Shadow Government and Socio-Economic Consensus

A “Request for Proposals: Socio-economic monitoring baseline data and data collection methodology and template” was recently issued by the Amador-Calaveras Consensus Group. Not understanding why this data is necessary, what the Amador-Calaveras Consensus Group really does and how consensus groups came into being I started investigating.

In the 1880’s Karl Marx and Frederick Engels propagated the idea that hunter-gatherer peoples lived communally and made decisions by consensus.  This was called primitive communism, a romanticized state of being to which we all could blissfully return. While this probably happened to some extent, the evidence is scant even today relying mostly on some scattered oral tradition and isolated observations. With the thousands of hunter gatherer groups that once existed, any honest generalization is impossible. Theories about these early human societies seem to flip completely with every new discovery. But the mythology persisted and has since flourished in various circles. 

It merged with Quaker sentiment and morphed into Sociocracy guided by the principle “…that the interests of all members must be considered, the individual bowing to the interests of the whole.” These feed into the Movement for a New Society which believed in “sensitivity training… (and to) challenge members to excise oppressive aspects of their traditional patterns of behavior.” This group influenced many in the 1960’s and that set the stage for its later adoption by the environmentalists.

While I don’t know how they started, the “Amador-Calaveras Consensus Group is a community-based organization that works to create fire-safe communities, healthy forests and watersheds, and sustainable local economies.” (Sustainable is their favorite word) They support projects we all like such as fire breaks, forest cleaning, biomass plants, etc but are also concerned with spotted owls, greenhouse gases and wildlife corridor connectivity. Their members include the Foothill Conservancy, Sierra Nevada Conservancy, Sierra Forest Legacy, PG&E, forest service, firesafe councils and many others with John Hoffmann representing Amador County. Supervisor Lynn Morgan attended a recent meeting.

Their decisions are made by consensus. “If consensus cannot be reached, the person or persons expressing concern are responsible for proposing an alternative which meets the same end goal. If alternatives cannot not be defined immediately, the person opposing a decision is responsible for convening a meeting with relevant persons to clearly define the alternative for consideration at a subsequent meeting.” Many people may find this process not that dissimilar from reeducation in Maoist China. But despite extensive study I couldn’t find the consensus for Daniel Boone crossing the Cumberland Gap or inspiring those for the long journey on the Oregon Trail. They appear to be a shadow government ruled differently than the concept of majority rule and minority rights I learned in what now seems to be an archaic America.

The prosperity we all enjoy, including the poorest among us, was undreamed of 250 years ago when the free enterprise system began. Private enterprise and the human spirit it harnesses, despite its imperfections, is the best way to get things done. However, I am not categorically opposed to consensus groups, non-profits, governments sponsored enterprises or a host of other organizational forms.  We are a big, diverse nation and should have a variety of venues to choose from for the task at hand.  But we need to choose wisely and be aware of where we are trending.  And while I wish it began by other means and had a less elaborate structure, I strongly support the Amador-Calaveras Consensus Group’s participation in the Wilseyville biomass plant proposal. If they could have received the waste how many of the recent out of control burn pile fires could have been avoided?

Adding more layers and complexity to decision making has its cost. When a group of architects and such were discussing where to pave walkways between new classroom buildings at Columbia University then university president Dwight Eisenhower stopped them. He suggested letting the students walk between the buildings and then paving the paths they found convenient. Sometimes expertise lacks the simple elegance of common sense.

But micro management, at the very least, must have motivated the Amador-Calaveras Consensus Group to issue “Request for Proposals: Socio-economic monitoring baseline data and data collection methodology and template”.  This proposal involves “sustainable local economies” and “will comply with the mandates of the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program”.  It is concerned with “community development challenges …to better monitor socio-economic conditions in our communities” and requires a “recommended frequency of data collection”. But the Demographic Research Unit of the California Department of Finance estimates and forecasts population, school enrollments, etc by county. Washington’s Bureau of Labor Statistics issues quarterly employment and wage data by county. The General Plan, the General Plan EIR, the separate Housing Element, the various transportation and transit plans and the plans of social service agencies contain reams of socio economic data.  The benefit this proposal could contribute to what is already available is very marginal at best and hardly seems sufficient to justify additional expense.  

Most people are aware of what is happening in their local community by daily observation and experience. The more curious ask those they encounter. The well being of a community is hardly obscure. A few decades ago the dollar rose or fell based on the monthly balance of trade figures. Software was primitive then and one investment firm spent a million dollars to produce projections slightly better than the others. But no matter how hard they all tried, one investment firm always beat them.  After this phase of investing ended they revealed their secret: they went down to the docks and asked about upcoming ship arrivals and departures. 

