Fort Bragg Rolls Out the Red Carpet (with me in it)

I thought you might be interested in my experience visiting Fort Bragg, Monday March 26th. It was a day trip for me but I was on my own for three hours while a friend fulfilled a contract.

My first stop was Headlands Coffee where I ate cookies and drank coffee while flipping through a book catalogue. There was time after to window shop. The bookstore had a used copy of Season of the Witch in their window. I considered buying a second one to lend out. Maybe after lunch.

Since it had been awhile since I was in Fort Bragg I thought I’d check out the mini mall in the old Union Lumber Company building. Final destination here was the Mendocino Cookie Company but first, a tour of the shops, slowing down to glance at the historical photos plastering the walls.

As I turned the last corner before the Cookie Company, someone vacuuming the carpet quickly turned off the machine and says to me “Let me ask you something” and proceeded to make accusations about me hanging out and not being there to buy anything. The phrase “You can’t hang out here” was repeated several times. My only response was “I’m heading to Mendocino Cookie Company. I’m a tourist.” He didn’t believe me. “Just remember, you can’t hang out here.”

I ate enough cookies earlier so I bought a Cappuccino to drink while making some notes in my catalog. I still had some time to cruise Main before lunch. On the way out I stop at the shared rest room. Someone was using it. So I’m waiting in the hall when the homeless patrol guy walks up to me and says sarcastically, “Still being a tourist?” I needed to find out what the problem was.

I go into serious conversation mode. “Look, what is the problem? Tell me what it is I’m doing and I won’t do it.” I hold up my cappuccino cup. “Look, I’m a customer.” Hallway police: “You can’t hang out here.” “What is hanging out?” “You can’t be here for over an hour hanging out.” Finally, a piece of information. “When you stopped me on the way to the Cookie Company I hadn’t been here for more than a half hour looking at the pictures on the wall so I was well within this range. Aren’t we supposed to look at the pictures?”

He acted like he never heard me but he didn’t ask me to leave either, which I was planning to do after the pit stop. Struggling to make sense of his behavior I do an analysis of my appearance – clean shave, clean clothes, no stuff except an Air Mac computer on my shoulder and a convention tote bag for a few papers. My best guess is, it must be the army raincoat. I grab the lapel of my coat in a final desperate attempt to break through to this guy. “Its been raining. I’m from Clearlake so I had no idea what the weather was going to be like here. THAT’s why I’m wearing THIS (pointing to the coat) which makes me look like a homeless person.”

I feel satisfied that I’ve solved the mystery but he just shakes his head and stalks off. During the whole encounter someone who was obviously the building’s manager passed by twice showing a new employee what had to be done to shut down the building at the end of the day. Nothing I described seemed out of the ordinary to him. I pop in and out of the rest room and leave – probably forever.

I meet my lunch date at the pizza pub across the street. I talk about the new Fort Bragg hospitality. I say “Fort Bragg” because there had to be significant public involvement to bring in all the historical artifacts to the mini mall. During my brief stay I spent $53.35. Obviously chump change for a classy place like Fort Bragg. I forget all about going back for the book on the way out of town.

I feel I should help your businesses keep lowlifes like me out of town by publicizing my recent visit. So who am I? I am 64, educated, and retired, currently on a mere $14,229 per year but I own my own place. I travel a lot on a budget within 150 miles of home. Someone still working would have to gross another thousand to clear this amount. Add another thousand to beat the hanging out threshold and we get a minimum gross income of $16,229 to keep Fort Bragg from jerking the welcome mat out from under you. I still don’t know what nuance I projected to throw retail personnel into homeless alert mode so probably no one else would either.

Feel free to use my picture of exactly what I was wearing and carrying for a poster captioned: “If you look like this, keep moving.” I’ll send it to you. I want to help.

Farewell to Theater

Traditional big-box theater in America is at an extreme disadvantage when it comes to reforming its structure. Even though the relevant numbers have been crunched as tweaks, gimmicks, and roll backs have been accepted, there still is the implicit resolve among the old school that “Beyond this point we can go no farther.”  This barrier to change affects how the content of plays speaks to the non well-off (which is increasing) and under 60 theater goers.

