Committee Approves Legislation to Strengthen and Improve Our Nation’s Fisheries
Fishing Supports 1.3 Million U.S. Jobs & Contributes to an America that Works

WASHINGTON, D.C., May 29, 2014 - Today the House Natural Resources Committee approved H.R. 4742, the Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act by a bipartisan vote of 24-17. This legislation would renew and amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (last reauthorized in 2006 and expired in 2013) to ensure that this  fundamentally sound legislation works in the best interest of both fish and fishermen.

“Congress should be focused on policies that promote an America that works – and when over a million Americans’ jobs are tied to fishing, whether commercial or recreational fishing, renewing and improving the Magnuson-Stevens Act should be a priority. The goal of HR 4742 is to strengthen and improve the Act through common sense reforms that increase management flexibility based on science, ensure greater government transparency, promote responsible fishing and prevent overfishing, improve fish data collection, and provide predictability and certainty for American jobs and local communities whose economic livelihoods depend on fishing,” said Chairman Hastings. “I continue to be open to working with the Ranking Member, members of the Committee on both sides of the aisle, and with Members from New England and the Gulf who are struggling with real fishing challenges.”

Since 2011, the Committee has held ten hearings and heard from almost 100 witnesses relating to the reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Act about how this Act can be improved. H.R. 4742 is the culmination of all these recommendations that ultimately strengthen and improve the Magnuson-Stevens Act to ensure that there is a proper balance between the biological needs of fish and the economic needs of fishermen.

Specifically, this bill makes the following improvements to the Act:

• Provides science-based flexibility measures for fishery managers when rebuilding depleted fisheries

• Provides common sense flexibility measures for fishery managers when setting annual catch limits

• Provides more transparency for fishermen and others in both science and management

• Provides a schedule for obtaining better fishery dependent and fishery independent data especially for data poor fisheries and provides greater protection for confidential information submitted to regulatory agencies

• Encourages and promotes cooperative research projects where scientists work with fishermen to develop sound scientific information

• Allows fishery managers to take environmental conditions and economic impacts of their decisions into account when establishing harvest levels

• Allows fishermen in regions where catch share programs have been controversial to have a say in whether a new catch share program will be implemented and to be provided better information when considering such a program

• Requires NOAA to provide better accountability on how fees are collected and used

• Clarifies the role of the Magnuson-Stevens Act in relationship to other Federal statutes

• Authorizes appropriations for an additional five fiscal years at current funding level

For more information on the Committee’s efforts to ensure that the Magnuson-Stevens Act is working in the best interests of fish and fishermen, please click here.

###

Printable PDF of this Document
Contact: Committee Press Office 202-226-9019

Related Posts:
Port Orford "Action Alert" Environmental Extremist Pushing National Marine Sanctuary 
Support Local Hatcheries Protest Native Fish Society April 11, 2014
Port Orford---Residents Get Closer to Recalling the Mayor for Bad Decision Making 
EPA---Public Comment on Disapproval of OR Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control 
City of Port Orford---Argument for the recall of the Mayor 
Senator Whitsett---Oregon: Transfer public lands from feds?
Natural Resources Committee--State Forests Management Superior to Federal Forests
Federal Register taking comments on hunting in The Bandon Marsh
The Nature Conservancy---Oregon Grasslands: Crucial for Wildlife Survival‏
The Bandon Marsh  Mosquito Farm
USFWS---Public Responses to the Bandon Marsh Mosquito Invasion
Letter to Mr. Lowe of the USFWS about the Bandon Marsh Mosquitoe Problem
Department of Interior---Land Buy-Back Program for Tribal Nations AKA The Coquilles
USFS---Federal land buries rural economies in WA & OR   
ODFW---A bright outlook for ocean salmon seasons
EPA---Victims of Government: The Case of Steve Lathrop, Sounds Fimiliar

Following this Letter are files to add resource material to backup the argument made by the author. Enjoy...Rob T. 

Subject: Letter to Editor

Oops!, Coos Bay, Citizens said, property taxes, sewer fees too high. Town Hall, May,13,14. lightly attended by Citizens, 25 and 15, and Councilors, 2 and one. Hmmmm. Mayor at both meetings. 5, staff.

Staff said, property taxes have not kept up with City growth. Oops!  Don’t mess with the elephants in the room, Urban Renewal, UR, and LNG fees, unpopular.

Popular: waste water, higher user fees. Charter change, Revenue bonds, Streets repairs, a combo of above adding in taxing.

So, what measures are being taken to live within the Cities revenue sources, without changing the charter? Charter change is a blank check, for City government  taxing the citizens to pay, no longer needing permission.

Ideas debunked.  Disbanding Urban Renewal Districts,UR, only puts 40 percent of current funds back into the general fund. Is 40 percent of UR funds, in the districts,  currently used on sewer and streets? Relieving some of the revenue required in the remaining parts of the City?