Aside from the more frightening social control aspect of consensus groups’ shadow government and the proposed even more elaborate monitoring of daily life, this is just another example of pencil pushing rather than beneficial production. How much do the fire safe councils spend on promotion, study and overhead versus projects like the firebreaks that we created them for? As I have stated previously groups like these and especially the EIR process serve a primary purpose to create employment for those interested in archaeology, for example, who would otherwise be unemployable.  Having more people producing less and less tangible result is creating a downward economic spiral that will engulf all of us.

Endnotes: Katherine Evatt recently asked me to join the Amador- Calaveras Consensus Group and I turned her down. It was not because of anything I’ve said above, most of which I didn’t know then, but because I don’t have the time. That hasn’t changed. Also I am a pension board trustee and we generally make decisions on a consensus basis. This is because no one individual wants to be on the hook for a multimillion dollar blunder. And do not confuse the primitive communism discussed with spiritual communism, an obscure late 1800’s French group that utilized repetitive work to induce meditative trance. But the primitive communism concept still remained as exhibited by the oil field workers’ homes in Baku being between the oil derricks due to their alleged mystical attachment to their work. Needless to say they all died prematurely from cancer.

Copyright 2015, Mark L. Bennett  

Smart Growth means Our Style Growth

Recently Smart Growth principles were posted on Facebook. What follows is my brief take on them.

 “Mix Land Uses” is conceptually a good idea.  Certainly it’s a reasonable response to the extreme city antiseptic planning of a century ago. While it creates convenience it also requires tolerance. I remember working in an office building where the air ducts picked up the cooking smells from the restaurant next store and people felt olfactory assaulted. And remember than our General Plan EIR goes to extreme lengths to prevent or regulate noise pollution, an obvious problem outcome of mixed uses.

“Take Advantage of Compact Building Design” negates one’s freedom to live as they want. It’s not the government’s role to design buildings except for basics such as safe wiring, etc. North Natomas was developed as a smart growth area and the homes are too close together. They are like the homes I lived in that led me to leave for Amador County. They are the style of our prior less affluent society being sold as a new idea. Is this planning for a possible decline in the standard of living?

“Create a Range of Housing Opportunities and Choices” sounds nice, but when it’s not done in the free market but rather administered it becomes arbitrary. Ask people in Stockton about the required mini apartment ghettos in each new development. They hate it.  While this glib principle often means a contrived “statutory” diversity, apartments that fit into a neighborhood’s character are essential for the elderly to remain there. When one leaves their single family home they should be able to stay put and continue ties and affiliations.

“Create Walkable Neighborhoods” again sounds nice, but it often means “stack and pack” housing. I would submit that neighborhoods became less walkable when we gave up the grid pattern for the current curvilinear pattern along with cul de sacs. This is not about density, but rather just design.  But the other side of the curvilinear argument is the number of dwelling units than can be fit into an area and in some cases preserving the topography an environmental plus for many. Also some people prefer the privacy and lack of pedestrians (strangers) in curvilinear areas.  Doesn’t the reality of create walkable neighborhoods contradict creating a range of housing opportunities and also choices for people with preferences deemed politically incorrect by those in power?

“Foster Distinctive, Attractive Communities with a Strong Sense of Place” sounds yummy. If this is done over time by many individual people, it creates the charm and character we all cherish. But if it is administered by a committee the result is often contrived. In only a few seconds one can decide if the business they just entered was designed by a corporation or grew out of the unique experience of a person or family. Does anyone remember the old joke: What is a camel? A horse designed by a committee.

“Preserve Open Space, Farmland, Natural Beauty and Critical Environmental Areas” What is so smart about assigning subjective judgment calls, open to abusive interpretations, of natural beauty and critical areas to government seers or stacked consensus groups? This is only smart if you want a preconceived ideological outcome.  An example I have cited before is locating a restaurant or gas station along the Hwy 88 scenic corridor.  While most people would consider such a facility as convenience, it would mar the Sierra’s beauty for an esoteric, but empowered, few. As an example of this attitude a recent photo posted on Facebook claiming to represent the intended Newman Ridge project was regarded as disgusting by those who find any productive enterprise as ugly. This is a problem attitude best dealt with by psychologists, not planners. 

