Mendocino County Today: Sunday, Feb 14, 2016

• Scalia Dead
• Michael Moore's Movie
• Supes Interminable
• CCDA Challenge
• CA Coastal Commission
• Liberating Germany
• Red Rose
• Sheriff Explanations
• Cuba Policy Discussion
• Real Fan
• Mendopia Cheesecake
• Westport Love
• Blossoms
• Water Scarcities
• Marco Radio

GHASTLY

Justice Scalia Found Dead At Home

by Larry Bensky

The first reaction, from she who is closest to me, when I brought her the news as she knelt on the black cloth cover through whose agency we are trying to turn our small, once green, front yard into something “drought resistant” (January’s deluges haven’t fooled us…) was to scream, “Yes!” and prostrate herself in the bright sun, “There is a God!”

“Not so fast,” I replied. “What kind of a ‘god’ are we talking about here? The one that Antonin Scalia sculpted so tortuously and pervasively in his personality and politics? Or the ones that will now be evoked, twisted, melted, reconstructed into self-serving ‘Vote for Me’s!’ during the next nine months – and beyond?”

A part of me gets deeply amused by all this. People ask me, endlessly, months and years before elections, what I think is going to happen. And my universal answer is a gnomic, “Whatever happens is going to be heavily influenced by what hasn’t happened yet.”

Not that there won’t be other things happening between here and there – perhaps even the same things, given the ages of the remaining eight justices (half of whom are north of 77 years, another two over 65).

But for now, let’s look at this one.

If you’re interested in things like peace, equality, and social justice, Scalia has been about as bad as it has ever gotten in US history. And it’s gotten pretty bad.

He claimed, and was given, nominal leadership in the US legal thought tendency known as “textualism” or “originalism.” Meaning that whatever the Constitution says, it says. That this solipsistic truism is the subject of anything other than laughter says it all. Because the self-evident truth, obvious since humans began to codify and symbolize thoughts through speech and writing is that…hold on….meanings vary and change! Depending on a vast variety of elements. And that words like “justice,” “general welfare,” and “liberty” are not self-defining. Nor can they be definitively concretized by referring to the mindsets and writing of those who, after much discussion and debate, put them on parchment. Because – hold on to your textbooks here – it took not very much time for even those who had debated and discussed them to disagree about what the result meant!

Now this may not have been the catechismic way of looking at politics in St. Francis Xavier, Scalia’s military high school (he never served in the military – did you know that?) or Georgetown of his era (he didn’t get into Princeton, which at the time was run by exclusionary WASP bigots), but it certainly was something he might have assimilated at Harvard Law School.

Yet he didn’t. Because he was, as the hard-line Commies used to say, “under discipline.” And that discipline did not come from the Constitution, but from another fabulist authority, the bible. The ordering of humanity in which Scalia believed comes not from human law, but supposedly divine guidance. Whose words are – get this! – themselves subject to….interpretation of meaning! For example, the pope who is currently treating the oppressed in Mexico to his Hallmark platitudes would not agree on very much in the bible with World War II era Pope Pius XII, who collaborated with Mussolini’s exterminist Hitlerian behavior.

The historical oddity that the Supreme Court has come to have a Catholic majority (nominal Catholics constitute about 22% of the population) stands beside its other anomalies: all (but one – she went to Columbia) graduated from either Yale or Harvard Law Schools, and all but one (our very own confused California Catholic Anthony Kennedy) come from East Coast states.

But the Court was never meant to be representative, or “diverse” in any way. It was meant primarily to resolve what were essentially property disputes. If its “original intent” were observed today, it would have nothing to do with whether someone can have an abortion, or anonymously pour billions into election campaigns, or blithely pollute the air we breathe and the water we drink, or torture someone, or walk around Texas brandishing a weapon. But in the sense that it can and does deal with such issues, however misguidedly and arbitrarily, it can sometimes provide what we tend to think we cannot even hope for. (You want an antidote to Scalia hagiography, read Juan Williams’ (unfortunately misnamed) 2000 book, “Thurgood Marshall, American Revolutionary.”)

And as for current electoral implications, try this one. (I’m not claiming to be the only one who will have thought of this, by the way, I’m writing just a couple of hours after Scalia’s demise…)

You’re Bernie Sanders. The establishment media (which is to say all newspapers, radio and TV) is picking on you because your home state is so white. So you wait a decent interval, something longer than the customary nanosecond in the silly twittersville we inhabit, and you announce a major promise.

After condolences to Ms. Scalia, their nine (!) children and abundant grandchildren, you say… “This country cannot go any further in the direction Justice Scalia took us. Therefore, my first act, upon being elected, will be to nominate his successor, “Barack Hussein Obama.”

(Larry Bensky is the retired National Affairs Correspondent for Pacifica Radio. He can be reached at: LBensky@igc.org.)

* * *

President Barack Obama says he plans to fulfill his constitutional responsibility and nominate a successor to fill the vacancy created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. In a direct rebuttal to Senate Republicans, Obama says there is plenty of time for the Senate to confirm his choice. Some Republicans, including Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, say the decision should rest with the next president in January 2017. Obama pointedly calls the decision "bigger than any one party." He says it is about democracy. Obama is praising the late justice as a brilliant legal mind who influenced generation of lawyers and students.