Only one Waste water Plant?  Cost too much to send waste to only one plant. News flash, Amendments to Biosolids design Wastewater Treatment Plant 2, May 20, 2014, Sludge. Councilors approved additional design funding., installing pipes that will send sludge from the new Plant 2, to the digesters at Plant 1. Indicating  3 pipes, 4 mile distant each.

Framers, and sponsors of the LNG fees, in lieu of taxes, are there no provisions for infrastructure, waste water and roads in our County and Cities?

Is there UR funds for infrastructure, sewer plants, pipes and streets in the districts? If not, disband, put the 40 percent to work.

Why two plants, growth, historical facts debunk that.  Sewage can be piped to  plant #1 and Moines to build plant #2 can be used for plant one expansion if necessary. 

Denny Powell
Coos Bay OR 97420

RALLY AROUND THE FLAG!

Save The Date June 14, 2014 Free Admission!

10:00 am to 4:00 pm

Western Oregon Exposition Fairgrounds in Cottage Grove

Booths, Speakers and Networking!

Protecting Our Rights – Defending Our Liberty

“Property must be secured or Liberty cannot exist” – John Adams

10:30 AM Land Rights  Stewardship is the right to own and control property and protect it from infringement by others.

“Either you have the right to own property, or you are property” – Wayne Hage

David J. Hunnicutt, President of Oregonians In Action

Rob Taylor, Coos County Watchdog

 12:30 AM Constitutional Rights The rights in the Federal Constitution must be observed by all agents of the federal government.

“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.”–Thomas Jefferson

Diane Roark, NSA Whistle Blower

 2:30 PM Natural Rights Are those not contingent upon the laws, customs, or beliefs of any particular culture or government, and therefore universal and inalienable (i.e., cannot be sold, transferred, or removed).

Dr. Gordon Fulks, PhD in Physics. George Taylor, Meteorologist, former Oregon State Climatologist.
(not confirmed) Chuck Weise, Meteorologist.

Oregon Liberty Coalition (OLC) is a statewide Coalition of local, autonomous, non-partisan patriot groups established to advance and strengthen the Founding principles and God-given rights predicated in the U.S. and Oregon Constitutions. Our mission is to encourage and facilitate citizen participation in the political process and empower all citizens with a voice and influence in demanding Constitutional governance. OLC will help local, independent groups grow in numbers and influence and nurture communication and collaboration among patriot and freedom supporting groups. Information send email to orlibertycoalition@gmail.com

Download the flyer here!

PRE-ORDER your T Shirt Here

2015-17 Budget Development Process

The department is currently developing its 2015-17 budget proposal through a public process involving stakeholders, customers, Commissioners, legislators and the Governor’s Office. The department met regularly with stakeholder representatives on its External Budget Advisory Committee (EBAC) (pdf) to develop the budget proposal. EBAC includes representatives of sports groups, industry and other interested parties and provides valuable input on the department budget.

The Agency projects a significant gap between expenses and revenues in 2015-17 unless action is taken to reduce costs and increase revenue. The 2015-17 budget proposal (pdf)reduces costs by cutting programs and personnel costs and through increased efficiency. To increase revenue, the department will be proposing to raise fees for recreational and commercial licenses, tags (pdf), commercial fees and permits (pdf), and to and create new license types (pdf). The budget proposal also recommends shifting funding for conservation, habitat, law enforcement and other programs that benefit the entire state off license dollars onto State general fund revenues.

The Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission will consider the final budget proposal at its August 1st meeting in Salem. If the Commission approves the budget, the proposal will be forwarded to the Governor for consideration. If the Governor concurs, the budget proposal and fee package will be presented to the Legislature to consider in the 2015 legislative session.

The budget proposal is likely to change due to public input, Commission consideration, and action by the Governor and legislature. There will be several opportunities to comment on the proposal as it moves through the budget process (pdf). More information on the ODFW 2015-17 budget and fee proposal can be found here.

Written comments must be received by July 17, 2014 and may be submitted by e-mail to ODFW.Comments@state.or.us or by mail to ODFW Director’s Office, 4034 Fairview Industrial Drive, SE, Salem, OR 97302.

