A Sierra umbrella? - Conservancy proposed to protect mountain range

The Union ^ | April 2, 2004 | Jamie Bate

[calcowgirl]

You would think this might get their attention:

The Sierra Nevada Region provides 65 percent of California's developed water supply and nearly all of the water supply for western Nevada.

[calcowgirl]

Check this out:

http://www.assembly.ca.gov/acs/legcomment/legcomment.asp?bill_number=ab_1788&author=leslie

I wonder if this becomes "official" opposition.
Who's the resident legislative guru here?

[SierraWasp]

"Who's the resident legislative guru here?"

It's... FARMFRIEND!!!

[farmfriend]

I wonder if this becomes "official" opposition.

Yes it does. Mass letter are always used as well as letter from organizations. The Grange needs to send one. We should get not only the State Grange but local Granges to all send them.

Founded in 1867, the Grange is the oldest general farm and public policy organization in the United States.

[farmfriend]

it has a list of Support and Opposition. Do you know how one gets on this list?

Sending a letter will do. Especially if you are an organization. Send the letter to what ever committee the Bill is in and send it to any Legislator who seems to be in oposition.

[farmfriend]

OK, I went and looked at the status of the Bills. 1788 seems to be in the lead as far as action goes. These Bills are still in committee in the Assembly. It didn't show the reading unfortunately but maybe it will when it gets to the third reading.

The bills get their first reading after it is introduced and assigned a number. It then goes to committee. It gets a second reading everytime it moves between committees. Once it is done with the committees it will get a third reading which means it will be up for a vote. This will be a critical time.

After it moves to the Senate, and it will keep the same number, the whole process starts again. If there is any good news in this, it is that the Senate is not considering a similar bill at the same time. If they were the bills could then be put directly in conference and speed the process up.

[calcowgirl]

Thanks for the input, FF.

I'm a novice at state legislation (but I did deal alot with the federal process). If I understand this correctly, the bill(s) just passed a vote in the Resources committee (my post #37), now going to the Appropriations committee... then will go up for full Assembly vote... or does it go back to Resources, then to Assy? If passed by the Assy, it then will go to the Senate for vote? Since it is moving from Resources to Approp Cmte now... a reading should be the next action in the Assy?

When is the strategic point in the process to wage an all out assault of opposition letters? At the time it comes up for vote or earlier? In your opinion, what is more effective: the quality of the issues raised or the quantity of individuals/orgns raising the issues?

An explanatory email that captures the issues could be effective to start sending to co-workers, friends, etc. to motivate them to let Sacramento know what they think. Maybe McClintock will give us his email list (LOL).

I can think of one radio-host in LA who might put something up on his website if provided the info. (He's been trying to wage a war against the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy).

I'm willing to contribute what I can... but looking for someone who knows the process and how to make that effort effective. (as well as articulate which are the strongest issues to highlight in attempting to de-rail this thing).

Appreciate any suggestions you have.

[farmfriend]

Ok, I have re-looked at the bills and I must amend what I said earlier. They both are now in the Appropriations committee for the second time and 2600 got there first. I think this is the last stop in committee, generally the Appropriations committee is the last to see it. If I'm right, it will get it's third reading and be scheduled for a full vote. If you want to stop it in the Assembly, I would send your letters now. Send them to the committee and any Assemblyperson you can.

Once it moves to the Senate it will have to go through the committee process again. I would send a second letter to that committee when it gets there. If you want to articulate an argument, I would try to speak to the committee when it comes up for a hearing, the Senate committee would be best for this. Otherwise, the only thing they care about is whether you are for or against. This is where an organization is helpful. It will mean more if the California State Grange is opposed compared to Joe Sixpack. It is a matter of numbers and name recognition. Joe Sixpack only works if they come in volume. The more people who write, the more likely that critical mass will be reached.

As for a critical time to deal with bills, that is harder to say. A letter early on puts you on record and lets the legislators know there is opposition but then you really have to watch the amendments etc. Often they will gut a bill as well. That is where they take everything that was in the bill and remove it, replacing it with something totally different. All that is left of the original is the number. Writing the Resource committee would have been helpful. Writing legislators now and getting it on the radio would be good. The trick is to escalate the opposition as they move the bill along.