* * *

MITCH CLOGG COMMENTS:

"Ding dong, the warlock's dead!"

Such glee is unsuitable at the passing of a prominent American, and the consternation in the corporate boardrooms, the best private clubs and the back seats of limousines is nearly palpable. One is stirred almost to sympathy. Not enough that a foreign-born negro is concluding his second term as president, that a Jewish communist is seeking to replace him, that Moslem fanatics are conquering the world; now the dwindling class of true Americans must bear the loss of its bravest defender in the judiciary, the towering Antonin Scalia. As more and more revisionists made specious argument that the U.S. Constitution was a document made by and for wealthy male Caucasions and should therefore be revisited often, reformed, even replaced to reflect (allegedly) changing times, Justice Scalia stood massive and strong as an old oak stump, his stalwart lieutenant Clarence Thomas at his back.

The nation always rallies at times like these. We will see our enlightened Senate close ranks and lock arms to prevent the seating of another America-hater on our highest court. We will see the stepping forward of our bravest citizens to stem the flow of American blood at this crucial moment. Take heart, America! Nino is no longer with us, but his spirit stays strong, the deep depression where he sat at that lofty bench ready to receive a new patriot's sturdy hindquarters, and the distinguished Justice Thomas will now raise his voice in the interests that his late and lamented colleague advanced so assiduously.

REEL SHORT MOVIE REVIEW

MICHAEL MOORE'S LATEST, Where To Invade Next, takes us to European countries and Tunisia to demonstrate deficiencies in fundamental areas of American life — education; labor policies; children's food; gender relations; crime strategies. Lots of places do it better, as most super-informed, cool-o ava readers know. The rightwing, of course, will view the film as "America bashing," not that it is and not that Moore doesn't conclude by pointing out, for two examples, that the labor reforms much of the world enjoys, or at least pays lip service to, were hard-won first here in the United States, as was free higher education via state colleges and universities.

WE LEARN a few things even a muy sophistico guy like me didn't know, such as the only bank in Iceland that didn't go broke in 2008 was a bank owned by women. "We didn't invest in anything we didn't understand." I did know that in the aftermath of Iceland's collapse a special prosecutor, assisted by an American, put Iceland's most egregious financial criminals in prison. Our crooks got bonuses and jobs advising Obama.

THE MOST STRIKING segment in the film for me was lunch time at a French public school where elementary students enjoyed a healthy four-course, sit down meal served by cafeteria workers on real china, a meal that we'd pay $60 or $70 for in a high end restaurant, and this was a working class school that could have been Boonville if we didn't know we were in France. French children, at an early age, learn how to eat well and master some table manners in the process. The school chef, shown photos of a typical American school menu, seems stunned, then says, "This isn't food."

AN AMERICAN WORKER suddenly enjoying the wages and general standard of living of an Italian or German worker would think he'd been re-born in paradise. American prisoners will be staggered to learn that Norwegian prisoners, even in the max facilities, keep the keys to their own cells. And Finn schools are the best in the world largely because private schools are outlawed. The rich, therefore, go to school with everyone else, and the rich, even the educationally handicapped ones like Trump, don't tolerate bad schools for their children. This film ought to be required viewing, especially by wage workers and, as they grandly call themselves these days, American "educators."

‘TAKING A MESS & MAKING IT MESSIER’

Supes take an hour just to schedule the Kemper Report discussion

by Mark Scaramella

Supervisor Tom Woodhouse seems to finally realize that not everything and everyone in Ukiah is wonderful and awesome and exciting and educational. In fact, he has started actually complaining, albeit at great unnecessary length, about how hard it is to listen to other people talk, many of them those same people he previously heaped praise on.

From the 2/9/2016 Board of Supes meeting discussion of what to do on February 16:

Supervisor Dan Hamburg: “It was just mentioned that we now have a meeting scheduled for February 16. Has that been…?”

Supervisor John McCowen: “We'll take that up later today.”

CEO Carmel Angelo: “That's actually the next agenda item, Supervisor Hamburg. It’s February 16.”

Board Chair Dan Gjerde: “It's a good point. If the very next agenda item is to recommend that we have a meeting on February 16 then we would be adding that to our adopted calendar.”

Hamburg: “It seems like we should before we go further.”

Angelo: “We can do that first if you like. And then come back to this. Sure. [Laughs.] Either way the staff will adjust the calendar so however you would like to do it. We could hold off on Item 5(c) and then do 6(b). That's the Health and Human Services Committee item [the possible privatization of the Animal Shelter.].”

Gjerde: “For the moment can we hold off on 5(c) and go back to 6(b)?”

Angelo: “Sure.”

Hamburg: “In the interest of order I would like…”

Gjerde: “6(b) is the discussion and possible action regarding the recommendation of the Health and Human Services Committee which did meet yesterday, related to the Kemper consulting group mental health review.”

Hamburg: “Mr. Chairman, I just heard it a few minutes ago that — I mean, obviously I knew that this was on our agenda. But I didn't know that we were also going to be meeting on the animal issue in the morning.”

Gjerde: “It's a full meeting. Proposed.”

Hamburg: “But that wasn't what we— what was in our packet. Was it?”