More information (pdfs)

• ODFW 2015-17 budget proposal
• Proposed Recreational License Fee Schedule
• Proposed New Licenses and Tags
• Commercial Fees
• 2015-17 Budget Development Timeline
• ODFW 2015-17 Budget and Fee Proposal Q&A
• Town Hall Powerpoint presentation

AGENDA
May 29, 2014
5:30 – 7:00 p.m.
Bandon Conference and Community Center (aka Bandon Barn)
1200 W 11th St. SW Bandon OR

5:30 – 5:35      Roll Call & Review/Approve previous meeting’s minutes

5:35 – 5:50      Staff Report

5:50 – 6:10      Bat House Program

6:10 – 6:20      June Event Planning

6:20 – 6:30      Mosquito Magnets

6:30 – 6:55      Public Comment

6:55 – 7:00      Committee Member Comment

7:00                 Adjourn

Saturday June 7, 2014 Josephine County Fairgrounds Floral Building Grants Pass, Oregon
Presented by : V.A.C.A.T.E.
Valiantly Affirming Constitutional Authority Through Education
THIS IS A FREE EVENT

INVITE YOUR COUNTY & STATE OFFICIALS WITH THIS FLIER
    Reserve your Group Table here

Event Agenda

Doors open at 9am, close at 5pm; event starts at 10am

Our Morning MC - Bill Meyer from KMED Medford   Afternoon MC - Mark Anderson from ISpy radio.


SPONSORED BY: Josephine County Sheriff Gil Gilbertson and The Liberators

It has nothing to do with the environment; it's ALL ABOUT THE MONEY and CONTROL!
 

Attorney and Utah State Representative Ken Ivory, one of the authors and architects of Utah's Statehood Bill, will talk about solutions that can be put in place now to SAVE our forests, wildlife, plant life, fish, water and most importantly, OUR LIVELIHOOD!
Learn about Utah's Statehood Bill and how their state & counties are preparing; about other states and counties successes and who's moving forward with courage, conviction and solutions of their own.   

Our natural resources have AND CAN provide a much needed product and comfortable living for many generations to come!  

This is a CRITICAL ELECTION! Invite your elected officials and those running in your area to attend. Our representatives must be informed and prepared to act!

PLEASE R.S.V.P. !!!!!  @ hairpiggie@reagan.com 


  THIS IS A FREE EVENT!!

Hey Folks,

The people in the area of the Bandon Marsh Mosquito Preserve are still experiencing swarms of escaped Tiger mosquitoes, even though the Service maintains they have successfully eradicating these pest. 

If residents continue to suffer the county will be forced to spray, which will cause a huge controversy.  There is no other choice for the public health officials.  Unless, they diked the marsh and drained the swamp.  The Environment Assessment of the Bandon Marsh Mosquito Problem has stated that this will be an indefinite problem unless actively managed.  Who will pay for the management of the mosquitoes that are in the county, but off the site?.

Below are files about spraying and the chemicals used in this process.  The people of the Coquille Valley will have to be well educated on insecticides and larvacides.  The American Mosquito Control Association have dealt with this issue and the following are some of their publications.....Rob T.   

AUTHOR:
Socrates (469–399 B.C.)
QUOTATION:
The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.

ATTRIBUTION:    Attributed to SOCRATES by Plato

Witnesses Question Obama Admin’s Authority to Regulate Energy Production on Wildlife Refuges


WASHINGTON, D.C., May 20, 2014 - Today, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans and Insular Affairs held an oversight hearing entitled “Oil and Gas Activities within Our Nation’s National Wildlife Refuge System.” This hearing highlighted the importance of oil and natural gas production occurring in America’s National Wildlife Refuge System and examined the potential effects of increased regulations. A proposed rule by the Obama Administration’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would require individuals and companies to obtain a permit to access subsurface minerals even though they already have the rights to the minerals while requiring companies to obtain a bond to produce energy on their own lands.

“Both the Fish and Wildlife Service and 43 states have oil and gas regulations. In every state in which the Service has identified active and inactive wells, regulations have been adopted which protect the environment and public safety through each stage of the extraction process,” said Subcommittee Chairman John Fleming (LA-04). “Horizontal drilling from private lands to access oil and gas under a refuge should not fall under the Service’s jurisdiction and any future rules should not try to add a new, duplicative layer of regulation over those activities.”

Witnesses appearing before the Subcommittee today offered testimony underscoring the importance of producing oil and natural gas in America’s Wildlife Refuge System and called on the Obama Administration not to overstep its legal authority with its proposed regulations on these energy production activities. Witnesses also noted that in most cases the subsurface rights to these energy resources existed before the surface lands were incorporated within the National Wildlife Refuge System.

Davis Powell from the Louisiana Chapter of the National Association of Royalty Owners urged caution surrounding the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s proposed rule that the “service must be held to a reasonable set of regulatory management controls that does not unduly burden private mineral owners.” Powell called on the Service to “not develop regulatory management tools and fees that provide a regulatory avenue to develop in theory but which creates an economic firewall to development in reality” and to ensure in its proposed rulemaking that “it allows for a balanced review of oil and gas development proposals and assesses any negative impacts of mitigation proposals on state and private mineral rights.”