After 50 or so issues of American Theater Magazine it is clear that your group has highlighted all attempts at tech, finance, and education innovations without changing theater itself. Your roots go to the past and significant change is in constant negotiations with several generations of what has worked in the past. When writing about how theater is done in other countries, I have nothing but good things to say. But other countries do not share our past. In any event, Americans may not be able to duplicate their success.

Since it all comes down to money, I would like to offer my two cents about why reform is limited when working from the top down. An approach of creating from the bottom up would look very different than trying to pinch pennies out of multi million dollar budgets. I include the 99 seat theater class that appears to be bargain versions of that same form and substance.

Don’t get me wrong. I saved several valuable articles that the magazine has printed that would also be valuable to those thinking (and working) outside the three-walled box. More of those type of articles have not appeared for some time. Maybe you’ve said all you have to say on what we both have in common.

But serious core reform seems to be hampered by what remaining traditional sponsors and aging subscribers expect, even as building and operation costs escalate and attention spans plummet. Because this is not where I’m going, maybe theater isn’t my end all be all. Maybe I should be traveling the multimedia road. Of course, TCG incorporates multimedia while refusing to yield the center. But a true multimedia approach has no structural bias. It is a true bottom up, continually changing experience.

I’ve been part of other genres that refused to yield the center when their time had passed. Cable public access TV refused to make a full transition to internet multimedia platforms so is withering away without a replacement. Public poetry readings rarely have more people in the audience than readers waiting their turn to bore, I mean read. Meanwhile the slam poets on Button Poetry are getting between a hundred thousand and a million views. These changes are not a passing fad.

It would not surprise me to see several structures and genres working in an ever changing flux together. Those who have been big fish in the traditional theater pond and ignore this change are going to find that their pond will be getting smaller and smaller until it is just a mud hole.

This head in the sand attitude about structure spills over into content offerings as well. For content cannot be isolated from current events and the broader experiences of the public. Likewise, current events cannot be separated from the real people that make up the public. The public is not always well informed and often overstocked on fear, anger, and class bias. But they are the public. Who is your audience?

I couldn’t help notice that several of your magazine issues have been obsessed with thinly disguised shock and disbelief about Trump being President. Since the Orange One never attempted to fool anyone about who or what he was during his campaign, I can only conclude that the motivations of a large segment of the voters are irrelevant to the official theater establishment. I know many people personally who voted for him and why. No, I wasn’t one of them. But I am not out of touch either.

In an effort to seem more broad minded, the rather forced ‘Enter Stage Right” article was printed. What was called “conservative theater” was mostly a reaction against things in the status quo that weren’t working. Bernie Sanders offered an equal popular solution against things in the status quo that weren’t working but he was shut down by the DNC, not the forces of Trump. The non ideologues who were so done with the status quo saw themselves stuck with Trump. I see the same fallacy of false alternatives in American Theater.

The irony is the “99 seat theater” class has aped the big theater gang instead of breaking away on a separate course. My recent experience was last years “Nittany Theater” contest which bent and twisted the terms of a small grant to do pretty much whatever the Hell they felt like doing. The writers who were sucked in by the advertised noble theme of the contest were just nobodies in some insipid Summer Stock’s ruse to get some free publicity. The message is, small is sometimes even smaller.

The bottom line is I will not be renewing American Theater since I would be reading more obituaries of people I never heard of than inspiring innovations in the performance arts. I’ll be finding my way to the future in other places.

Good Gun Laws, Bad Gun Regulations

There are rules for owning guns in California. Some of these rules are for firearms in general. Some regulations are for specific categories of firearms, such as handguns or assault rifles. It is improper to apply the law for a category of firearms by creating regulations for all firearms not in that legal category.

Even when regulations are properly applied to a category of firearms it is possible to be so restrictive or vague that the original intent of the law is ignored. Both of these situations apply to me. In particular, there appears to be so much flexibility and discretion in the area of residency that requirements can be fabricated out of thin air without any connection to the law.

Problem Number One. Like many rural Californians, I live on a bad road with no mail delivery at my residence. My California Commercial Drivers License shows my PO Box on my license. The DMV refuses to put a physical address on my license if I do not receive mail there. However, if I ask for a printout of my driving record, after showing my drivers license, I will receive a document with a California State stamp that lists both my physical and mailing addresses. This not good enough to buy a shotgun.

