Quote of the Day:

"As people do better, they start voting like Republicans — unless they have too much education and vote Democratic,
which proves there can be too much of a good thing."      Karl Rove, President Bush's top advisor

Senators Feinstein and Boxer Object to New Rule which Could Lead
to Thousands of Miles of New Paved Roads
in the Mojave, and on other Federal Lands

Return to Index 

Governor Davis Signs Legislation to Save Coastal Commission

By Bill Allayaud, State Legislative Director, Sierra Club California

On February 20, 2003 Governor Gray Davis signed legislation that will hopefully resolve the constitutional issue raised by the composition of the California Coastal Commission. The bill was AB 1XX authored by Assemblyperson Hannah Beth Jackson of Santa Barbara. Senator Kuehl introduced the same bill on the Senate side, which was eventually dropped in favor of the Assembly bill. All this work was done as part of a special session called by the Governor so that the action could be done in as short as time as possible. Legislation passed and signed in a special session takes effect in 90 days rather than the first of next year.

This legislative response was needed in the face of an adverse Court of Appeals ruling of December 30, 2002 in the Marine Forests vs. Coastal Commission case. The Marine Forests case involves a man in the Los Angeles area who has illegally dumped old tires and other objects in the ocean just offshore. His claim is that he is doing an experiment to show that habitat can be created from these materials. However, he failed to comply with various State laws including the Coastal Act that requires he receive a permit from the Coastal Commission for such a project. Over the years, the Department of Fish and Game has established marine habitats through their artificial reef program and has had mixed success.

The Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) took up the violator’s case. This conservative non-profit litigation organization based in Sacramento has challenged, harassed, and even attempted to dismantle the Coastal Commission in every way they can. When the PLF won at the Superior Court level, the Coastal Commission appealed, represented by the State Attorney General. The Appeals Court found that the nature of the appointments process of the Coastal Commission violates the California Constitution in that eight appointments from the state legislature (four from the Assembly, four from the Senate) serve "at the pleasure" of the appointing authority rather than according to fixed terms. The current setup, according to the court, unfairly undermines the Governor’s authority (and his four Commission appointments) over the Commission.

The Court was less clear about their concern that the Legislature rather than the Governor appoints the majority of the Commissioners. The PLF vows to keep raising that issue all the way to the State Supreme Court. Proposition 20, passed by the voters in 1972, established the composition of the Commission long ago; it was made permanent by the Legislature in 1976 with passage of the Coastal Act. On Monday February 10, 2003 Attorney General Bill Lockyer asked the California Supreme Court to review the Court of Appeals decision. Lockyer is concerned that there are, at various state courts, at least 20 other lawsuits raising legal challenges to the Commission’s constitutionality. Therefore, it would be very helpful to the administration of justice and coherent coastal land use planning if the Supreme Court would either reverse the Court of Appeals or rule that the AB 1XX legislative fix is sufficient.

What is clear is that if the Supreme Court doesn’t comment, certain developers (Bolsa Chica), certain Cities (Malibu), certain media (Santa Barbara NewsPress), certain lawyers and law firms (Ronald Zumbrun of PLF) will continue to bellow that the Commission is unconstitutional in every lawsuit they manufacture. What we know is this: since the Coastal Initiative was passed in 1972 there has always been a small, loud minority group of aggressively anti-coastal persons that continue to this day to work to undermine and dismantle the coastal protection program in California. It would be very helpful for the Supreme Court to advise these diehard litigants in advance that their future efforts to undermine the program will not be successful.

AB 1XX moved quickly through the State Assembly and Senate, with Sierra Club’s Legislative Director Bill Allayaud involved in crafting the language through meeting with legislative staff and committee consultants. Mr. Allayaud testified at hearings and also communicated with the administration to let them know how important this bill was to Club members. From the grassroots side, Mark Massara, the Sierra Club’s coastal program manager, organized letter and phone call campaigns so that the Governor and legislative leaders would know how important resolving this legal issue is to voters and lovers of California’s coast.

On February 20, Governor Davis held a bill signing ceremony for AB 1XX. He praised the Legislature for getting him a bill to sign in short order. He praised the Sierra Club and other environmental groups for stewarding the bill to his desk. He pointed that he feels we must have a strong coastal program and said "the Coastal Commission is the Guardian Angel of our coast" and "this legislation will let the Coastal Commission continue to be America's environmental leader."