Dan Naatz, Vice President of Federal Resources and Regulatory Affairs at The Independent Petroleum Association of America, called the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s rulemaking “premature” while questing the Service’s authority to even regulate oil and natural gas operations in the National Wildlife Refuge System saying that the Service is “limited in its authority to inhibit operations, including horizontal drilling from private lands, to access minerals under a refuge, and we expect FWS to adhere to the legal bounds of its authority. One of our biggest concerns is that the lack of jurisdiction that we believe the Service may have with this rulemaking.” In addition to questioning the Service’s legal authority of this proposed rule, Naatz cited that the Service “fails to provide a legitimate purpose” for this regulation limiting oil and natural gas production activities.

Ethan Schutt, Senior Vice President of the Land & Energy Development at the Cook Inlet Region Inc. in Anchorage, Alaska, said that the “current apparent land management philosophy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Alaska as it relates to oil and gas exploration on or adjacent to the refuge system can be summed up as: ‘No. Not here. Not Now.’” Citing “junk science or lack of science” in the proposed rule, Schutt questioned the Service’s authority to regulate oil and natural gas production activities on refuges. “I can think of no circumstances under which the United States Fish and Wildlife Service‘s proposed new oil and gas rules are needed or would be justified in their application in Alaska.”

Kip Knudson, Director of State & Federal Relations for the State of Alaska, highlighted the importance of existing regulations that were tailored specifically for Alaska to benefit Alaskans. “There is a robust framework of existing state and federal law that rigorously regulates oil and gas development within the boundaries of the National Wildlife Refuges in Alaska. This framework is unique to Alaska and was specifically tailored by Congress to provide for the national interest and the economic and social needs of Alaskans.” Knudson emphasized “how critical continued oil and gas development in Alaska’s National Wildlife Refuges can be to our citizens’ electricity and heat in addition to economic livelihood.”

###

Printable PDF of this Document
Contact: Committee Press Office 202-226-9019

Coos County Commissioner John Sweet

With copies to other Commissioners and to other parties having expressed an interest in the SCCF matter

Dear Commissioner Sweet:​

In their 23 May 2014 memo to new South Coast Community Foundation (SCCF) directors that was made public and published yesterday by The World paper, outgoing SCCF board members and officers Lansing, Verger and Whitty gave readers no doubt that you are a director of the SCCF.

In recent weeks, orally and in writing to the media, Ms. Cribins has stated that Coos County is not yet a member of SCCF and a motion to join the SCCF (perhaps ratify an earlier work session decision) is scheduled to be voted upon 3 June 2014.

Since you have a personal interest in SCCF and you will receive personal benefit by a favorable county vote to join the SCCF, this constuituent respectfully requests that you recuse yourself from voting on joining the SCCF, on accepting the SCCF Bylaws as now written (whatever that may be) and from voting on any other related SCCF, CEP, or Bayfront Investment matter.

Thank you,
Fred Kirby
Coos Bay 

05.24.14

Oregon Firearms Educational Foundation and Gun Owners of American Fighting Connecticut Gun Ban

 OFEF has contributed to an amicus brief in a lawsuit against Connecticut's unconstitutional firearms and magazine ban. You can read it here.

As attempts are made across the country to eliminate your Second Amendment rights, it is more and more critical that we engage the gun grabbers in court. 

You can help us continue these efforts and it won't cost you a dime.

If you shop at Fred Meyers and use a Rewards Card you can designate the Oregon Firearms Educational Foundation as a recipient in their Community Rewards Program. Fred Meyers contributes to OFEF and you still receive your reward points, fuel points and rebates.  It's a cost free way to help us fight for gun rights and getting involved is easy. Just follow this link for all the details, and thank you.

Related Posts:
OFF---Candidate Rating for the Primary 2014
OFF---Two Gun Bills Back in the OR House  
Ashland, OR debates the Right to Bear Arms,  Two must see videos on the subject
OFF---Public Comment needed for Gun Registration Bill SB1551 
OFF---Public Comment needed on the First Gun Bills Scheduled for 2014 Legislature
OFF---Obey The Law, Go To Jail
OFF---Gun Bills Officially Posted‏
OFF---Five Years In Prison For Giving a Gun to Your Best Friend‏
OFF---More on Portland Slime Moving South‏
OFF---Update on anti-gun bill introduction, suggested message, troubling video.
OFF---IS PORTLAND EXTENDING ITS TENTACLES?
OFF---Santa Claus is Coming To Town.  So Is Michael Bloomberg.
OFF---ACTION ALERT:  Comment On Obama's Anti-gun Rule Proposal‏
OFF---Supreme Court to Hear "Straw Purchase" Case

From: fred kirby
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 7:53 AM
To: crystal@shojiplanning.com
Cc: larry.campbell@theworldlink.com; jeanivey
Subject: Constituents request for information

To: Coos Bay Oregon Mayor Crystal Shoji
With copies to local Coos Bay print media:
The World newspaper / Executive Editor Larry Campbell
The Sentinel newspaper / Publisher Jean Ivey

​Dear Mayor Shoji:

This citizen is shocked and saddened by the sudden departure of Dr. Muenchrath.