Angelo: “The item in the packet is for the request for the Kemper report to be heard in the afternoon, so it would have been February 16 at 1:30. Given that we would have a full half day our thought was that we would go ahead and have a full meeting that day starting at 9. However if that does not fit the schedule of the Supervisors we could change that.”

Hamburg: “The only thing I'm bringing up is that it wasn't on our agenda. I suppose we can do anything we want with our meetings. But there was nothing on our agenda today that said we were going to be meeting next Tuesday morning to talk about animal care.”

Supervisor Carre Brown: “I've got problems with that. Because I have already scheduled meetings, in fact scheduled them for the day. And have canceled, and moved a meeting for the afternoon so I could be present for the afternoon session. I guess it's not a big deal to cancel what I have in the morning but, you know it's, it causes a lot of issues [Laughs.]”

Hamburg: “It seems a little ad hoc to me.”

Gjerde: “For the moment let's stick with the Kemper report recommendation of the ad hoc committee and we can go back to our calendar.”

Angelo: “That would be fine.”

McCowen: “I suppose it's fine to complete the discussion on the 16th and what we may do in the morning as part of the other item. For now the recommendation is that we have a special meeting on the 16th for the Kemper report. Frankly, one of my concerns is if we start at 1:30 will that be enough time? We know there is a tremendous amount of public interest in the Kemper report and in the underlying subject. So — but — I suppose this is the time when we are going to choose to set that we will hear the Kemper report at 1:30?”

Angelo: “Yes, through the chair, Lee Kemper is traveling here. So 1:30 is the timeframe that works for him. So if we started at nine o'clock in the morning I'm not certain he could be here. So that's why we thought 1:30 would work.”

Gjerde: “Do we know that he could not travel the night before?”

Angelo: “I certainly could ask him.”

Gjerde: “Or if we started say at one o'clock instead of 1:30, that might help him.”

Angelo: “I'm sure we could start at 1. I can go ahead and get a hold of him and see if we could start at 9 if you would like, but I think — I'm not certain what we’re doing. I can guarantee you that he could be here at one o'clock in the afternoon.”

McCowen: “It could be at 1?”

Angelo: “I can guarantee you that he could be here at 1, but I don't know about 9.”

McCowen: “I think that would give us a little extra time. I think that would be appropriate. Actually, by the nature of this item and the recommended motion doesn't refer to a time, it only refers to that we would schedule a special meeting for the 16th to hear the Kemper report.”

Angelo: “At 1:30.”

McCowen: “No, it does not mention the time in the recommended action motion. But if you are confident with one o'clock I think it would be appropriate to go with that time.”

Brown: “I could do 1.”

Hamburg: “I could go for that but it does say that we are going to meet at 1:30 on the request. It doesn't say that in the motion.”

McCowen: “Correct.”

Hamburg: “But anybody in the – Oh, any way.”

McCowen: “But we could adjust that if we —”

Angelo: “We could do a press release too that says 1 o'clock rather than 1:30 if you would like.”

McCowen: “I will move that we hold a special meeting on February 16 and that the Kemper report be heard beginning at one o'clock.”

Woodhouse: “I will second that.”

* * *

McCowen: “I think it's unfortunate that we did not anticipate in advance that there might be the need to have a block of time fall on the 16th for the animal shelter discussion. But at this point a room full of people in the room yesterday have been informed that that's what we would be doing and we’ve told more people this morning. So, as part of making a decision on that in addition to the conflicts that that may create for us we should also consider the confusion it may create for the public.”

* * *

Brown: “Did I hear you say Supervisor McCowen that people have already been told we are meeting the morning of the 16th?”

McCowen: “That's what they were told yesterday.”

Brown: “By whom?”

McCowen: “By I believe staff and the committee.”

Brown: “Well — I — you know — it's — to me that is not right. Or fair.”

Woodhouse: “I am trying not to add to the confusion. I often don't say what's on my mind because the day isn't long enough. But I understand Supervisor Brown’s comment. I think it's something we are going to run into with the standing committees. It's a great idea. But what it's doing is saturating our lives with a lot more meetings and then we are going to have more joint meetings and there's a limit to how much of this I am willing to do. I've been very patient for the most part, putting up with the length of meetings and the content of what we do. But a lot of it is not deep critical thought with serious choices and using our intelligence. It's having presentations and spending a lot of time being very busy and being very sincere but not really changing the direction of the county. We really need to have some time and I'm hoping the standing committees are going to give that opportunity for a deeper look at what's going on with the county. We are very good at moving things along and approving everything but overall the county is not operating efficiently or up to what I think my expectations are. I won't speak for any of you. Each thing I look into in every department, there are so many screwed up things and so many problems that it is very very frustrating. So that's my own problem. But having endless meetings is not going to get us anywhere. When I spend time with the constituents and respond to the people with e-mails we have chances to go out in our district and hear what people are thinking. It connects them to us and gives us as supervisors a stronger base of understanding of what's going on. At this point we don't have any huge problems that are attacking us but I assume we are going to have some big challenges and we are going to be saddled with all this baggage of all this stuff we do. So I am not adverse to canceling some of the standing committee meetings when there is nothing of substance that happens there. I just think there is a limit to what this kind of forum accomplishes. I do understand — the thing I wanted to say is — the standing committees don't have any ability to make decisions and should not be making commitments. That was my mistake to be putting forward dates. We can't make decisions that affect the whole board. We should bring everything to the board and this is going to be a re-occurring theme. And I will try to be more attentive to that myself because we are going to be pulling in different directions and possibly confusing the public. This is more my frustration. I’m concerned that we just make sure we are headed in the most productive direction to change things at the county and make things better, not just keep it moving straight ahead on the edge.”