The press corps asked only one question of the Governor, that being the PLF’s claim that this "fix" will not be enough, and that the real problem is the majority of the Commissioners being appointed by the Legislature. The Governor gave a good answer saying that we think the District Court opinion is clear and that this bill will be enough. So for now, this issue is put to rest. But be assured that the PLF will pursue this matter endlessly as they would like nothing better than having no Coastal Commission around. State Director Allayaud says however, "If the Coastal Commission was declared unconstitutional, coastal activists from Oregon to Mexico would immediately rally behind the Legislature and Governor to remedy the problem, and if comes down to doing a new coastal initiative as the only means to do so, the work would begin. People love the California coast and know that some local governments cannot withstand the pressure that developers put on them. We need the Coastal Commission to guard our coastal land, estuaries, and offshore areas."

Sierra Club California represents 200,000 Sierra Club members in California before the State Legislature, the Governor’s Office and administrative agencies. Join our legislative action network by visiting us on the web at http://www.sierraclub.org/ca.

Return to Index 

March 22 Red Rock Canyon Meeting

The third public meeting for the General Management Plan for the 1994 addition to Red Rock Canyon State Park will present the preferred alternative. Please join us at the meeting and also plan to see the California desert during a good wildflower year while you help protect Red Rock Canyon. We need to support the good management the park has enjoyed and ask for continued strong protection of the natural and anthropological resources.

Mar 22, 1:00 pm
California City Middle School,
California City (a community quite close to the park — turn east off Hwy 14 north of Mojave)

Stan Haye  adit@ridgenet.net

Return to Index 

Help Stop the Bush Administration's Disastrous Forest Management Proposal

The National Forest Management Act (NFMA) of 1976 requires the US Forest Service to develop a management plan for each National Forest or administrative unit. The regulations (or rule) that implements this law are key in detailing the requirements that the agency must follow in developing the plan. As part of its barrage of damaging proposals the Bush administration has announced changes to the NFMA rules. The draft proposal would greatly reduce the amount of environmental analysis, wildlife protection, and public involvement currently required in the development and revision of forest management plans and the management of our National Forests.

The current regulations, first implemented early in the Reagan administration, were revised and updated in 2000 after significant scientific and public input. But after complaints from the timber industry, the Bush administration put the revised safeguards on the chopping block. Undersecretary for Natural Resources and Environment Mark Rey, a former lobbyist for the American Forest and Paper Association, has led the charge. Unremarkably, today's NFMA changes mirror the timber industry "wish list" from the American Forest and Paper Association's 2001 congressional testimony.

The Bush administration's proposed NFMA rules would:

• Effectively exempt the plan revisions from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA.) By not requiring a full environmental impact analysis of the revised plan, this one step would give agency managers total discretion on when and how much they wanted to involve the public and how they would weigh public input.

• Eliminate the requirement to maintain viable populations of native wildlife species. This current requirement is one of the most important legal safeguards of National Forest wildlife habitat.

• Eliminates requirements in the 2000 regulations to evaluate and protect wild roadless forests.

• Increase the likelihood of harmful logging projects based on "multiple use values." This would allow commercial logging under the guise of "wildlife habitat improvement," or "fuel reduction," among other reasons.

• Reduces overall environmental standards and accountability by allowing management plans to be revised to accommodate individual projects and opens loopholes for "adaptable management."

• Drastically limit public involvement and allow no opportunity to request administrative review or an appeal of the final plan.

YOU CAN HELP!—Send official comments to the Forest Service and a copy of your comments to your Congressional representatives. Comments should be sent by April 7! Please raise the above points in your comments and use the sample latter below.

Your Comments should by sent to:
    USDA FS Planning Rule Content Analysis Team
    PO Box 8359
    Missoula MT 59807
        or via email, planning_rule@fs.fed.us or fax (406) 329-3556

Dear Forest Service:

Many Americans relish their trips to any of America's 155 National Forests today, thanks in large part to forest protection measures that have been in place for decades. But if the Bush administration and its timber industry allies get their way, the public's forests will be managed to maximize commercial logging profits with little consideration of harm to fish and wildlife, clean water and recreation.

I oppose the Bush Administration's Proposed Changes to National Forest Management (NFMA) regulations. These proposed regulations would weaken environmental and wildlife safeguards, harm wild forests and clean water, drastically limit public involvement, increase damaging commercial logging projects and reduce agency accountability. Please completely withdraw these harmful proposed NFMA regulations.

Our National Forests belong to all Americans, not just those who wield chainsaws and donate money to political campaigns. Instead of undermining current National Forest and wildlife protections, the Bush Administration and the Forest Service should be working to protect our wild roadless forests, stop damaging commercial logging and logging road construction and restore our National Forests. Please count this as my offcial comment on these proposed regulations.

Sincerely,

Return to Index 

Conservation Committee Standing Rules

    These are the Standing Rules for the Conservation Committee and its Subcommittees.