[calcowgirl]

Great info FF... Thankyou VERY much!

I'm only Jo-Anne Sixpack... but maybe I can find a couple more Sixpacks in the case or a wino or two to write and/or call, lol. And, I've been known to try to get a radio host or two energized via phone or email.

Last question (I think)... Do you know of any any publically available resources that might include analyses of these bills (or similar conservancy bills in the past)... i.e. that tear them apart by issue from either a property rights perspective or otherwise?

[farmfriend]

Do you know of any any publically available resources that might include analyses of these bills (or similar conservancy bills in the past)... i.e. that tear them apart by issue from either a property rights perspective or otherwise?

LOL! I use Carry_Okie. But otherwise the answer to your question is no.

[calcowgirl]

LOL! I use Carry_Okie. But otherwise the answer to your question is no

Good One! There is no one better!

[forester]

I did some research on the Packard Foundation several years ago and bookmarked this site Conserving California Landscapes Initiative . It did not look good at the time, it reads even worse now knowing what they are going to do. I could fill this post with excerpts, but I know you all well enough that I know you will read it for yourselves.

It looks like there is alot of money behind this...I feel bad for the people in the Sierras.

[forester]

Do you know of any any publically available resources that might include analyses of these bills (or similar conservancy bills in the past)... i.e. that tear them apart by issue from either a property rights perspective or otherwise?

I checked the website of The American Land Rights Association and found nothing. Most of what they have is about federal issues like CARA and Heritage Areas. Have you tried google?

[calcowgirl]

Thanks for the Packard link. I've looked at them before, with dismay.

Yep... this current move seems well organized, and well financed. I'm only starting my search... it usually starts with the Public Library (online) and then google. With Google, I keep getting all the propaganda sites supporting this thing! LOL.

Given the massive area they are talking about, and the natural resources controlled within, I feel sorry for all of California and Western Nevada... as well as the Sierra folks.

[Carry_Okie]

I did some research on the Packard Foundation...

Yup, they've been in on this big-time, especailly in Nevada County. The Levitz family is in on it too.

It looks like there is alot of money behind this...I feel bad for the people in the Sierras.

The ones who have houses now will make out like bandits. It's the small holders of developable dirt who will really get screwed.

[Carry_Okie]

Yep... this current move seems well organized, and well financed.

They tried once in Nevada County with a programme called NH2020. The people figured it out (with help) and dumped the Board of Supes. The speed with which this is moving is, in part, in response to that success. They don't want the public up there to realize that they have power and are at risk so they are trying to go over their heads by pushing up the scale to the State level.

Given the opportunity for an ego trip, I have little doubt that Arnold is more than willing to play along.

[calcowgirl]

I have little doubt that Arnold is more than willing to play along.

This should help eliminate any remaining doubt (from article above):

He said that "tact" is necessary in this situation, especially since
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger himself has fueled the bills.

[Carry_Okie]

Lol, hadn't read it. Given that the Conservancy was in his environmental plan, I had little doubt.

I had a prediction at that time:

The Sierra Nevada Conservancy will make the San Bernardino Fire look like a patch burn.

[SierraWasp]

Thank you for this link to Leslie's thingy! I registered my opposition and added a curt, but civil comment! He used to call me on stuff similar to this, like the Forest Legacy garbage that he helped push back a decade ago.

Marsh2, I can't believe they're pushing that Forest Lagacy again... It's like "dead man walking!" Poor CDF, they keep getting trapped by this endless activism and at least last time, they were danged glad for the help we gave 'em to get rid of it!!!

[calcowgirl]

You're welcome for the Tell Leslie what you think Link.
It was accessed from the leginfo site - after finding the subject bill, click the "Send a comment to Author" button. Voila!

Re: Forest Legacy... what an abomination !

Posting link from Marsh2 here for future reference.
Forest Legacy Program