Brown: “I just want to clarify why I'm upset. This meeting was set two weeks ago. We had a hard time finding a date. It's embarrassing to me because it is meeting on constituent issues that all of a sudden we now one week away, I've got — you know — basically say cancel. I will attend if that's the decision of all of you. Certainly there are issues that can't wait. After hearing the public expression today [about animal control] — so please. I lost my temper a bit. But I will be here because it's my responsibility and I will just have to cancel and reset.”

Hamburg: “I will of course be here as well, but I do agree with Supervisor Brown, it does concern me that the standing committee would schedule a meeting without consulting the full board. I don't know if — I know things are at a very contentious place. Obviously with regard to the shelter. I don't know if putting this meeting off until March 1 is going to make things worse or maybe make things better. We did just bring someone in as an interim director. Maybe we do need to have a little cooling off period. I really don't know. But I share Supervisor Brown's sentiments and of course I will be here if the majority of the board decides to go ahead. But I'm not happy with it.”

McCowen: “I apologize to my colleagues because the standing committee can’t schedule a meeting of course and cannot do anything without the board giving that direction. What was in my mind was, Well, we are meeting on the 16th, that was — although this is in front of us as a recommendation from the standing committee it was really a discussion of the board previously that we would be meeting on the 16th to hear the Kemper report. With the issues with the animal shelter I do think that they are of sufficient gravity and things have escalated to the point where whatever direction is going to be given, the sooner that direction is given the better. So that people understand what are we going to be doing moving forward. One of the things that everyone agreed on was that the process has been too long and drawn out and I think that has contributed to a lot of the behavior that we have seen recently. People are — their frustration is spilling over. So again I do apologize to the board. I think in the bigger picture it's appropriate to meet in the morning on the 16th for the animal shelter issue.”

Woodhouse: “I’ll be brief [sic]. I don't mean to confuse things but just to suggest another way of thinking. The Kemper report is going to be hugely important that we all are focused and clear and it is going to be a tremendous amount of information. The public will want a lot of time to talk about it. It's an area where we are losing millions of dollars. And people have waited a long time for that. We could debate each of these meeting dates for ever. But having both of those on the same day— you guys are very strong, you can deal with a lot of the pressure from the public. I absorb their energy and I really care and I know you all do too and when you listen to people basically on both sides of heavy issues there is a limit to how much I can do that and still have sense and energy and then be absorbing the Kemper report. I really feel like having both those things on one day is insane. It could be that letting the animal shelter flow a little bit longer — the heavy proponents, that's what they were suggesting, they are not begging for another regular meeting, but if that's what they are going to get. I could see focusing on the Kemper report. I just said I don't like a bunch of meeting dates, but I would rather focus on Kemper one day and the shelter on another. I feel like I would be fresher and it's a big big deal — both of them are. The animal shelter — our meeting was very intense and it’s a larger crowd. It's just a whole lot to go through. So I think there's some intelligent thought to saying, Let's focus on Kemper one day. But I will do what ever you guys want. I respect you very much.”

McCowen: “Again, we have the problem of having told quite a number of people who are probably already spreading the word that we were going to meet on that issue on the 16th. Frankly, it's not unusual that we deal with two or three emotionally charged issues in a day. I don't know any other way to do it. If that were the criteria for setting our meetings we will be scheduling a lot more meetings.”

* * *

Angelo: “No one moves on social media quicker than the advocates for the animal shelter. So if this board decides that it would not work to have the animal shelter meeting on the 16th in the morning and then our mental health item in the afternoon we could very easily get that message and a new date out to the advocates with the animal shelter. That's one of the issues that we have actually, the social media issue with this [the animal shelter] group. So we know we can do that. So either way.”

Woodhouse: “Thanks for the conversation, I think immersing ourselves and doing it all is a great idea. Thanks for listening.”

Gjerde: “So have we made the issues clear as mud here? What are we looking at? Animal shelter in the morning? Or on a different day?”

McCowen: “We'll see.

McCowen then moved to have both items heard on February 16, morning and afternoon.)

Gjerde: “Is there a second?”

Brown: “Okay, I will second.”

Gjerde: “Apologies to your constituents.”

McCowen: “I will owe you really big-time Supervisor, thank you.”

Brown: “I am going to make you pay. [Laughs.]”

Motion approved 4-1, Hamburg dissenting.

* * *

But that wasn’t the end of it at all. After a brief discussion of the Library budget correction and the Transportation Director’s routine report, Supervisor Woodhouse brought it up again after CEO Angelo emphasized to the Board that she personally had contracted with Mr. Kemper, adding that she has known Mr. Kemper for many years. Then she went into how the report was distributed in advance of the Feb. 16 meeting, adding that the discussion of the Kemper report was set for 1pm on the 16^th.