Tenure:

• Chairs or co-chairs of Conservation Committee subcommittees shall serve at the pleasure of the Chapter Conservation Chair for terms of up to one year, beginning each calendar year. Subcommittee chairs or co-chairs may be chosen by the Chapter Conservation Chair or by vote of the subcommittee, subject to the approval of the Chapter Conservation Chair.

• Each subcommittee shall make a yearly written report to the Conservation Committee Management Committee.

• The Chapter Conservation Chair shall contact each subcommittee chair at the end of the calendar year to determine the leadership of the subcommittee for the following year. At that time, the sub-committee chair will be asked to serve another year or be replaced.

Subcommittee Membership

• A subcommittee chair or its co-chairs shall appoint the remaining members of the subcommittee.

• Disputes among subcommittee members that can not be resolved by the subcommittee will be referred to the Chapter Conservation Chair.

Subcommittee Actions

• Issues that affect two or more subcommittees, or issues that involve subcommittee(s) and Chapter group(s), shall be referred to the appropriate subcommittees and groups. These subcommittees and groups are not required to reach a unanimous recommendation but the Conservation Committee will not act on such an item unless each affected entity has been consulted.

• A proposed action item must come from a group or sub-committee that has jurisdiction or from the Conservation Committee Management Committee.

• Expenditures in excess of $50 must be submitted for the prior approval of the Conservation Chair. Bills may not be reimbursed if this procedure is not followed.

• Proposed action items for the agenda of the Conservation Committee should be submitted in writing to the Conservation Committee Management Committee and the Conservation Committee Newsletter Editor prior to the meeting of the Conservation Committee Management Committee. They shall include the wording (without whereases) of the motion to be considered, accompanied by an objective background statement and arguments supporting and opposing the motion.

• All resolutions shall begin with the words "The Conservation Committee of the Angeles Chapter recommends that...".

• Late additions to the agenda must be submitted in writing to the Conservation Chair at least 24 hours before the meeting of the Conservation Committee along with the standard background material and arguments pro and con. The Conservation Committee will decide, by a 2/3 vote, whether to consider a late addition to the agenda.

Expectations for Conservation Subcommittees

• The Sierra Club seeks to be an organization that welcomes all members who want to help protect and preserve our environment. This is particularly important to remember in issues subcommittees of the Conservation Committee, because this is where the majority of the preservation work is carried out.

• It is also important that the various entities of the Club stay informed about the activities of others, and that our staff are on top of things. With new Conservation Coordinators, it is particularly important to provide them with information, because they do not yet have the background to know who holds what expertise, and who is active on which issues.

• All Sierra Club members are welcomed, and respected, and given a chance to participate in subcommittee meetings.

• Meetings are scheduled in advance and occur on a regular schedule, with locations and times announced to all subcommittee members, as well as the Conservation Coordinator(s)—meetings should be included in the Chapter Schedule and Conservation Newsletter so new people can participate in the issue subcommittee's activities.

• If a meeting is held in a private home, each subcommittee member must be made welcome.

• Each subcommittee has a chair, who is the responsible party for the subcommittee, and who serves as the official interface with the Angeles Chapter.

• All officers of any Sierra Club entity must be Sierra Club members.

• Reports on any actions (resolutions, activities initiated, etc) are made to subcommittee members and are communicated to the Conservation Coordinator(s).

• All subcommittees with Chapter bank accounts or spending any Sierra Club funds must provide a regular (at least yearly, or sooner if requested) accounting of those funds.

Return to Index 

Conservation Committee Voting Criteria for Chapter Entities

The Executive Committee of the Angeles Chapter of the Sierra Club establishes the following criteria regarding the status of various Chapter entities to be able to vote at meetings of the Chapter Conservation Committee:

• Groups and sections which have a Conservation Chair will be considered to be adequately informed on conservation issues to be allowed to vote at any meeting.

• Issue Committees and Task Forces, to be considered active, must have more than four members and must meet at least one time per calendar quarter. In addition, they must have a mission statement that clearly states their purpose, and must publish an annual report describing their meetings, activities, and accomplishments.

• To be able to vote at Conservation Committee meetings, active committees and task forces must have had a member in attendance at Conservation Committee meetings either in Los Angeles or Orange County at least once in the previous four months. Attendance will be tracked by the Secretary of the Conservation Committee.

Return to Index 

New CNRCC Population Committee Seeks Members

Ladd Seekins, iwfladd@eee.org, (909) 825-4427, 22418 De Soto St, Grand Terrace, CA 92313-5424

Return to Index 

Angeles Chapter Sierra Club, Orange County Political Committees

Invite You To A Fundraising Cruise To Channel Islands National Park

April 12 - 13, 2003

Visiting San Miguel and Santa Rosa Islands (Departing from Santa Barbara) Traveling aboard the 68' twin diesel TRUTH for a very informal cruise. Each guest is assigned a bunk and is served delicious and generous meals in the comfortable galley-lounge
    To:

• Watch Whales, Sea Lions, Seals, Dolphins, Birds

• Hike Stroll, Beachcomb, Kayak, or just relax at sea

• A knowledgeable crew and a naturalist will delight guests with their expertise on all forms of sea life and with the special history and natural features each island offers.