At election time facts and rumors fly fast in small town America.  Please help me replace rumor with fact. 

I believe that the voters apathy and anger directed at their elected representatives who ignored their desire for greater citizens involvement in the SCCF matter caused, in part, the low county primary election voter participation and the election results. 

I had hoped that someone other than me would address this subject.  At the risk of being labeled by County Commissioner Sweet as another "Naysayer", or labeled by anointed SCCF President Whitty as another local "Yahoo", this constituent respectfully requests your response to the below inquiry.

I understand that the government (collectively the people) of Coos Bay employs the services of well regarded and qualified attorney Nathan McClintock as counselor to the city as his services may be required.  It is my understanding that counselor McClintock is paid for services rendered by the people through their representative government and that counselor McClintock is not employed as a personal or private counsel to the mayor or to council members individually or collectively or to the city manager.

Regarding the SCCF matter - It is my understanding that counselor McClintock was asked by you, or by the city manager, or by one or more council members, to render an opinion on the SCCF Bylaws as originally written and as amended prior to your motion that was set before the council to join and adopt the SCCF Bylaws.  It is further my understanding that an opinion was rendered by counsel and that the mayor and council relied on this opinion when making a unanimous vote to accept the Bylaws as they were amended 25 April.

Please provide this constituent citizen of Coos Bay with a copy of the peoples counselor McClintock's written opinion (perhaps a one or two page report) by e-mail attachment.  If the rendered opinion was oral, please set forth a concise summary of the rendered opinion; i.e acceptable as written, not in the peoples best interest, try again, etc.  If counsel was not asked to render his opinion in this matter of major importance to the citizens, why not?

Thank you for your time and for your timely concise response with copies to those CC addressees who are listed above for dissemination to other interested citizens as they may deem appropriate.

Sincerely,
Fred Kirby
Coos Bay

On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 6:00 PM,
Rodger Craddock <rcraddock@coosbay.org> wrote:
Mr. Kirby, 

This email serves to respond to your public records request involving communications between the City’s attorney and members of the City Council and/or staff.  As advise provided by the City’s attorney constitutes a privileged communication between an attorney and his client, such communications are exempt from disclosure.  Thus I must respectfully deny your  request.

Rodger Craddock, City Manager
City of Coos Bay
500 Central Ave
Coos Bay, OR  97420
541-269-8912
Fax 541-267-5912

Thank you for your rapid reply. 

That is the answer that I expected.  In this specific matter, I do not believe that the mayor and council can shelter under the protective umbrella of attorney client privilege.  I will ask the attorney general for an opinion and hopefully to compel the city to respond.

Sincerely,  Fred Kirby ​

Hello OWEB partners,

At its April 2014 meeting, the OWEB Board awarded a total of $12.048 million in grants for Watershed Restoration, Land Protection, Water Acquisition, Technical Assistance, Monitoring, Outreach, and Technical Assistance for Watershed Council Action Plans.  This funding supports local, voluntary watershed restoration and protection work across Oregon and helps local economies.

Board award tables are posted on our website at  http://www.oregon.gov/OWEB/docs/board/2014/April/Final_Funding_Tables_Oct_2013.pdf

Thanks to all of OWEB’s local partners who make such a positive difference for Oregon’s watersheds and communities. 

 ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:57 AM
Subject: Oregon law re publishing ballot
To: elections.sos@state.or.us

​ I understand that it is a violation of Oregon law to post your marked ballot on the Internet with a clear attempt to influence other voters. Am I informed correctly? If so, how may I file a complaint and with which organization? Thanks.


The person discussed below is a an Oregon county commissioner - if that makes a difference in your answer. Thanks.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: SOS Elections <elections.sos@state.or.us>
Date: Tue, May 20, 2014 at 8:53 AM
Subject: RE: Oregon law re publishing ballot

Thank you for your inquiry. ORS 260.695 used to prohibit showing a marked ballot to another person, but that provision was repealed in the last legislative session. The repeal was made by SB 1515, which went into effect April 1, 2014. A synopsis of election law changes from the last session, including this change, can be found here: http://sos.oregon.gov/elections/Documents/2014-Synopsis.pdf

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Alana

Alana J. Cox
Oregon Secretary of State, Elections Division
255 Capitol Street NE, Ste 501
Salem, OR  97310
503-986-1518

Hey Folks,

I have been told that I'm too paranoid and should trust the people in government, because they have our best interest in mind.  They tell me that all my predictions of what will become of the Community Enhancement Plan is all speculation and there is no evidence to the contrary.  Except, a historical pattern from every bureaucracy ever created by any government since the beginning of time.  Below is an excerpt from an article of government corruption.  Notice, the people involved are using a NON-PROFIT, such as the SCCF, to funnel money that was intended for the less fortunate.  The CEP will be used like a political slush fund for all kinds of government waste and the story below is a picture of Coos County's future.....Rob T. 