Problem Number Two. I don’t have a currently registered vehicle. This is partly due to expense and partly from having to barricade my driveway for security reasons. I ride a bike, take the bus, and occasionally rent cars. This should not make me a bad person.

Problem Number Three. Most utilities in California are private companies. The addresses on those bills apparently are worthless for documentation purposes. In the city of Clearlake there is a private garbage company, a private phone company, a private power company, a private cable company, and two out of the three water companies are private. Many people are on wells. My water comes from the one Special District in Clearlake but the content on its bill does not meet either the gun stores’ or the Bureau of Firearms’ standards.

Problem Number Four. I bought my first lot where I live now when I was still living in San Jose. Over time I bought five more contiguous lots, performed two separate multiple lot mergers, and moved onto the property in 2002. None of this paper work shows a current physical address. My current property tax bill does show a physical address but it is not accepted by gun store clerks. Since they want to sell guns I assume they are acting on Bureau of Firearms instructions.

Assuming that the Bureau of Firearms is behind this erroneous interpretation of otherwise reasonable laws, I am asking that the Attorney General over ride this mistake by issuing a correct interpretation. I believe this interpretation should take note that 1) Someone should not have to live in a residence that can receive mail in order to buy a shotgun. 2) Someone should not have to own a registered vehicle in order to be qualified to buy a shotgun. 3) Someone should not have to get service from non existent government utilities to buy a shotgun. 4) Someone should not have to convince the rare government utility to change their billing practices so I can buy a shotgun.  And 5), someone should be able to substitute a tax bill for a deed if the deed only shows plot numbers and not an address.

I’ve been background checked to be a security supervisor, a transit bus operator, a census worker, and a school teacher. I’ve been finger printed and drug tested more times than I can count. I am a property owner, earned two college degrees, and am active in community affairs. My record is spotless. I am a responsible person. But the Bureau of Firearms says I cannot buy a shotgun unless I meet their impossible conditions.

There is nothing in existing law that suggests that the Bureau of Firearms has made reasonable interpretations. Yes, I contacted the Bureau and they blew me off. Enforcing existing firearm laws should not stray from the original intent of those laws. I am not advocating any change in the law, so unless there is some agenda I am not aware of, I expect common sense procedural changes to be made that will allow a poor, retired rural person to buy a shotgun.

Walking the Plank for a New Pirate Platform

 

For the second time the California Pirate Party has crashed and burned. This is in spite of (maybe because of) many high level techies at the helm. There never seemed to be a commitment to reach out to the average person’s main concerns. Concise and compelling outreach materials would have been a good place to start. Other obsessive structural minutia just soaks up the energy of would be grass roots activists with nothing to show for it.  Which brings me to the surviving National Pirate Party’s planned platform.

After a decade in existence, the national pirate is beginning to revisit forming a political platform. Not that I’m complaining about the delay. Full blown platforms are internal documents that don’t interest your typical voter. Eventually something should be cobbled together since writers occasionally drift over to check out  political happenings on the fringe. Unfortunately, writers don’t write the platforms. These electoral shopping lists tend to be the bastard offspring of tedious committees. But they don’t have to be.

I would like to offer a criteria for writing a pirate platform that would be compelling enough to distribute for outreach. This populist broadside should navigate through waters that are foggy even to the founders. But even when the destination is clear there could be options. Why not consider alternate possibilities in the platform, as long as each has a strong following among pirates? Be advised that some non techies possess knowledge and experience that could be effectively incorporated into this goal.

Criteria one:

The pirate party needs a tag line in the platform and other documents. The “pirate party” name is a good hook (Arrr) but there needs to be a tag afterwards to keep people from blowing by.

Our title with tag should read thus: “United States Pirate Party – Freedom of Information.” Instantly a reader knows we’re not about themed birthday parties.

Criteria two:

The mission statement, below the tag line (the major goals in one sentence): “The voyage of the Pirate Party is to achieve government transparency, open records, copyright reform, and a free internet.”

Criteria three:

Use existing sources for compatible platform planks first. The original direction for the platform committee is Rick Falkvinge’s, the Pirates’ international founder’s, “wheel” of related concepts. Its not a wheel. Its a convoluted schematic mess. Here’s what I think can be saved from the wheel. “Transparency, ticks (exchange of tools and ideas), resilience (decentralization and sustainability), swarm economics.” Everything else here, ignore and don’t show to anyone. Please.