                $288 covers all meals, snacks, naturalist and bunk on the boat.

                    Proceeds will support the Angeles Chapter Political Program

To reserve space: Send a $100 deposit check (payable to Sierra Club) to Reservationist
    Joan Jones Holtz
    11826 The Wye
    El Monte CA 91732
        or call 626-443-0706 for more information.

Return to Index 

Dana Point Ocean Awareness Festival

Sun, Mar 16 , 11 am to 4 pm, Baby Beach, Dana Point Harbor. The OCC needs help to staff the Dana Point Headlands booth. We need 3 people for each 2 1/2-hour shift, 4 for setup, 8:30-11, & breakdown, 4-5. We’ll have a simple activity for kids, postcards to the Coastal Commission & a Surfrider petition for people to sign, info sheets, an informative display, & a big donation jar. The 3 months, minimum, before the Coastal Commission hearing gives us a terrific opportunity to spread the word that the Headlands is not a done deal. Call Celia Kutcher at (949)496-9689 to help.

Return to Index 

Orange County Native American Sacred Sites

TUESDAY, MARCH 25, 7pm, Sierra Sage General Meeting. Please attend this unique program moderated by Rebecca Robles, a member of the Acjachamen Nation, with a special guest paleontologist on saving our last remaining Native American Sacred Sites in Orange County. The program will have music by Acjachamen singers and feature a powerpoint presentation created by archaeologists, paleontogists and Native Americans describing the most significant archaeological and cultural sites in Orange County. Learn how archaeologists date important cultural sites, their importance to the history of the State of California, their sacred significance to Native Americans, and the need to save the few that remain. Second half of program will include an in-depth look at the major archaeological and cultural significance of Putiidhem, the mother village of the Acjachamen/Juaneno people, in South Orange County. Refreshments will be served.

DIRECTIONS: Unitarian/Universalist Church, 25801 Obrero, Mission Viejo. From I-5, exit Alicia Parkway and go east (inland) to Jeronimo; left on Jeronimo; left on Obrero (second light); immediate right into driveway. For more information, contact Paul Carlton (949)661-9505.

Return to Index 

 OCC Activist Training Workshop #2

Sat, Mar 29, 1pm - 5pm—This educational workshop is designed to assist conservation task force chairs, steering committee members, and key activists

1 pm        Leadership, Member management, Recruitment/How to Use Sierra Club Resources
2 pm        Fund Raising
3 pm        Getting Political Influence
3:30 pm   How to Sue the Bad Guys
4 pm        Land Acquisition
5 pm        Adjourn

Acorn Naturalists Center for Science & Environmental Studies, 155 El Camino Real, Tustin.
    Contact Gail Prothero at (949)347-1255 or gprothero@cox.net to RSVP.  Directions will be e-mailed.

Return to Index 

OCC Catalina Island Service Trip

FRI-SATURDAY-SUNDAY, APRIL 11-13, O trip: (Sierra Sage of S Orange Co) This should be a spectacular weekend on Catalina. After taking the ferry from Dana Pt on Fri afternoon, participants will have dinner in Avalon and be taken to the Catalina Island Conservancy camp 3 miles west of Avalon. Meals in camp will be potluck. Saturday we work on Conservancy project. Sunday we may work in the morning then hike 7 miles to Avalon for dinner. Participants pay for transportation to/from Avalon, for restaurant meals, plus $25. Limit 14. Leader: Paul Carlton. Asst: Sylvia Stevenson. Contact: Paul Carlton (949)661-9505, E-mail pfcsage@aol.com

Return to Index 

New Angeles-Alerts Listserv

Johanna Zetterberg has created a new Angeles Chapter listserve to notify members about conservation issues, news updates, and actions they can take. It is a public list and is announce-only. It will be low volume.

The link to sign up is http://lists.sierraclub.org/archives/angeles-alerts.html.

Return to Index 

Anti-Smart Growth Conference

By Joel Hirschhorn, Mar 03, 2003

I expected to be entertained when I decided to attend the "Preserving the American Dream" conference held this week in Washington DC. It was put on by the nation's leading conservative and libertarian think tanks and featured their "stars," including Wendell Cox and Randal O'Toole. I was not disappointed. The hatred of government and regulations by conservatives and libertarians from all over the nation now is more focused. Everything they see as wrong with this nation is labeled smart growth.