“Strengthen and Direct Development towards Existing Communities” This premise compromises the principle that people are free to live where they want. The government is here to serve us, not to make us accommodate their intellectual desires of social design divorced from our traditions. American land tenure, in rural areas, is your home near the middle of your property. This pattern made America freer and different from the Europe of crowded villages most of our ancestors left behind. Divorced from reality and tradition, this statement appears to be the product of isolated intellects with the hidden agenda of homogenizing us to look like Europe along with their roundabouts.

“Provide a Variety of Transportation Choices” How many potholes do we tolerate to placate the few, but vociferous bicyclists? Resources are not infinite. Or was my mother wrong when she told me that money doesn’t grow on trees? Public transit is a vital opportunity that allows people to help themselves, just as public education does. But given the prevalent patronage and social welfare model rather than a public sector business model, throwing money at most big city transit agencies is grossly wasteful without a revolutionary change in their planning and management.

“Make Development Decisions Predictable, Fair and Cost Effective” Fair is a buzzword for social justice, the rebranding of failed socialism. How stable is a society based on entitlements compared with one based upon what you have earned?  Cost effectiveness can be judged by whatever unrealistic ideological assumptions are in charge. My prior discussion of a twisted and rather extended concept of externalities is a perfect example. While nothing can make life predictable, this desire requires at the very least an acceptance of stagnation.

“Encourage Community and Stakeholder Collaboration in Development Decisions” depends, of course, on who is a stakeholder or community member. Certainly people without children and with extra time and means are most likely to appear at meetings as participants. Community groups often are multipliers of the same people appearing as more numerous than they are.  Sometimes I wonder if the number of groups concerned with the Mokelumne River equal the number of fish or frogs there. Caltrans found that neighborhoods often change more rapidly than project timeframes and only chaos and discord ensue. 

Smart Growth is an advertising slogan that can’t help remind me of “You can sure if it’s Westinghouse”. Remember that great company that dissolved with some parts now owned by foreign companies?

Copyright 2015, Mark L. Bennett

Everyone Loves the Circus

On 6/9/15 the Board of Supervisors had a public hearing on a possible referendum about the Newman Ridge project. I made the following statement:

“Not too long ago on my way into a local market I was approached by an agitated man. At first I thought he was a carnival barker in an old B movie. But he wasn’t tempting me to see the bearded lady or the five-legged frog. Instead, I was informed that our ranchers and farmers water was in danger unless I signed here.

It is a sad day for Amador County when dishonesty triumphs.  Deciding to rescind the favorable decision is to cave into a megalomania of well financed deceit. The other option, to have a vote in what will probably be a year and a half, could suspend the benefits of the project at best, and also subjects this County to a continued derisive debate with a group devoid of integrity.

I have followed this project since its public inception and have often publicly commented upon it.  I devoted a week to reading the EIR, including an independent study of the alleged air pollution. Since this project already has remediated old mines and will recycle old roadbed and will be critical to saving our railroad, the alternative to diesel trucks, I consider this project to be an environmental winner.

While it is easy to understand this shrieking abuse of environmentalism, it becomes sickening to consider what appears to be the nihilism involved and enviable outcome of economic suicide.”

At the hearing, however, we all learned that there were not the simplified two, but given the various consequences there were six options including a new consideration. Since the referendum petition contained the reclamation plan which is ministerial, not legislative, it may be invalid. As an example my recent reroofing permit is ministerial and could not be denied by a referendum of people trying to drive me out of the county. This problem arose despite the attorneys for both the county and the anti project LAWDA organization engaging in prior discussion.  Apparently for LAWDA, their fanaticism overruled legal tradition.

The Board of Supervisor voted unanimously to ask the court for clarification via an action for declaratory relief. Perhaps the referendum decision will be revisited later. At the very least this will delay the employment opportunities and cause us taxpayers an unnecessary expense.

Once again the anti project contingent portrayed the situation as if they were quoting a century old muckraking novel, seeing the supervisors as oppressors. And they present themselves, buttressed by their dishonest petition and referendum campaigns, as representing “the people”.  This hallow claim has been repeatedly shown as prosperous at every public meeting I have attended."

After my presentation at an Ione City Council hearing, people lined up to thank me for speaking on their behalf.  It was a very gratifying experience.

 Copyright 2015, Mark L. Bennett    

Something Deeper Happening?

They say all politics is local. Here we have Newman Ridge. In Calaveras County a similar battle is unfolding over a proposed asphalt plant. The tactics of the opposition appears to come from a similar playbook. Is this all more than coincidence?