The other official source to mine is the “values” in “blog.pirate-party.us”. This is more useful than the wheel but it too is a source to be extracted and condensed from. Personally, I found eight values that could be developed in articles that would be linked within the platform itself. This linking may be a new idea in itself that would attract attention and comment.

Criteria four:

Other sources for platform ideas: Books and articles by Rick Falkvinge and Cory Doctorow. This is problematic since few people on a committee will have the same knowledge base when it comes to books. Strangely, a bigger obstacle will be developing the expertise for the clickable “Resilience” on the wheel and the “egalitarian” and “active practice” values from the pirate blog. These refer to skills and practices developed in intentional communities – a long and difficult process. The lessons learned here are frustrating, emotional, gritty, and grimy. “Communities” magazine at “ic.org” is a good first stop to catch up.

Criteria five:

I saved the toughest rule for last. No matter how much study, discussing, and writing we do, limit the number of platform planks to five and only five. This is the limit of most people’s attention span. Also the more positions you take, the easier it is to incur contradictions and confusion in a single document. There will be a tendency to turn planks into sub lists of positions and sentiments. To resist this, planks should be limited to 200 words each, preferable less, an average “Letter-to-the Editor” length. Make every line pop. Include in the plank, names of current specific movements and legislation which can be changed or pulled when events have moved on.

Here is the challenge: A platform of less than 1,000 words, not counting the mission statement, that will change the world, assuming it will change us first. Let’s see what I can do in a first draft. Recently, I bought the domain, “northbaypirates.org”, which doesn’t seem to step on the toes of official party stuff or the Bay Area Facebook page. The “North” part gives me a little push into Wine Country and I never get into Silicon Valley anyway. This new site is hooked into my online domains. Here goes.

1. Copyright and Open Records Reform: 

Copyrights should be a reward for hard work. They should not be a barrier to the creativity of others or the expansion of knowledge in society. Copyrights have been extended for greater lengths of time for no reason other than monopoly privilege. We advocate reducing the shelf life of valid copyrights and formulating clear rules to better define what is fair use of copyrights for education, research, and public comment purposes. Using copyright status for legal bullying in the fair use domain should be grounds for the suspension or revocation of a copyright. Likewise, government records,, outside narrowly defined categories, belong to the people. An informed citizenry requires full disclosure in order to evaluate their employees. Only judges not affiliated with the records holder, should be allowed to make exceptions. The effective veto of “national security” must be proven.

  2. Corporation Reform:

Corporations are created by public entities therefore they should serve a public purpose. A series of Court decisions between 1886 and Citizens United have transformed this business tool into legal people with rights even flesh and blood people do not have. We support Move to Amend’s 28th Amendment’s declaration that corporations are not people and money is not speech. This will start a process to increase corporate responsibility in the environment, in their exporting of factory jobs overseas, and in buying our democratic elections through front groups. We oppose other corporate structural monopolies from the Federal Reserve’s control of the money system to the corporate attack on net neutrality.

3. Electoral Reform:

All citizens should have an equal vote. This vote should not be filtered by the Electoral College which was created by our Constitution to do just that. Even at the congressional level, our winner-take-all-system of representation districts, favoring two parties not even mentioned in the Constitution, guarantees their dominance and the marginalization of all other views. Those two self anointed parties take turns gerrymandering districts to increase the importance of money by diluting the vote. After citizens overcome these electoral traps they still have to run a gauntlet of voter suppression qualifications. While there is weak popular representation in the House of Representatives this is erased in the Senate whose membership is not based on population or coherent physical boundaries. We believe only a series of Constitutional Amendments or writing a new Constitution will remedy this injustice by creating proportional representation, multi member districts, online voting, and an upper House based on rational bio regions that would result in new solutions from silenced voices.