These opponents of smart growth are deeply committed and more energized than ever. The leaders of the smart growth movement are in for much more effective opposition than anything in the past. The conservatives are fine-tuning their rhetoric, learning from their successes and failures, and reshaping their avalanche of statistics. They are getting more organized and unified. Their tactics and rhetoric are impressive: Smart growth is now "snob growth." Smart growth is coercive. Smart growth reduces home and transportation choices. Smart growth increases home prices and traffic congestion. Smart growth reduces affordable housing and harms minorities. Smart growth opposes economic growth and prosperity. Smart growth threatens the American dream. In fact, this first-ever conference was also the beginning of some type of national American Dream project with an American Dream media campaign and regional American Dream conferences. State groups are not likely to call themselves 1,000 Friends of Sprawl.

Here is some advice for the leaders of the smart growth movement. Recognize that some elements of the diverse smart growth movement provide the best imaginable targets for right-wing groups. Advocacy, for example, of urban growth boundaries is now equated with smart growth. Stay focused on the attributes of smart growth. The fundamental goal of conservatives to protect private property rights is more easily advanced when they can point to public policies that make it easy for property owners to portray themselves as victims. Focus more on what smart growth communities, urban and suburban, are and what benefits they give consumers, and far less on public policy obstacles. Stress positive benefits for individuals, not costly externalities for society. Stress market forces, and how obstacles created by government will fall if and when much more massive consumer demand for smart growth places materializes. Place more attention on those developers who are building authentic smart growth communities, despite all the obstacles, and making money. Start paying more attention to the many grassroots groups working under the banner of smart growth but fighting any form of local or regional growth. They are, ultimately, undermining the success of the smart growth movement. This tactic is providing the conservatives with all they need to convince millions of Americans that their personal economic well being is threatened by smart growth. Smart growth has to be successful in bad economic times, not just the good ones that we had in the 1990s. Smart growth must be unequivocally pro-growth.

The conference sponsors included an association of property owners, a home builders association, a development company, a road builders association, and the leading conservative foundation. Smart growth leaders need to take conservative think tanks more seriously. Though masquerading as objective and scholarly researchers, they are the public face of the many components of the national sprawl industry. Conservatives know how to convince elected officials and regular citizens. Their facts must be explicitly countered with other facts. In fact, many of the speakers at the conference have been effective in blocking local and state smart growth initiatives. Sprawl industry companies know how to work quietly behind the scenes and will be served by the conservative emphasis on pushing for more infrastructure investment (a.k.a. road building) and now know that it must include some money for public transit. Like the multitude of smart growth conferences, there was no one on the program who was a true, articulate opponent to directly and forcefully challenge the data, assertions, and conclusions being disseminated as gospel. The conference seemed like the initial attempt to put a wedge between optional New Urbanism and coercive smart growth. Looks like the upcoming battle will pit coercive smart growth against the cherished American dream, which conservatives define in ways that have nothing to do with sprawl. You will hardly hear the words sprawl and environment spoken by conservatives. Smart growthers need a message on redefining the American dream, so that it is about an ideal community. Conservatives do not talk about community, see no relationship between it and the design of the built environment, and ignore the evidence for consumer demand for community. One last tip: not one conservative seemed to have a clue about selling smart growth as a means for achieving active living and greatly improved personal health.

Joel Hirschhorn lives in an old neighborhood near Rock Creek Park in Chevy Chase, Maryland. He has worked in the environmental and policy areas for many years and is currently Director of the Natural Resources Policy Studies of the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices.

Return to Index 

Coastal Act Celebrations

By Jack McCurdy

The 30th anniversary of the people's initiative that produced the Coastal Act and the Coastal Commission was celebrated, and the dogged activists who over those three decades invented coastal protection and helped make it work were honored in Monterey earlier this month. Proposition 20, the historic initiative that passed by a wide margin in 1972 and placed coastal development under public control by a statewide body, was the centerpiece of the gala dinner at the Monterey Bay Aquarium on Feb. 1, and 10 "Coastal Champions" were presented with awards—some of whom helped organize and pass the ballot measure, which led to the strongest coastal management law in the United States.

Six additional Coastal Champions received their awards in person at a companion anniversary dinner on Jan. 24 at the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach.

"Thirty years later, it's important for us to remember why a citizen-based initiative like Prop. 20 was necessary," said Bill Allayaud, legislative director of Sierra Club California, lead sponsor of the events and himself a former Commission intern, planner and legislative liaison. "There was a legitimate concern that we would have Miami Beach-like, high-rise buildings lining the coast if we didn't act to stop irresponsible development."

"The people we honor serve as the continuing inspiration for those of us who follow their footprints in the sand," said Susan Jordan of the California Coastal Protection Network. "It is their diligence and persistence that provide the encouragement we need to carry on the never-ending battle to save the California coast."

