OCCUPY Movement - Perspective UPDATE

OCCUPY Reader Input

I also got some great calls from people who didn’t write - thank you everyone for your feedback and on-going engagement in this process. ~ Vesta, publisher

---------------------------

“There’s something happening here;

what it is ain’t

exactly clear.”

By Larry Robinson

The Occupy movement has touched a deep chord in America, particularly among young people who sense that the doors of opportunity are closed to them and that capitalism has finally vanquished democracy. But that is only the most visible face of what is happening here, in Europe, in the Middle East, in Iran, in China and Burma and many other places.

Read more »

Read article »

Exposing the One Percent - Occupy Emerges across the U.S.

Exposing the One Percent: 

Freeport McMoRan Exploits Workers and the Environment




By Peter Phillips and Kimberly Soeiro

As the Occupy Movement emerges across the US and around the world, a prime example of greed and exploitation is occurring with very little coverage in the global corporate media. Members of the global top one percent are killing striking workers and using raw military power to protect their billions of dollars of annual profits. And the highest levels of US Government encourage and protect the exploiters.

Read more »

Read article »

Occupy Wall Street Movement: The Larger Purpose

The Larger Purpose of the 

Occupy Wall Street Movement

A Personal View

by Fred Krueger

Last weekend I participated in the local Occupy Santa Rosa event. The turnout was impressive. In a city of 150,000 people, at least 3,000 local citizens filled the grassy area in front of City Hall and them marched to City Center before returning to City Hall. Protester signs addressed upwards of a hundred issues, including unjust home foreclosures; corporate greed over human need; the growing numbers of hungry people; the rising levels of poverty; the export of manufacturing jobs to Asia; skyrocketing college tuition; threats to the post office; government misinformation about Iraq; the malfeasance of big banks; growing inequalities in wealth; duplicity in the global financial system; corporate disinformation about global climate change; the XL Keystone pipeline from Canada; unregulated campaign contributions; the polarization of government,  etc., etc.

   

Read more »

Read article »

OCCUPY Sonoma County Movement

OCCUPY?

Why Not?

By Bill Wadsworth

Has the gridlock in Washington and Sacramento got you wondering if our democracy is functioning? Want to witness democracy really working? Roundup your mate and kids or, if single, all your friends and head down to the Santa Rosa City Hall. The time doesn’t matter. This democracy demonstration, Occupy Santa Rosa, is happening 24/7. Take your blankets and spend the night, which I did the first night and it’s a hoot, or just go for an hour or two. There were 900 Occupy rallies around the globe on October 15 and the Santa Rosa rally was the sixth largest turnout in the nation, just under 3,000.

Read more »

Read article »

OCCUPY Update: Sonoma County Persective

Marine Down in Police Attack on Occupy Oakland

By Shepherd Bliss 

Marine Scott Olsen made it through two tours in Iraq without an injury, but back home in the United States he was critically wounded by a police riot. Heavily-armed police injured Olsen and other unarmed citizens on Oct. 25 when they attacked the non-violent Occupy Oakland.

Olsen, 24, had his skull fractured by a police projectile and is experiencing traumatic brain swelling. He apparently sustained the most serious injury nationwide among occupiers and is at risk for brain damage.

Olsen’s roommate and buddy Keith Shannon, who served with him in Iraq, rushed to Highland Hospital, as did other friends. The hospital described him as being in a “serious but stable” condition. He apparently had been unable to say his surname and was sedated on a respirator. “They are waiting for a neurosurgeon to examine him to see if he needs surgery,” Shannon told the press.

“He doesn’t agree with the way the banks aren’t regulated, the way they drove the economy in the ground,” Shannon added. Olsen apparently wants people who think that they are above the law—like bankers—to be brought to justice for their crimes.

Read more »

Read article »

Occupy Santa Rosa - First Week

Occupy Santa Rosa’s First Week 

Contrasts with Wall Street’s Moral Principle

By Shepherd Bliss

The inspiring grand opening of Occupy Santa Rosa on Oct. 15 was a great success. I was energized from the moment I saw and felt the surprisingly large crowd, which turned out to be some 3000 around City Hall.

Many aspects of that historic occasion were impressive. People were genuinely joyous to be together, as well as angry at the 1% who rule the United States, extracting their excessive wealth from the labor of the rest of us and the Earth’s natural resources. Yes, it is a class conflict, started by the 1%, which the 99% is finally mobilizing to struggle against. This has been building for a long time—locally, nationally, and internationally.