4. Constitutional Reform:

There are structural and process problems in the Country and many States that cannot be solved by legislation. Only a different form of government can solve these problems.Power has been centralized and national agendas are almost entirely determined by those closely connected to that power. Citizens not in that elite group who demand other agendas be pursued are considered whiners and trouble makers. That’s me. That’s you. Rather than build strong communities with healthy prosperous people our government has promoted Wall Street casinos and military adventures. Instead of creating a level playing field where all players can succeed, our institutions have rewarded monopolies and squandered our natural resources for short term gain. We believe we should be governed by a different model. This model would be bottom up not left right. This likely means that new franchised citizens will choose a greater role for government in critical areas, such as health care and natural resources, where monopoly privilege has failed to deliver. A bottom up, direct participation Constitution would also mean the end of expanding surveillance, executive orders, secret agreements, whistleblower prosecution, and reversing the contempt for civil liberties in favor of the police state.

5. Land Reform:

Land is not capital or a commodity. No real estate developer or speculator created land and no one is making any more. Developers can take credit for most building and some infrastructure value only. These groups, as well as local and State governments, existing property owners, and our culture in general primarily values land for its individual “property value”, ignoring the contribution of the surrounding community. The result is the abstract metes and bounds definition of own-able land units and dimensionless boundaries. Only zoning, special districts, most building codes, and some exclusive covenants prevent the ground under our feet from being a context free absurdity. But even these ham handed patches come at a high cost. That cost is weak community bonds, exaggerated individualism, and a reduced commitment to localism and sustainability.

Treating residential or business lots as make believe micro fiefdoms are a barrier to future sustainable initiatives. We believe land should be transferred as larger coherent entities that contract with co owners for exclusive uses. Examples are co ops and condos with well defined covenants. All separate properties should either have a natural boundary (creek or ridge) or public alleys and road right of ways.

Well that’s version 1.0. Notice there are no links. Total word count with the mission statement is about 850 words – one piece of paper. There will be in the next version after I get some feedback. I think calling these “the Five Planks” ties in well with the pirate theme in print but when speakers are trying to seize the high ground before groups I would stick with “Five Reforms.”

Walking the Plank for a New Pirate Platform

 

For the second time the California Pirate Party has crashed and burned. This is in spite of (maybe because of) many high level techies at the helm. There never seemed to be a commitment to reach out to the average person’s main concerns. Concise and compelling outreach materials would have been a good place to start. Other obsessive structural minutia just soaks up the energy of would be grass roots activists with nothing to show for it.  Which brings me to the surviving National Pirate Party’s planned platform.

After a decade in existence, the national pirate is beginning to revisit forming a political platform. Not that I’m complaining about the delay. Full blown platforms are internal documents that don’t interest your typical voter. Eventually something should be cobbled together since writers occasionally drift over to check out  political happenings on the fringe. Unfortunately, writers don’t write the platforms. These electoral shopping lists tend to be the bastard offspring of tedious committees. But they don’t have to be.

I would like to offer a criteria for writing a pirate platform that would be compelling enough to distribute for outreach. This populist broadside should navigate through waters that are foggy even to the founders. But even when the destination is clear there could be options. Why not consider alternate possibilities in the platform, as long as each has a strong following among pirates? Be advised that some non techies possess knowledge and experience that could be effectively incorporated into this goal.

Criteria one:

The pirate party needs a tag line in the platform and other documents. The “pirate party” name is a good hook (Arrr) but there needs to be a tag afterwards to keep people from blowing by.

Our title with tag should read thus: “United States Pirate Party – Freedom of Information.” Instantly a reader knows we’re not about themed birthday parties.

Criteria two:

The mission statement, below the tag line (the major goals in one sentence): “The voyage of the Pirate Party is to achieve government transparency, open records, copyright reform, and a free internet.”

Criteria three:

Use existing sources for compatible platform planks first. The original direction for the platform committee is Rick Falkvinge’s, the Pirates’ international founder’s, “wheel” of related concepts. Its not a wheel. Its a convoluted schematic mess. Here’s what I think can be saved from the wheel. “Transparency, ticks (exchange of tools and ideas), resilience (decentralization and sustainability), swarm economics.” Everything else here, ignore and don’t show to anyone. Please.

The other official source to mine is the “values” in “blog.pirate-party.us”. This is more useful than the wheel but it too is a source to be extracted and condensed from. Personally, I found eight values that could be developed in articles that would be linked within the platform itself. This linking may be a new idea in itself that would attract attention and comment.