Related Posts:
BOC---Jordan Cove Energy Project Request Text Amendment on Eminent Domain
Local History of The Coos Bay Area by John Whitty
MGX---Mary Geddry offers Critique of The Oregonian Article on CEP
The Oregonian Calls the Community Enhancement Plan a "Shell Game" = Vindication
The Family of Caddy McKeown will Profit from the Jordan Cove Project 
Letter to Editor---Use CEP Monies for Coos Bay Sewage Plant
City of Coos Bay---Public Meeting for Opinion of the Community Enhancement Plan
County Officials at the Bay Area Enterprise Zone Committee Meeting May 12, 2014
Lessons from the Detroit Bankruptcy Example for Community Enhancement Plan
Open Letter to the Coos County Board of Commissioners about the SCCF 
County Elections Questions from a Constituent for County Commissioner Cribbins
BOC---Cowardly, Commissioners Cribbins & Sweet Betray the Voters of Coos County
Unanswered Questions about the South Coast Community Foundation
MGX---CEP/SCCF will Impact ALL of Oregon
AFP---Information on the CEP/SCCF Presentation at the Red Lion on May 1, 2014
Letter to Editor---SCCF Should pay for Coos Bay Sewer Upgrades
Letter to Editor---Promises in the Dark with the Jordan Cove Project
BOC---Public Meetings Coos County Planning Changing Land Use Laws
Letter to Editor---County Politicians Keeping Public in the Dark on SCCF
RPCC---Republican Monthly Meeting "Candidate Forum" April 24, 2014
Critique of the BOC Town Hall in Bandon---"PUT IT ON THE BALLOT"
BOC---Public Meetings on South Coast Community Foundation "Put it on the Ballot"
BOC---Public Meeting for Vote on South Coast Community Foundation April 1, 2014
Letter to Editor---South Coast Community Foundation Scam will Top All Past 
MGX---Geddry Slams Koch over Forced Cooperation & Jordon Cove Funding 
League of Oregon Cities Class of Slanted View on History of Urban Renewal in OR 
City of Bandon---Expanding Government Cheese
Urban Renewal---King Hales of Portland Master of Government Development
FBI Press Release on Charges Against Local Bandon Developer Michael Drobot
Urban Renewal---Read How Schools suffer to Support Wealthy Foreign Companies
City of Bandon---Local Developer Michael Drobot Admits to Bribery & Conspiracy 
Preserving the American Dream:  Lessons in Beating Boondoggles
Agenda 21---Sustainable Development & Regionalism

SCOTUS takes up case of fired air marshal
Source: Fox News

"The Supreme Court agreed Monday to consider the case of a federal air marshal who was fired after leaking information to the press about aviation security plans. The justices will hear an appeal from the Obama administration, which claims Robert MacLean is not entitled to whistleblower protection for disclosing that the Transportation Security Administration planned to save money by cutting back on overnight trips for undercover air marshals. ... MacLean said he leaked the information after his boss ignored his safety concerns. ... The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled last year that MacLean should be allowed to present a defense under federal whistleblower laws. But the government argues that the law does not protect employees who reveal 'sensitive' security information." (05/19/14)

http://tinyurl.com/n3juoxv

SCOTUS vacates police immunity ruling
Source: Christian Science Monitor

"The US Supreme Court ordered a federal appeals court Monday to reexamine a case involving the alleged use of excessive force by a police officer in Louisiana who deployed an electronic Taser device eight times against a handcuffed arrestee who was lying on the ground. The suspect, who later died, had reportedly refused to obey a police command to stand up and walk to the patrol car. The police officer was fired for using 'unnecessary force,' but was found not guilty of manslaughter. A panel of the New Orleans-based Fifth US Circuit Court of Appeals subsequently ruled that the officer was entitled to qualified immunity and could not be sued for allegedly violating the rights of the handcuffed prisoner." (05/19/14)

http://tinyurl.com/mglfkzz

Related Posts:
7th Circuit Court Rules Against Gun Activist Using Precedence Set in the Drug War 
OR Supreme Court---LOC Celebrates the Fact the Property Owners lose more rights
SCOTUS---Is it a fish or an incriminating document? 
SCOTUS: Google believes Snagging Data over Unsecured WI-FI Is Not Illegal 
SCOTUS---Oregon Protest Case Heard by the Supreme Court Marsh 26, 2014
SCOTUS---Court Upholds Property Rights in Rails-to-Trails Case
SCOTUS----Amazon workers' suit for paid search waits
SCOTUS---Rejects Appeal of Victim Disarmament Legislation 
SCOTUS---Did EPA Overstep on Global Warming 
SCOTUS---Court grants reprieve to death row inmate over pentobarbital 
SCOTUS---Case on Obama Recess Appointments 