Woodhouse: “I don't know if it's the correct time to say this, but if I could ask a couple of questions it might help. Of course I'm concerned about that day and having both those meetings is my problem. I apologize that I am not effective enough to figure out how to make us have a better discussion about this. When he [Kemper] gives us his report do you have any idea how long it will take him to go through it if there are not a lot of interruptions for questions during their report? It's a long report and I want to hear it and I had so much to learn about that, I feel like it's going to take everything I have just to listen to that. Then dealing with the public's comments and my own questions. Generally, when you ask questions about this particular subject it is so complicated, when I ask staff and other people — I get an answer that I'm smart enough to know is not the right answer. But I am too polite to ask more than maybe one more follow-up question. But on that day we have to dig down and get to some serious things. It will take time to do it. Do you have any idea how long it would take him to go through if that’s his process and present it all to us before we get to the next part?”

Angelo: “I believe that Mr. Kemper could cover his report in one hour and then be here to answer questions. I think the approach is that for the first hour Mr. Kemper goes through the report without any interruptions because once we start a question then that will be the rest of the afternoon. So if we allow him to talk about his process and his findings and why he is making the recommendations he is making for one hour without any interruptions and then at that point however you want to do it, if you want Board questions or if you want to go straight to the public — whatever. Then Mr. Kemper could be here all afternoon so that as questions come up he could answer those questions. I agree with Supervisor Woodhouse that there may be so many questions and Supervisor McCowen has already said he doesn't think we are going to solve this in one day, so there could be the possibility of taking down those questions and coming back with a written response after that. I do not know what's going to happen. But my best guess is one hour to go through the report without interruptions and after that questions — whatever.”

Woodhouse: “That would be questions from the board which follow that for another hour or so?”

Angelo: “That is up to this board. If the board — I would assume that board members would ask questions and then go to the public.”

Woodhouse: “I just feel like it will take more time. I don't know if you picture it being — while he's here it's going to be valuable time so I want to take two hours to ask him questions so that we can all learn about it and the public will be crazy by then and they are going to want a couple of hours. How long do you picture the night going? What is your wild estimate?”

Angelo: “Somebody could call the 5:30 rule on the 16th. [Laughs.] But I imagine that we would go well into five or six o'clock or so. Then it's up to the board. We could break for dinner and come back. Or by that time be too exhausted and as Supervisor McCowen said earlier there could be another discussion of the full Board. I believe that the 16th will be the last time that we see Mr. Kemper. So whatever we need from him we need to get on the 16th. “

Hamburg: “How is the report being distributed to the public?”

Angelo: “It's online for anybody to access.“

Hamburg: [Asks about hard copies…] “Another one of my concerns is we get the report and it goes to the standing committee and they set it —”

McCowen: “No.”

Hamburg: “Not to the standing committee?”

McCowen: “Only to recommend that the Board holds a special meeting. We [the HHHSA standing committee] did not discuss it at all. In fact we just decided that we want everyone to hear the full discussion.”

Hamburg: “I'm a little concerned about this being — as Supervisor Woodhouse said — it's a 60+ page report. It's our job. We will all read it. And digest it. But it's a lot to ask members of the public in general to digest this entire report. I'm not sure a lot of people will do it. It's a lot of information.”

Angelo: “There are three pages of recommendations at the end of the report which I think are rather lengthy and wordy. If I was going to give a suggestion to anyone who asked, I would say go straight to the recommendations. We had hoped to have this process finalized and reported out to the board on December 15. That did not happen. Then we were hoping for January. But given the enormity that you can see in the report that didn't happen. So at this point I personally did not want to delay this any longer than February 16. I know that the public and us have only had the report since last Friday. …”

Hamburg: “I would not like to see us spend four or five hours on this next Tuesday and then end up referring it back to the committee for recommendations back to the board. There just has to be some kind of a process for how we deal with this so we are not going through the same process between, among ourselves and between ourselves and the public, you know, over and over again, there has to be some way to deal with these things so that they actually move forward.”

McCowen: “That direction would be an outcome of our discussion on the 16th. (More discussion of how the report was distributed and to whom and how much time they have to review it. At length.)”

* * *

Woodhouse: “This is being set up for our convenience and not the public’s convenience. We’re setting it up to not work as well as it should. This is not the right timing to give the public enough time. It should start at 9am and let it run as long as it takes. And I think there's a lot of interest in this and it's very very important and it's a screwed up mess. So I would start it early and give it all the time it deserves. Public comment will take three hours at least.”

Hamburg: “I agree with Supervisor Woodhouse. I think we are setting ourselves up for a horrendous afternoon if we start at 1 PM.”

CEO Angelo then summarized the status of the Animal Shelter and the newly hired interim Shelter manager.

Gjerde suggested just re-issuing the Animal Shelter RFP.

McCowen reviewed the situation again. "This [scheduling] just keeps getting more and more curious." McCowen noted that only one animal shelter proposal was received in response to the RFP. No other bids are pending. Angelo suggested closing the RFP and postponing it again and noting again that the Feb. 16 meeting would be arduous.

Board Chair Gjerde then also suggested devoting all of Feb. 16 to the Kemper report.