Criteria four:

Other sources for platform ideas: Books and articles by Rick Falkvinge and Cory Doctorow. This is problematic since few people on a committee will have the same knowledge base when it comes to books. Strangely, a bigger obstacle will be developing the expertise for the clickable “Resilience” on the wheel and the “egalitarian” and “active practice” values from the pirate blog. These refer to skills and practices developed in intentional communities – a long and difficult process. The lessons learned here are frustrating, emotional, gritty, and grimy. “Communities” magazine at “ic.org” is a good first stop to catch up.

Criteria five:

I saved the toughest rule for last. No matter how much study, discussing, and writing we do, limit the number of platform planks to five and only five. This is the limit of most people’s attention span. Also the more positions you take, the easier it is to incur contradictions and confusion in a single document. There will be a tendency to turn planks into sub lists of positions and sentiments. To resist this, planks should be limited to 200 words each, preferable less, an average “Letter-to-the Editor” length. Make every line pop. Include in the plank, names of current specific movements and legislation which can be changed or pulled when events have moved on.

Here is the challenge: A platform of less than 1,000 words, not counting the mission statement, that will change the world, assuming it will change us first. Let’s see what I can do in a first draft. Recently, I bought the domain, “northbaypirates.org”, which doesn’t seem to step on the toes of official party stuff or the Bay Area Facebook page. The “North” part gives me a little push into Wine Country and I never get into Silicon Valley anyway. This new site is hooked into my online domains. Here goes.

1. Copyright and Open Records Reform: 

Copyrights should be a reward for hard work. They should not be a barrier to the creativity of others or the expansion of knowledge in society. Copyrights have been extended for greater lengths of time for no reason other than monopoly privilege. We advocate reducing the shelf life of valid copyrights and formulating clear rules to better define what is fair use of copyrights for education, research, and public comment purposes. Using copyright status for legal bullying in the fair use domain should be grounds for the suspension or revocation of a copyright. Likewise, government records,, outside narrowly defined categories, belong to the people. An informed citizenry requires full disclosure in order to evaluate their employees. Only judges not affiliated with the records holder, should be allowed to make exceptions. The effective veto of “national security” must be proven.

  2. Corporation Reform:

Corporations are created by public entities therefore they should serve a public purpose. A series of Court decisions between 1886 and Citizens United have transformed this business tool into legal people with rights even flesh and blood people do not have. We support Move to Amend’s 28th Amendment’s declaration that corporations are not people and money is not speech. This will start a process to increase corporate responsibility in the environment, in their exporting of factory jobs overseas, and in buying our democratic elections through front groups. We oppose other corporate structural monopolies from the Federal Reserve’s control of the money system to the corporate attack on net neutrality.

3. Electoral Reform:

All citizens should have an equal vote. This vote should not be filtered by the Electoral College which was created by our Constitution to do just that. Even at the congressional level, our winner-take-all-system of representation districts, favoring two parties not even mentioned in the Constitution, guarantees their dominance and the marginalization of all other views. Those two self anointed parties take turns gerrymandering districts to increase the importance of money by diluting the vote. After citizens overcome these electoral traps they still have to run a gauntlet of voter suppression qualifications. While there is weak popular representation in the House of Representatives this is erased in the Senate whose membership is not based on population or coherent physical boundaries. We believe only a series of Constitutional Amendments or writing a new Constitution will remedy this injustice by creating proportional representation, multi member districts, online voting, and an upper House based on rational bio regions that would result in new solutions from silenced voices.

4. Constitutional Reform:

There are structural and process problems in the Country and many States that cannot be solved by legislation. Only a different form of government can solve these problems.Power has been centralized and national agendas are almost entirely determined by those closely connected to that power. Citizens not in that elite group who demand other agendas be pursued are considered whiners and trouble makers. That’s me. That’s you. Rather than build strong communities with healthy prosperous people our government has promoted Wall Street casinos and military adventures. Instead of creating a level playing field where all players can succeed, our institutions have rewarded monopolies and squandered our natural resources for short term gain. We believe we should be governed by a different model. This model would be bottom up not left right. This likely means that new franchised citizens will choose a greater role for government in critical areas, such as health care and natural resources, where monopoly privilege has failed to deliver. A bottom up, direct participation Constitution would also mean the end of expanding surveillance, executive orders, secret agreements, whistleblower prosecution, and reversing the contempt for civil liberties in favor of the police state.