Peter Douglas, executive director of the Coastal Commission and once a legislative staff member who helped write the law that created the Commission, told the audience of about 250 persons that "the coast is never saved—it is always being saved." He was among those honored as a Coastal Champion.

"Prop. 20 is an enduring tribute to what the environmental community can do. What we have accomplished is also a tribute to all of you. We need to fight the fight on behalf of the children."

Douglas predicted that "the people who want to make the Commission history are going to strengthen it." Their legal challenge to the Commission's constitutionality will result in legislation giving members fixed terms and more independence, something "we tried to do in 1976 (when the Legislature approved the Coastal Act) but couldn't accomplish then," he said.

Michael Fischer, former Commission executive director and an award recipient, recalled that the bill creating the Coastal Act "passed in the last hours of the legislative session by one vote."

Sara Wan, one of the strongest and most respected Chairs in Commission history and a recipient of a Coastal Champion award, said "the role of the activist is most critical" in making the Commission an effective bulwark for coastal protection. "The ultimate power is in our numbers," she said. "The Commission can't survive alone. You must continue to contribute and come to meetings. It's the only way to make the system work."

Jordan noted that when Wan started out as a grassroots activist, she was encouraged by Douglas to appear more often before the Commission. "She did so for seven years," Jordan said, "and then was appointed by (then state Senate President) Bill Lockyer. She became a lightening rod for the fight over the coast. She has been under siege but has stood up and fought back." She stepped down as Chair last December but remains on the Commission and, Wan added, will continue to fight hard for coastal protection.

Mark Massara, coastal program manager for Sierra Club California, who estimated he argues 100 cases before the Commission annually, said the Commission is surrounded by "chaos," and coastal protection is immersed in "constant crisis." But "this stuff just makes us stronger," he said. "That fact has less to do with the arguments I make before the Commission and more with how many people appear before the Commission and write letters to Commissioners."

Also honored were members of the Coastal Commission staff, some of whom were in the audience. It is often called the best of any agency in Sacramento, Douglas said "my accomplishments would not have been possible without our staff. Mine are theirs." He told them, "My success is your success. It is a tribute to you. Yours is a noble and ennobling work."

Those honored as Coastal Champions:

• Ellen Stern Harris. Sometimes referred to as the "mother of the Coastal Act," she hosted a meeting at the kitchen table of her Los Angeles home in 1971 where the idea for an initiative came to fruition following several years of the Legislature failing to act.

• Alan Sieroty. Former Los Angeles area member of the state Assembly who pushed early coastal protection legislation and then co-authored the Coastal Act of 1976.
• Mel Nutter. Former member of a previous South Coast Regional Coastal Commission and chair of the Coastal Commission from 1982 to 1985.
• Naomi Schwartz. Former Chair of the Commission and a member from 1982 to 1992.
• Mel Lane. Chair of the Commission in 1973 and longtime environmental activist.
• Lennie Roberts. Coastal activist from San Mateo County and former member of the Central Coast Regional Commission.
• Phyllis Faber. Worked to get Prop. 20 on the ballot and passed and former member of the North Central Regional Commission from Marin County.
• Warner Chabot. Worked for passage of Prop. 20 as a college student and longtime staff member of the Ocean Conservancy (formerly Center for Marine Conservation).
• Bill Kortum. Helped write Prop. 20.
• Ann Notthoff. Staff member of the Natural Resources Defense Council, who has worked on coastal protection since 1978.
• Richard Charter. Campaigned against offshore oil drilling since the 1970s and led the fight against Lease Sale 53 which would have opened up oil drilling off the Central Coast.
• Sara Wan. Appointed to the Commission in 1996, served as chair for more than three years, co-founded Vote the Coast, a political action committee dedicated to helping elect coastal-friendly candidates.
• Bert Muhly. Professor at UC Santa Cruz who inspired many students to go into environmental planning careers and helped draft Prop. 20.
• Joe Bodovitz. First executive director of the Commission.
• Michael Fischer: second executive director of the Commission and later executive director of the Sierra Club.

• Peter Douglas. Third executive director of the Commission since 1985, appointed chief deputy director in 1977, co-authored Prop. 20.

Major sponsors of the dinners were Sierra Club California and the League for Coastal Protection, and co-sponsors were the Natural Resources Defense Council, the California Coastal Protection Network, Mel Lane, the Monterey Bay Aquarium and the Long Beach Aquarium.

Jack McCurdy is a member of Pelican Network, vice chair of Coastal Alliance on Plant Expansion, and editor of the Santa Lucian, San Luis Obispo Chapter of the Sierra Club.