Read more »

Read article »

Occupy Movement - Perspective

The Larger Purpose of the 

Occupy Wall Street Movement 

A Personal View 
by Fred Krueger 


 Last weekend I participated in the local Occupy Santa Rosa event. The turnout was impressive. In a city of 150,000 people, at least 3,000 local citizens filled the grassy area in front of City Hall and them marched to City Center before returning to City Hall. Protester signs addressed upwards of a hundred issues, including unjust home foreclosures; corporate greed over human need; the growing numbers of hungry people; the rising levels of poverty; the export of manufacturing jobs to Asia; skyrocketing college tuition; threats to the post office; government misinformation about Iraq; the malfeasance of big banks; growing inequalities in wealth; duplicity in the global financial system; corporate disinformation about global climate change; the XL Keystone pipeline from Canada; unregulated campaign contributions; the polarization of government, etc., etc.

Read more »

Read article »

Dissent IS patriotic - Occupy Wall Street!

Sonoma County is coming out in support of Occupy Wall Street. Activists are taking time to occupy downtown Santa Rosa in an effort to support this world-wide movement to bring awareness to the destruction caused by greed and an imbalance in the income tax structure of our country.

The November edition of the Gazette will feature an Op-Ed by a Sonoma County resident who spends a fair amount of his time trying to bring awareness to issues that impact our lives and environment. below are photos of some of our friends who have participated in demonstrations and movements to raise awareness from political to environmental issues since the movement started back in the sixties.

THANK YOU everyone who has the time and takes the time. We have changed the world more than once through peaceful demonstrations.

Read more »

Read article »

Bodega Bay Well Project

Bay Flat Road Well Project 

My Opinion on the Board of Supervisors Hearing 

By David Kenly

Tuesday, September 27th, the date set for the rehearing and vote regarding Bodega Bay¹s Bay Flat Road Well Project (Application PLP09-0057), has come and gone.  Why the rehearing?  Because the public had not been notified of the original hearing as the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires, as noted by Counsel for the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors.

Read more »

Read article »

One Bad Apple by Efren Carrillo

ONE BAD APPLE... 

by Efren Carrillo
In Sonoma County, most farmers and vineyard owners take the time, and incur the expense, to have their projects properly vetted by state and local regulators. This protects our community and environment, their interests, and ensures sustainability - which is a cornerstone of what makes Sonoma County special. Unfortunately, the actions of an individual can sometimes reflect badly on the farming sector, harming those who toil tirelessly to follow the rules.

This week, a bulldozer laid waste to the former Davis Tree Farm property on Vinehill Road at Highway 116 near Graton. Behind a stand of shielding eucalyptus trees, the machine ripped ground and uprooted hundreds of Christmas trees to clear the land. This began in the mist and continued as rain poured down with no apparent erosion control plan or protections. Downstream from the property is the Atascadero Creek and its dwindling coho salmon population.


When contacted, the bulldozer operator claimed not to need permits for this process as the intention was to replant the trees. Whether that is the case will be determined by authorities with the expertise to examine what the law requires and then to take appropriate enforcement action as a result. But, one need not wait for a legal determination before expressing outrage at the insensitivity and environmental depravity of this conduct.

In recent weeks, representatives of Paul Hobbs winery and the property owner, Del Davis, visited both the Planning Department and the Agricultural Commissioner's vineyard permitting section to find out what was required to convert this property to vines and clear up prior code violations on the property. 
Both departments confirmed that clear direction was given that conversion would require a Timber Harvest Plan (THP) from CalFire, an environmental review required with THPs, and a vineyard permit. 
The winery representatives and property owner were both put on notice of the required steps. And someone ordered a bulldozer.


This is not the first time that Paul Hobbs has been in the news for his aggressive pursuit of vineyard land. Recently, a great deal of news coverage was brought to bear over his acquisition of John Jenkel's property by legal, but questionable, means. While many people, including me, were appalled by this situation, there was little County regulators could have done to prevent that event. Later, we watched mature trees bulldozed to make way for vineyard following the property acquisition.

More alarming to me was the clear cutting of redwood stands on the Pocket Canyon property where Paul Hobbs maintains a residence. This activity took place mere weeks before the Jenkel incident. Today, stacks of redwood trunks remain on this property where trees once lived. Mr. Hobbs began the required process, and received a tentative THP from CalFire. Before completing the needed steps by obtaining a use and vineyard permit from the County of Sonoma- which would have required a public process- he pushed forward with his tree removal.

This most recent effort to skirt the regulations of CalFire and Sonoma County by ripping out trees at the Vinehill Road property must not be ignored. Mr. Hobbs confirmed that he is in escrow on the site. It appears to be a business decision - that fines are cheaper and more expedient than the regulatory process - that resulted in the bulldozer. It would take a huge leap of faith to give him or the property owner the benefit of doubt where this incident is involved, and Mr. Hobbs has not earned my faith.