5. Land Reform:

Land is not capital or a commodity. No real estate developer or speculator created land and no one is making any more. Developers can take credit for most building and some infrastructure value only. These groups, as well as local and State governments, existing property owners, and our culture in general primarily values land for its individual “property value”, ignoring the contribution of the surrounding community. The result is the abstract metes and bounds definition of own-able land units and dimensionless boundaries. Only zoning, special districts, most building codes, and some exclusive covenants prevent the ground under our feet from being a context free absurdity. But even these ham handed patches come at a high cost. That cost is weak community bonds, exaggerated individualism, and a reduced commitment to localism and sustainability.

Treating residential or business lots as make believe micro fiefdoms are a barrier to future sustainable initiatives. We believe land should be transferred as larger coherent entities that contract with co owners for exclusive uses. Examples are co ops and condos with well defined covenants. All separate properties should either have a natural boundary (creek or ridge) or public alleys and road right of ways.

Well that’s version 1.0. Notice there are no links. Total word count with the mission statement is about 850 words – one piece of paper. There will be in the next version after I get some feedback. I think calling these “the Five Planks” ties in well with the pirate theme in print but when speakers are trying to seize the high ground before groups I would stick with “Five Reforms.”

Route 12, 4pm

On September 6th the Lake Transit Board finalized substantial cuts in bus service to Lake County residents. Some cuts were on runs that few people use. However, at least two routes that were cut either jeopardize public safety or eliminate service to Social Services for the entire afternoon for most County residents.

Were all of these cuts necessary in hard times? My answer based on some experience and a lot of number crunching is “no”. Specifically, I redesigned three routes in my own report so the necessary savings could be made while compromising the fewest number of people. This report was sent to all elected representatives on the Board but was not mentioned in the analysis of public comment.

During the September meeting the Lake Transit General Manager, Mark Wall, glossed over a couple problems by combining them with issues that were resolved. This confusion was around cutting the 4pm Route 12 to Social Services. Although it was not brought up by the General Manager, the last appointment at social services is at 4:30pm. After conferring with disabled riders and IHSS workers I confirmed there is almost no allowance for being late. You would have to make another appointment.

My report mentioned that late appointments could “leave” by Route 10 if Social Services did not mind people waiting outside for an extra half hour after all the employees left. I assume this is what Wall was referring to when he said Social Services did not see a problem. He did not elaborate. The problem of arriving will remain.

In spite of scheduled connection glitches cited in my report, Wall deferred to Wanda Gray, the Operations Manager, who said people could take Route 10 to Social Services in the afternoon. This only works for Clearlake residents. Route 10 cannot connect with late regionals. My report showed clearly that it is impossible for riders in Middletown, Cobb, and Kelseyville to get to Social Services for an afternoon appointment. Northshore and Lakeport will have to take the Route 1 that leaves one hour earlier and spend more time waiting at  Social Services.

Here is how the drill works. All you (or a Board member) need to check this scenario is a bus schedule. Currently, late afternoon Social Services appointments is served by the 2:10pm Lakeport Route 4 and the 2:30 Sutter Hospital Route 1. The 2:10 will arrive at Walmart at 3:10 after the 3pm Route 10 has left. Wait for the next bus? The 4pm Route 10 will get you to Social Services at 4:38, too late for the last appointment of the day. The 2:30 Route 1 also gets you to Social Services, via Route 10, at 4:38. But at least there is an earlier 1:30 Route 1 where someone can connect with the  last planned Route 12 at 3pm. This is barely doable for functional people.

People in Kelseyville, Middletown, or Cobb do not even have this option since there is no possible way to leave in the afternoon and make an afternoon appointment. Kelseyville would have to take the 11am Route 4. Middletown would have to take the 10:21am Route 3. And Cobb would have to take the 10:53am Route 2 to transfer to the Route 4, leaving Kelseyville at 11:27.

Many people want to dismiss the issue by just saying people can ask for a morning appointment instead of the first available time. Yes they can….and wait longer for an appointment. Though several cuts are unnecessary, cutting the 4pm Route 12 almost seems intended to cause the maximum amount of suffering for the most people while saving the least amount of money.