Hey Folks,

The Jordan Cove Energy Project L.P. asked the county's Planning Department for a text amendment request, which concerned Eminent Domain.  I support the LNG, but stealing private property for private business is morally reprehensible.  None of the resolutions passed by different organizations in support of LNG did not have a word about eminent domain, so the company did not promote the idea. 

Of course, the power of seizing property is in the hands of government and that it is why we need local representatives who are working for the people, not special interests, like incumbent county commissioners, John Sweet & Melissa Cribbins.  Read the questions and comments at the bottom of the post.  Remember to VOTE.  Gurney & Rowe in 2014......Rob T. 

From: "Daniels, Katherine" <katherine.daniels@state.or.us>
Subject: question re local land use applications
Date: May 15, 2014 10:10:26 AM PDT
To: "Cameron La Follette (cameron@oregoncoastalliance.org)"

Hi Cameron, 

You asked whether a county may adopt an ordinance to permit someone other than a landowner to apply for a land use action on the landowner’s property where eminent domain is an issue. The following statutory provisions apply to land use applications in counties: ORS 215.416(1) “When required or authorized by the ordinances, rules and regulations of a county, an owner of land may apply in writing to such persons as the governing body designates, for a permit, in the manner prescribed by the governing body.” We read this provision to require the written signature of a landowner on all land use applications to counties, even if otherwise represented by a consultant or other person. Our understanding is that where a proposal for eminent domain is contested by the owner, only the courts can grant actual eminent domain and facilitate transfer of the property ownership for the fixed price in the judicial proceeding to the applicant. Until the applicant actually takes title to the property, the applicant is not the "owner" and therefore cannot submit a land use application without the existing owner's permission. I hope this provides helpful clarification on the matter. 

Katherine

Katherine Daniels, AICP | Farm and Forest Lands Specialist 
Community Services Division 
Oregon Dept. of Land Conservation and Development 
635 Capitol Street NE, Suite 150 | Salem, OR 97301-2540 
Direct: (503) 934-0069 | Main: (503) 373-0050 | Fax: (503) 378-5518 
katherine.daniels@state.or.us | www.oregon.gov/LCD

Letter to the Editor 
What does a Supreme Court ruling concerning christian prayer have to do with a Vietnam Memorial in Mingus Park?  The cross is not in the park as a religious symbol, it is a Memorial to our Veterans.Why does THE WORLD newspaper side with the idiots from out of town and refer to it as a religious symbol?  Once in an article about the bombings and now in an editorial.Leave our Memorial where it is.
Carol J. Taylor

Thanks to The Oregonian coverage, Coos County now knows what MGx readers have known all along, that Jordan Cove made promises it never intended to keep, namely that it would pay taxes despite an available enterprise zone exemption.


Although, in truth, this is hardly a revelation because the prevailing understanding in the area has always been the company would pay the freight during construction as evidenced by all the resolutions supporting the project stating just that. What is strange is that none of the officials who signed those resolutions uttered a peep when David Koch presented the CEP as a solution to the five year exemption period. Curiously, Koch denied any knowledge of these resolutions even though the one of the entities to pass one was his employer, the Port of Coos Bay.

We also learned, or rather received further affirmation, that the individuals behind this scheme and appointed to administer it do not much care for the public, or at least the public process. Even The World newspaper had to rein in its enthusiasm for the South Coast Community Foundation when it became clear that the directors are not interested in involving the public or the paper, for that matter. One of the SCCF directors referred to the public as “yahoos”. ya·hoo noun \ˈyā-(ˌ)hü, ˈyä-\ a boorish, crass, or stupid person

Again, this is hardly a revelation to the public because if the architects and planners of this plan felt any other way the public would have been invited from the very beginning. Or, the plan would be setup as a public trust rather than a private, insular nonprofit that even after all the bylaw revisions, need not meet any public records law standards. Still, while not a revelation, seeing the directors’ blatant disdain and contempt for the average citizen in print in the largest publication in Oregon confirms the worst fears of the plans opponents. The CEP, and its component parts, the SCCF and the Bayfront Investment Corp, will follow historical precedent and benefit a very few at the expense of everyone else.

The SCCF bylaws describe the qualifications for a seat on the board. [emphasis added]

Each director shall possess the qualities of integrity, capability and knowledge of the community which the Foundation serves, and community standing that will help the board carry out its functions

“Community standing” meant here to assure that “yahoos” need not apply. Or it means cronyism. cro·ny·ism – the appointment of friends and associates to positions of authority, without proper regard to their qualifications.