Marketwatch.com recently ran a story that stated: “The number of drugs in short supply in the U.S. has risen 74% from five years ago, to about 265... They range from antibiotics and cancer treatments to commodity items such as saline.” A recent article in Barron’s said that as of 2013: “…no new landfills have been permitted in the U.S. in 18 years, and no new hazardous-waste incinerators have been built in the past 15 years.”

Maintaining our roadbeds, having essential pharmaceuticals and disposing of our waste are not economic growth projects, they are staying put projects. Without them, we fall behind and enter a period of decline...and this is without even adding in population growth both natural and from legal and illegal immigration. While we debate social issues like gay marriage and some see a moral decline, the economic decline is most often only witnessed locally. I believe most people think that their town is in trouble, but that things are pretty good elsewhere. Everyone in Kansas feels relieved that they don’t have to pay the rents in San Francisco. The new media may have exploded, but most people still see their limited, habitual sources. If it’s not a crisis yet, it isn’t news.

This may well be the Chinese century, but the United States doesn’t have to sink into oblivion. How close to sinking into a deep hole are we? Our illusionary life is sustained by debt. The Federal Reserve buys about half the debt of the US Treasury. Most of the other half is sold to unknown entities in places like the Grand Cayman Islands. This is less stable than a house of cards. Some say a collapse is being engineered and that recent domestic military maneuvers are preparation. But others say this is total paranoia. Clairvoyants say the USA will break apart into a series of regional republics. We all know that movements such as the State of Jefferson are now occurring.

I don’t know what will happen nor can I predict the future. But I acutely observe what is happening, find it alarming and struggle for optimism.

Copyright 2015, Mark L. Bennett

Do we share the same reality?

Following and participating in many recent heated and sometimes hateful dialogues on local Facebook, I asked myself the following question: Is there a sharp contrast between a difference of opinion and a lack of grounding in reality? The line is sometimes gray, so I won’t venture an absolute definition, but rather share some observations. Many people here feel that our future is an economy based upon boutique shopping, wine tasting and white water rafting.  As they promote this vision they also oppose the Newman Ridge project.  But a sound economy is a diversified economy, more resilient to enviable change. Because I support this project many consider me to be an ideological conservative, but 50 years ago I would have been considered a liberal Democrat. I don’t care about labels; I rest my case on common sense and thousands of years of economic history.

I was born in 1947 in Buffalo, NY at a Sisters of Charity hospital. As my mother approached the end of her pregnancy the doctor asked if she wanted me strangled if I wasn’t “right”. It was then commonplace for the disabled newborn to be killed with the doctor telling the parents that their baby was born dead and then forging the dead certificate. The hospital staff was complicit, which presumably included the nuns, and they all carried this secret to their grave. A disabled child would have consigned the family to poverty; some siblings would have forgone marriage to care for them while others would have given up the possibility of college and upward mobility. There was no welfare state as we know it today, and back then it was a badge of shame to say I can’t take care of myself and my family. These people had their pride, hopes and dreams, these would be off spring were the children or grand children of those who left the spent fields of Sicily or the imperially ravaged landscape of Poland. The doctors and hospital staff knew the families and lived in the same neighborhoods. They all knew life was a bitch.

I won’t be sitting on a golden throne on Judgment Day and I can’t answer the question of whether this was right or wrong. I know God gave us freewill and I know that we have to make decisions within our limited confines and restricted circumstances. It is not always easy, nor do I suspect it is supposed to be.  Life is a gritty experience of hard choices.

A cousin of mine killed hundreds, if not thousands, of Japanese. If the Marine Corp pinned any more medals on his chest he would have fallen over from their weight. But after the war he was a person that dreaded uncertainty and never fully embraced life. Beyond his job and family, he devoted himself to helping other veterans which probably aided his own struggle for inner peace. He chained smoked, was plagued with bleeding ulcers and died young. In his heart he was never a hero; just a man caught in a kill or be killed situation.

While it may surprise many people here, I once worked on a project for a former Sierra Club lobbyist. It was a great project and I am proud of its accomplishments. I mention this because I was guided by what I believe was reality based common sense, not a preconceived ideological stricture. Some people would like an economy of cutesy tourist towns, and others say we are justified in spending a quarter of a million dollars or so keeping brain stem babies alive for a few months and some oppose the Dollar General store in Pine Grove because they believe that we are a more affluent community than we really are. I wonder what reality some people live in and what their concept of reality is based upon. It is not always just what we would like to happen.

Copyright 2015, Mark L. Bennett