Supervisor McCowen, realizing that the discussion was both off the agenda and becoming endless, noted that there were “a lot of unanswered questions from the [proposed animal shelter] vendor" [Petaluma Animal Services] which caused Supervisor McCowen to then quip: "So we're taking a mess and making it messier, but that seems to be the tenor of the times."“

Angelo: “There have been lots of emails [regarding the Animal Shelter] which made process more difficult. It still needs more discussion. I could have erred in not deciding months ago.” Angelo said she accepts responsibility for the situation. Then she suggested closing the RFP and re-starting, adding, “It needs public discussion of the options.”

Hamburg: “Now what? Feb. 16 should be devoted to mental health. The shelter discussion should go back to the HHSA standing committee. Or back to the board.”

Gjerde asked for a motion to remove the Shelter from the Feb. 16 agenda and only deal with Mental Health on Feb. 16. (But still at 1pm.)

McCowen: “I'll just abstain. I'll show up whenever for whatever. But we have to comply with the Brown Act.”

Woodhouse: “I should just shut up because I think I'm going to get what I want out of this. But I think it's important that we have a correct pattern. The standing committee went through what to me was a very painful process, having our meeting and getting our input and doing our very best and Supervisor McCowen, I count on him a lot because he's the chair and handled that group very well, so I want to hear whatever he has to say. It seems to me like we could change our scheduling of the one meeting to the 9:30 for the discussion on Kemper but that I would want to hear from Supervisor McCowen. I guess that's the best I can do. I just feel like in a way it undercuts the standing committee. Imagine if you guys were bringing something and we kind of went around you before hearing your thing. So after we did that one, we could give our standing committee report and that would be the time to discuss the other issue, is that incorrect thinking on my part Mr. Chair?”

Supervisor McCowen then stepped out of the room. Then there was even more discussion on which agenda item was being discussed.

Gjerde asked if anyone wanted to clarify that the Kemper report be scheduled for the entire day of February 16.

Woodhouse moved to spend most of the day Tuesday the 16th on the Kemper report. Hamburg seconded.

CEO Angelo then told the Board, “Mr. Kemper has now said that he can be here at 10 AM. So we could have a full day with Mr. Kemper.”

The motion was changed to 10am for the Kemper report.

But Supervisor Brown wasn’t finished complaining about the timing.

Brown: “I will be voting against the motion because we've taken action earlier. If we are going to feel crumbed on [sic], you have heard the advocates who were here under public expression about getting to the issue to discuss the animal shelter, so I am going to — we are confusing the public. My vote will be no. I just wanted to express that.”

Gjerde: “In terms of the animal shelter by the CEO doing this and concluding that [RFP] process, it will be releasing their proposal and discussing this topic again with that information out there is important."

Brown: “I do feel we should discuss it for these people.”

Gjerde: “I disagree.”

Brown: “I was against it in the first place. I want no meeting in the morning. I have to reschedule a bunch of meetings myself and disappoint constituents, more constituents. Bottom line, I am going to vote against this. I want a discussion Tuesday morning for these people [the animal shelter people].”

Gjerde: “Any public comment?”

Brown: “Anyone brave enough?”

Hamburg: “It's all your fault.” [Nervous laughter.]

Motion passes 3-1, Brown dissenting, McCowen not present.

In all, the discussion involving simply moving the start time for the Kemper report discussion from 1:30pm to 10am took up almost an hour. And Supervisor McCowen wasn't even there to vote on it.

One can only recoil at the thought of how long the Kemper report discussion might be on Tuesday.

THE DA SAYS....

District Attorney David Eyster announced late this afternoon that the California District Attorneys Association (CDAA) yesterday filed a Writ of Mandate in the Sacramento County Superior Court challenging the so-called Public Safety and Rehabilitation Act that Governor Brown is trying to rush into circulation. An explanatory press release is available on the Mendocino County District Attorney's web page

https://www.co.mendocino.ca.us/da/news.htm

by clicking on "CDAA challenges proposed initiative."

For additional background, please see the February 6th post below on this the Mendocino County District Attorney Facebook page. Just look for the "wolf" in sheep's clothing.

FIRED COASTAL COMMISSIONER SPEAKS OUT

by Tony Barboza

The newly fired executive director of the California Coastal Commission said Thursday that commissioners have shifted in recent years to be more accommodating to coastal developers and to exert tighter control over day-to-day activities at the agency.

"This commission seems to be more interested in and receptive to the concerns of the development community as a general rule," Charles Lester said in comments similar to those expressed by hundreds of supporters who spoke at a public hearing before his dismissal. "There is less focus on how we can make decisions to implement the Coastal Act.

"That's different than saying it's development versus environment," he said. "It's more nuanced. But I think it remains to be seen how it will unfold."

Lester, 53, spoke in a hotel room a few hundred feet from where the agency he ran for more than four years continued a regular meeting without him. Acting under one of the nation's strongest coastal protection laws, the 1976 Coastal Act, the agency is charged with protecting the state's 1,100-mile shoreline from overdevelopment, threats to public access and environmental damage.

For the first time in the agency's history, coastal commissioners have dismissed an executive director. Commissioners voted 7 to 5 in a closed session late Wednesday to fire their executive following a long and emotional hearing in which hundreds of speakers, including environmentalists, elected officials and former commissioners came out in Lester's defense.