Two of the three appointed founding SCCF directors, Bill Lansing and John Whitty’s social skills have been sorely tested with each being caught with the proverbial foot in the mouth.

Having their true character displayed for all to see, is a probably a good thing for the public. For the foundation, however, and its ability to function in the community, their impolitic candor may be more of a hindrance.

Speaking of cronyism, it should be noted that the same people who want to shut out the public are also supporting the reelection of Melissa Cribbins for commissioner and very likely John Sweet as well.
With a less than 22% voter turnout now is the time to prove that the yahoos outnumber the cronies in Coos County. Get your ballot in by Tuesday! Hopefully, we can hold Cribbins and Sweet to just two years on the commission.

The plan plays a kind of financial shell game with the state, transforming property taxes into community service fees, then funneling them into private non-profits whose non-elected board members would have final say over how the cash is used.

Backers of the plan say it will allow them to both accelerate and smooth the tidal wave of property tax revenues expected from the project. It will spread the wealth over a broader geographic area and create a long-term funding stream for schools and economic development.

Read More:  http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2014/05/controversial_plan_to_divvy_up.html#incart_m-rpt-1

It is not often that we get to share such outstanding news with our readers.  Congratulations to Feld for the very successful close to this long, arduous suit and a historic victory.


Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
saova@earthlink.net

HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES AND CO-DEFENDANTS PAY $15.75 MILLION SETTLEMENT TO FELD ENTERTAINMENT ENDING 14 YEARS OF LITIGATION

Unprecedented Settlement Brings Total Paid to Parent Company of Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey® Circus to More Than $25 Million

Groups Settle with Circus After Federal Court Determined Case Was "Groundless and Unreasonable"

VIENNA, Va. - May 15, 2014 - The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), along with their co-defendants, have paid Feld Entertainment, Inc., the parent company of Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey® Circus, $15.75 million to settle cases stemming from a lawsuit they brought against Ringling Bros.® over the care of its Asian elephants. This historic settlement payment to Feld Entertainment ends nearly 14 years of litigation between the parties.

"We hope this settlement payment, and the various court decisions that found against these animal rights activists and their attorneys, will deter individuals and organizations from bringing frivolous litigation like this in the future," said Kenneth Feld, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Feld Entertainment. "This settlement is a significant milestone for our family-owned business and all the dedicated men and women who care for the Ringling Bros. herd of 42 Asian elephants. We look forward to continuing to set the standard for providing world-class care for all our animals and producing high quality, family entertainment."

HSUS and animal rights groups the Fund for Animals, Animal Welfare Institute, Born Free USA (formerly the Animal Protection Institute), the Wildlife Advocacy Project, the law firm of Meyer, Glitzenstein & Crystal, and several current and former attorneys of that firm, paid the settlement for their involvement in the case brought under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) that the U.S. District Court ruled was "frivolous," "vexatious," and "groundless and unreasonable from its inception." Today's settlement also covers the related Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) case that Feld Entertainment filed against the groups after discovering they had paid a plaintiff for his participation in the original lawsuit and then attempted to conceal those payments.

In December 2012, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), a former co-defendant in the case, settled its share of the lawsuits by paying Feld Entertainment $9.3 million. Today's settlement brings the total recovered by Feld Entertainment to more than $25 million in legal fees and expenses, which the company actually spent in defending the ESA case.

"After winning 14 years of litigation, Feld Entertainment has been vindicated.  This case was a colossal abuse of the justice system in which the animal rights groups and their lawyers apparently believed the ends justified the means. It also marks the first time in U.S. history where a defendant in an Endangered Species Act case was found entitled to recover attorneys' fees against  the plaintiffs due to the Court's finding of frivolous, vexatious and unreasonable litigation," said Feld Entertainment's legal counsel in this matter, John Simpson, a partner with Norton Rose Fulbright's Washington, D.C., office. "The total settlement amounts represent recovery of 100 percent of the legal fees Feld Entertainment incurred in defending against the ESA lawsuit."

In the original ESA lawsuit, Feld Entertainment discovered the animal rights groups and their lawyers had paid over $190,000 to a former circus employee, Tom Rider, to be a "paid plaintiff." The Court also found that the animal rights groups and their attorneys "sought to conceal the nature, extent and purpose of the payments" during the litigation. Their abuse of the judicial system included the issuance of a false statement under oath by Rider, assisted by his counsel, who the Court found was "the same attorney who was paying him" to participate in the litigation. The Court found in addition to Rider being a "paid plaintiff," that the lawsuit was "frivolous and vexatious."

http://www.ringlingbrostrialinfo.com/