Return to Index 

Environmental Resolutions passed by ExComm—2/23/2003

Conservation Grants for First Cycle 2003

The Conservation Committee of the Angeles Chapter of the Sierra Club approves the allocation of $48,140 in conservation grants for the first cycle of 2003, including the $43,140 grant allocation recommended by the Conservation Management Committee and $5,000 in short-notice funds for the Santa Clarita Urban Water Management Plan Lawsuit.
 

Allocation to San Diego Chapter

Allocation to UC Merced Lawsuit

CEQA Lawsuit—Saddleback Canyons Task Force

The Executive Committee of the Angeles Chapter of the Sierra Club initiates a CEQA suit for the Saddle Creek & Saddle Crest projects in the Trabuco Canyon area of Orange County. This is subject to National Legal Committee authorization. The Chapter allocates a maximum cap of $5000 to this suit.

Return to Index 

Action Directory

Sierra Club Legislative Hotline — (202) 675-2394
Sierra Club National Headquarters — (415) 977-5500
Sierra Club Sacramento Legislative Office — (916) 557-1100; fax (916) 227-9669
Sierra Club World Wide Web — http://www.sierraclub.org
Sierra Club Vote Watch Website — http://www.sierraclub.org/votewatch/
White House Comment Line — (202) 456-1111
White House Fax Line — (202) 456-2461
President George W Bush's e-mail — president@whitehouse.gov
Vice President Dick Cheney's e-mail — vice-president@whitehouse.gov
White House Address — 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, Washington, DC 20500
US Capitol Switchboard — (202) 224-3121
To contact your senators — http://www.senate.gov/contacting/index.cfm
    Senate Office Bldg, Washington DC 20510
To contact your representative — http://www.house.gov/writerep
    House Office Bldg, Washington DC 20515
California Capitol Switchboard — 916-322-9900

Return to Index

E-mail Discussion Lists

There are three important discussion lists for Angeles environmental activists:
      the Angeles Chapter Conservation Listserve angeles-conservation@lists.sierraclub.org
      the Angeles-Alerts Listserve angeles-alerts@lists.sierraclub.org
      the California/Nevada Listserve calif-activists@lists.sierraclub.org

To subscribe to a list, send an email message to listsserve@lists.sierraclub.org
      with the message “subscribe angeles-conservation” or “subscribe calif-activists” or  "subscribe angeles-alerts"

To leave a list, send an e-mail listserv@lists.sierraclub.org and, in the text of your message (not the subject line), write:
    “signoff calif-activists” or “signoff angeles-conservation” or "signoff angeles-alerts"

The Angeles Chapter’s website is www.angeles.sierraclub.org

Return to Index

Sierra Club Committee Contacts

Air Committee, Bob Palzer bob.palzer@sierraclub.org
Wetlands Working Group, Robin Mann robin.mann@sierraclub.org
Water Committee, Albert Ettinger aettinger@elpc.org
Environmental Justice Committee, Phaedra Pezzullo phaedra@email.unc.edu
Genetic Engineering Committee, Laurel Hopwood laurel.hopwood@sierraclub.org
Waste Committee, Jim Mays jmays@ulster.net
Sprawl Committee, Tim Frank tim.frank@sierraclub.org
CAFO/Clean Water Committee, Hank Graddy hank.graddy@sierraclub.org
Community Health Committee, Michael McCally michael.mccally@mssm.edu
Workplace Environment Committee, Les Reid lesreid@frazmtn.com
ECL/End Commercial Logging on Federal Public Lands Cmte, Connie Hanson chcccpn@aol.com

Return to Index

Priority Campaign — What is it?

I would also add that a priority campaign is one that geographically impacts more than one regional group, and therefore requires chapter-level support to coordinate the efforts.

A chapter priority campaign should contain issues/strategies/actions/solutions that the chapter, as the chapter, is better able to address than other entities.  (See the Angeles Chapter Conservation Agenda)

Parking at the Chapter Office

Visitors must park inside the building weekdays and week-nights. The outside lot is reserved for monthly parking and requires a keycard entry through a gate. There is no attendant. Gates are closed 24 hours a day during the week.
Weeknights: You may park free inside the building after 5:30 pm. Be prepared to show your membership card or one of our parking passes, available at the front desk in the Chapter office. Take a ticket when you enter through the gate; present it at the parking office near the elevators, and sign it. The ticket machine at the front gate may be turned off after 7 pm. If so, buzz the attendant and say you are going to a Sierra Club meeting. There is no entry after 8 pm. The outside gate is up after 8 pm.
Weekends: No parking inside the building.
Saturday: Attendant is expected to be on duty from 8 am to 3 pm. You may park free, showing Sierra Club affiliation as above. Tickets may be validated at the Chapter office. Outside gates are down all day.
Sunday: Outside gates are up; there is no attendant.
Linda Hoyer

Return to Index

Motions should be submitted in advance, together with objective background material and supporting and opposing arguments, both to the Committee Chair and Newsletter Editor, for distribution with the agenda. Other motions will be postponed for action at a later meeting unless the motion is submitted in writing and unless the Committee votes an exception to ordinary procedure. Motions needing further action by the Angeles Chapter ExComm or some higher level of the Sierra Club should start out: “The Angeles Chapter Conservation Committee recommends that the Sierra Club...”