Commissioners have not specified the reasons for their action, saying they are prevented from discussing the contents of past performance reviews that are confidential. But several have cited problems with management, trust and communications, including a lack of follow-through on commissioners' directions and staff not returning phone calls.

"It was like pulling teeth," Commissioner Roberto Uranga said Thursday. "We had an executive director who wasn't working with the commission."

In the hourlong interview Lester, his suitcase already packed to return to his home outside Santa Cruz, spoke calmly and carefully as he detailed his long-brewing tensions with the commission and his worries over the future of its work.

By Lester's account, when he took over at the agency in 2011, about half the commission was new, having been on the panel for less than a year. He said they began to intrude more into what are traditionally staff-managed affairs, including new hires, agendas, budgets and meeting locations. They also demanded that agency employees be more responsive to members of the panel.

He called those typical management issues that he had worked to address.

Lester cited what he said were some commissioners' "obsessive focus on the complaints about how long things take and not filing things" on projects including Newport Banning Ranch, a controversial proposal to build hundreds of homes on a 401-acre parcel that is the largest remaining privately held piece of coastal land in Orange County.

Last fall, Lester and his staff recommended denying the project on the grounds that it would destroy environmentally sensitive habitat. The project will be under consideration again by the panel in March.

Was his ouster an effort by pro-development forces to take control of the commission?

"Yes and no," said Lester, who sees the notion of a stark divide between development and the environment as an oversimplification.

Lester suspects he was fired because he was too independent. He is concerned about the direction of the panel if it chooses to replace him with an executive more amenable to the suggestions of commissioners and development interests.

Lester said the public response to his ouster has "touched a nerve about this program that I don't think is fully appreciated yet. It may be that we are at a watershed moment. Unless the political system in California recommits to the spirit and intent of the Coastal Act, it may be a fundamental shift in direction."

"This is a powerful land use agency, there's a lot at stake and there are vested interests that want things done," he said. But the agency's staff, he stressed, must remain independent and at an arm's length from political appointees in order to make impartial recommendations on projects large and small.

Lester said commissioners had long kept him on a "pretty tight leash," conducting many evaluations and quarterly check-ins on his performance over the last year. But he said he addressed the concerns raised and called commissioners' focus on the confidentiality of his written reviews a "smokescreen."

"They could talk about whatever performance issues they wanted," Lester said. "That was just a way to enable them to go into closed session."

Lester said he is considering waiving his rights to privacy over those documents to dispel the notion that they contained anything that "rises to the level of doing what they did and taking the kind of action that they did."

Such a disclosure would also have to be approved by the commission, he said.

Lester said that when he was appointed head of the politically charged agency in 2011, he understood that some would see it as "an opportunity to try to wrest the program from its historic direction," which he says has been to err on the side of coastal protection, public access and broad participation in its decision making.

"I knew people would try to take me out, or reorient the program," he said. "I think there have been people interested in doing that from the beginning."

(Courtesy, the Los Angeles Times)

1945

John Dos Passos, writing in Life magazine for January 7, 1946, quotes a “red-faced major” as saying that “Lust, liquor and loot are the soldier’s pay.” A serviceman wrote to Time magazine for November 12, 1945 “Many a sane American family would recoil in horror if they knew how ‘Our Boys’ conduct themselves, with such complete callousness in human relationships over here.” An army sergeant wrote “Our own Army and the British Army … have done their share of looting and raping … This offensive attitude among our troops is not at all general, but the percentage is large enough to have given our Army a pretty black name, and we too are considered an army of rapists.”

According to an AP dispatch of September 12, 1945, entitled “German-American Marriages Forbidden”, the Franklin Roosevelt government instructed its soldiers that marriage with the inferior Germans was absolutely forbidden, but those having illegitimate children by German women, whose husbands and boyfriends were conveniently dead or held as prisoners or slave laborers, could count on allowance money. And, according to Time magazine of September 17, 1945, the government provided these soldiers with an estimated 50 million condoms per month, and graphically instructed them as to their use. For all practical purposes, our soldiers were being told: “Teach these Germans a lesson — and have a wonderful time!” Such were the great crusaders who brought “democracy” to Europe.

For the Americans and British, open rape was not as common as among the Soviet troops. The Soviets simply raped any female from eight years up and if a German man or woman killed a Russian soldier for anything, including rape, 50 Germans were killed for each incident, as reported in Time magazine, June 11, 1945. But for most of our boys, having that “wonderful time” depended a great deal on the “cooperation” of the German and Austrian women. From the starving and the homeless, of course, sexual “cooperation” could be bought for a few pennies or a mouthful of food. I don’t think we ought to dignify this arrangement with any other than its true name of sexual slavery.

RED ROSE

BOOKING LOG PROBS, SHERIFF ALLMAN EXPLAINS:

We have spent a considerable amount of time trying to get the booking log up but the problem is with our record management system administrator. This is the vendor, and not any Sheriff’s Office personnel. I have a huge amount of trust in our computer guys, and they have assured me that the problem is not with our system, but rather our vendor. I certainly hope that we can take care of it next week (early). Fyi, there are no other agencies locally who offer this service so when it goes down, we are the only ones complaining.

— Tom Allman

PS. Update: Sorry to report that even though we spent more time on this today (Saturday), the problem is not solved. Hope to have better results soon.

PPS. As for the animal shelter, if the Board of Supervisors has the desire to approach me and discuss it, my door is always open. I have taken the day to day responsibility of Emergency Services and Animal Control, however at budget time, the budgets that these departments had rarely make it to our budget. I'm not complaining, I am simply predicting the future, if the shelter is given to the Sheriff’s Office. I certainly appreciate the research you are putting into the animal shelter and mental health. Welcome to my world.

CUBAN AMBASSADOR TO U.S. TO SPEAK At Sonoma State University March 7

A REAL FAN

Editor,

So there is this guy in the high altitude seats at Levi stadium Super Bowl.

Can’t see much but he got a great deal on ticket, under 4k.

So the game has been going on for awhile and he looks down near the 50 yard line and sees this guy with an empty seat next to him.

What the hell? I’ll go down and see if I can snag it.

He asks the guy next to the empty seat if it’s taken and he says no, he bought it for his wife but she just died. “We’ve been to 22 Superbowls in a row,” he says.

The guy from the nose-bleed seats asks “Don’t you have any friends or family to bring to the game?”

The widower says: “They’re all at the funeral.”

--David Ellison, Felton

WELCOME TO MENDOCINO - WE'VE GOT CHEESECAKE

Latest Mendopia video by Scott Peterson

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BFkIlYpxBA&index=1&list=PLWTKx4OwAkBEZRZB07aPOA237QV8BS-b0

LOVE IN WESTPORT?

Who Would have thought....

Carolyne Cathey speaking in Westport, Sunday, on LOVE. Happy Valentines Day!

Sunday, Feb. 14, Carolyne speaks on "LOVE" at the Westport Church on Abalone Street. Note Time: 10 am.

This is a mini-workshop/discussion on Love, what Unconditional Love means, how we love ourselves, are we really supposed to love our enemy? And, how to embody love for the most glorious life. But how do we do that when we feel caught in an unloving world?

The full workshop is Feb. 17th, 1 pm & Feb 18th, 6pm, The Gathering Place.

God bless,

Carolyne Cathey
707.272.5397
Live, Love, Laugh, Enjoy, Care!
carolynecathey.com/spiritual-tools-workshops

THESE WILD BEAUTIES ARE BLOOMIN' EVERYWHERE!

THIRSTY WORLD

Dear Editor:

Four Billion People Face Severe Water Scarcity

A new research report published in the journal Science Advances concludes that 2/3rds of the world population, over 4 billion, people live with severe water scarcity for at least one month every year. The research also reveals that 500 million people live in places where water consumption is twice the amount replenished by rain for the entire year which results in a rundown of underground aquifers.

The World Economic Forum recently rated the water crises as one three greatest risks of harm to people and economics alongside climate change and mass migration. A prolong drought is more likely led to mass migration of farming families to the cities. The water issues will worsen as population growth and increasing water use continues to rise. Just 1%-4% of the water footprint is in the home while 25% is due to meat consumption. It takes 15,000 liters of water to make 1 kg of beef, with almost all of that used to irrigate the crops fed to the cattle. The research included environmental water requirements as to the water needed to ensure that life survives in the rivers and lakes. Even one month of severe water scarcity can have a devastating impact on the health of a river.

Yemen could run out of water in a few years, and aquifers are being continuously depleted in places such as Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Mexico. There are fragile water resources in central and western United States. Of particular concern is the continuing depletion of the Ogallala aquifer. There are numerous other places in the world with water scarcity issues. These water scarcity issues have to be considered in context with the other recent studies on climate change. The next 30-50 years will result in a world we would not know.

In peace and love,

Jim Updegraff, Sacramento

THE VORONOI TESSELLATION

"If you know what to do and you don't do it, then there you bloody well are, aren't you." --Lord Buckley

The recording of last night's 107.7fm KNYO Memo of the Air: Good Night Radio show is available to download and keep or just listen to via http://MemoOfTheAir.wordpress.com

The new Fusion internet/phone service at Juanita's house worked way better than the old way. As I was doing the show I could see on the buffer graph that the signal only dropped out once in seven hours, and the dropout didn't last long enough for the transmitter end of the chain to even notice. Fusion is the way to go. Cheap, reliable, faster than legacy DSL (both down and up), no more paying AT&T, and free long-distance phone calls, as long as you're not calling Morocco. Really, we'll be saving around $60 a month. We should have switched over years ago. Two thumbs up.

Also at http://MemoOfTheAir.wordpress.com you'll find a great number (like a 1 or 2 or so with several zeroes after it) of rainy-day or rainy-night links to interesting things to see and do and learn about, such as:

The tell-tale thighs of a cheerful Soviet test cheater. http://www.mentalfloss.com/article/75304/nostalgic-photos-student-life-ussr

A short Russian film about astronaut friends. (15 min.) http://video.newyorker.com/watch/we-can-t-live-without-cosmos

A complete webcomic about Midnight Radio by Ehud Lavski. (Scroll down.) http://elcomics.tumblr.com/post/138514380764/midnight-radio-written-by-ehud-lavski-art-by

And a tour of The Garden of Earthly Delights. Guided or wandering-- it's up to you. https://tuinderlusten-jheronimusbosch.ntr.nl/en

Marco McClean

memo@mcn.org

http://MemoOfTheAir.wordpress.com