Angeles Chapter Conservation Committee

Angeles Chapter Office, The Equitable Building, 3435 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 320, Los Angeles CA 90010-1904
Gordon LaBedz, Chair, 562-494-6368 GlaBedzMD@aol.com

Agenda — March 19, 2003

7:30 pm (sharp) Conservation Staff Report
Conservation Coordinator Reports
Discussions:
    Voting Members of Conservation Committee:
    All Group and Section Conservation Chairs
    The following Chapter Conservation Committees/Task Forces:
        Forest Committee
        Ballona Wetlands Task Force
        Endangered Species/Wildlife Committee
        Harbor Vision Task Force
        Santa Monica Mountains Task Force
        Sustainable Population and Consumption Committee
        Transportation Committee
        Urban Environment and Parks Committee
 

California Great Coastal Places Campaign

Chapter Priority Campaign
Talking Points: Priority Campaign — What is it?

• A priority campaign is an environmental project that has educational value towards all the other projects that we do in the Club. A campaign should have multiple lessons and issues involved within it. It should educate activists, decision-makers and the public at large.

• A priority campaign, when completely or partially victorious, will inspire other people to try the same or similar campaigns elsewhere.

• A priority campaign is subject to more chapter resources than other campaigns. Resources include staff time, funding and prominence in our newsletters and literature.

• A priority campaign becomes an identity project for the entity involved. The campaign and the organization become synonymous.

• A priority campaign and the proper publicity behind it give opportunity and focus for fund raising.

• A priority campaign is one that geographically impacts more than one regional group, and therefore requires chapter-level support to coordinate the efforts.

• A chapter priority campaign should contain issues/strategies/actions/solutions that the chapter, as the chapter, is better able to address than other entities.

Vote to approve Grant Handbook
    The Conservation Committee recommends that the Chapter Executive Committee approve the Grant Handbook as submitted.

Next meeting is April 16

Return to Index

Orange County Conservation Committee

Gail Prothero, Chair 949-347-1255 gprothero@cox.net

Agenda —  March 18, 2003

Location: Inn at the Park in Irvine
From the north, come down 405 to 73 and off at University. Turn left and pass Campus and turn right on Harvard. Follow Harvard as it bends; look for Marquette. The Inn is at 10 Marquette, on the corner of Harvard and Marquette behind a steel fence.
From the south, get off 405 at Culver and go left. Follow Culver past Michelson and University and turn right on Harvard.
Take Harvard to Marquette. It's on your right.

7:00 Welcome, Introductions, Approval of Agenda/Minutes

7:20 Announcements/Old Business

• March 29 Activist Training Workshop.

• Sierra Sage Group, Chapter Ex-Comm & National Board passed

• Resolution approving Sierra Club participation in Saddlecreek/Saddlecrest CEQA lawsuit.

7:25 OCCC/Treasurer (Merri Levy/Gail Prothero)

7:30 Santa Ana River Conservancy (Bonnie Sharpe)

7:35 Santa Ana Mountains Task Force (Paul Carlton)

7:40 Save Hobo Aliso Ridge Task Force (Penny Elia)

7:50 Banning Ranch Park & Preserve Task Force (Everette Phillips)

8:00 Dana Point Headlands Task Force (Celia Kutcher)

8:10 OC Native American Sacred Sites Task Force (Rebecca Robles/absent)

    Please attend our March 25 Sierra Sage Program on Orange County Native American Sacred Sites
        See Announcements for details.

8:15 Puente-Chino Hills Task Force (Mike Popovec)

8:25 Save Coyote Hills Task Force (Connie Spenger)

8:30 Saddleback Canyons Task Force
        Gloria Sefton (Saddlecreek/Saddlecrest)
        Rich Gomez/Will Divine (Saddleback Meadows/Environmental Coalition)

8:50 Friends of the Foothills (Bill Holmes or Brittany McKee)

9:00 Staff Reports (Rachel Oshry Myers/Brittany McKee/Communications)

9:15 Adjourn.

Return to Index

Conservation Committee Calendar

PLEASE! Send correction or additions about your calendar dates to the editor, preferably by email: ivesico@earthlink.net

Return to Index