Rather, Paul Hobbs has shown a blatant disregard for Sonoma County, its resources, his fellow vintners, and community sentiment. Many Sonoma County residents share my shock and disbelief. His disregard extends to the reputation of honest farmers and grape growers who obey the laws and contribute to our local economic health. His practices also offer reputable farmers a competitive disadvantage by unfairly skirting established rules.

Community outrage is appropriate.


With the many responsible grape growers in our community who embrace the shared environmental ethic that makes Sonoma County -and its wines- so unique, it makes little sense to support the product of one who so blatantly disregards our community values. I will never knowingly drink or purchase Paul Hobbs Wines. To me, his wines are unpalatable as they carry strong tones of environmental harm with overwhelming notes of arrogance. 


Efren Carrillo holds a degree in Environmental Economics and Policy from University of California-Berkeley

Read article »

WHEEL OF LIGHT JUNE 2011

BY RIO OLESKY

Whenever the outer planets, Uranus, Neptune or Pluto, connect in a significant way changes occur in individual consciousness as well as collective reality. This month a square (ninety degree angular relationship) begins between Uranus and Pluto. This will continue strongly until October and then will come in and out of orb of that aspect until the spring of 2016. These planets represent the greatest potential for change. Uranus can bring change that is inspired or rebellious. Its machinations can create awareness and expression of one’s uniqueness and provide motivation to live in a progressive, experimental way. It can bring changes that are unexpected and extreme. Pluto is about transformation. Its tendency is to eliminate whatever has become stale, stagnant or boring. It can also create new priorities, values and behaviors to replace the old and worn out.

Read more »

Read article »

LETTERS response to “Don’t Blame Public Employees”

While visiting a friend in Forestville recently, I read the front page article in your March 3 edition by Martin J. Bennett entitled “Don’t Blame Public Employees”, and discovered it was almost identical to a piece that appeared a couple of months earlier in my local on-line newspaper, Voice of San Diego. Mr. Bennett, a junior college history professor, instead of dealing directly with the central question of whether public sector pay and benefits are out of line with the private sector, trots out a series of allegations to get people fired up. He claims that The Economist magazine, to which I subscribe, is part of a misleading corporate campaign to scapegoat public employees. This is ridiculous. The Economist is a British publication and is far and away the best and most objective weekly news magazine. It’s bias is, if anything, slightly liberal.

The author then proceeds to blame the housing meltdown, Wall Street, oil companies, Proposition 13, wealthy people and a “too low” top State income tax rate of only 9.3%, while claiming that an article entitled “The Truth about Public Employees”, written by two Berkeley professors, proves that public employees are not overcompensated compared to the private sector.

I’ve read this study, because it was cited in the Voice of San Diego story. It contains a huge fallacy, that pay scales should somehow be based not merely on the work people perform but primarily on their education and their age. I live in San Diego, which was perhaps the first city to discover it was in deep trouble as a result of foolish commitments made to public employee unions. The President of one of our unions is a trash truck driver. She happens to be a college graduate. Should she be paid more than other drivers because of her degree? Most people would consider this a ridiculous question, but it’s at the heart of the Berkeley professors’ claims that public sector compensation is not out of line. Their study is garbage.

I’m a retired human resources director from the private sector, so I read articles like this one very carefully to check their validity. This one flunks. E.g., Prof. Bennett cites average pensions for CalPERS retirees of only $25,000 a year, without mentioning comparable figures for private sector retirees, which are far lower. The reason this figure seems rather modest is that it includes all retirees, many in their 70’s and even 80’s, and you will find that public sector retirees in recent years have opened up a huge gap. I’ll explain why in a moment, but first let me cite some history.

Public sector organizations used to compare pay and benefits with private sector firms, but stopped doing so over 30 years ago when they realized they had passed private firms in many aspects of compensation. They now look strictly at other public entities, typically other cities and counties, and search for “leaders” to justify pay and benefit increases. And why not? The people paying the bill, the general taxpayers, are completely shut out of the process because, it is claimed, these are sensitive “personnel” issues.

About 15 years ago when tax receipts in California, as a result of the high tech boom, swelled dramatically, major increases in retirement benefits were granted. In San Diego, these occurred in 1996 and again in 2002, and instead of improving the benefits only for future service, increases were given for past service as well, thus instantly creating huge unfunded liabilities that have come home to roost and are simply unsustainable. San Diego’s situation is not an aberration, it’s more or less typical among larger cities and many small cities as well.

No one is “blaming” public employees. They do what most people would do, take advantage of any chance they get to maximize their financial situation. But the public sector is different. The unions have huge political clout, and often make the difference in elections, thus in effect selecting their bosses, the politicians who approve proposed pay and benefit increases negotiated by managers who know they’ll get the same deal or better. It’s no accident that the majority of unionized workers are now in the public sector. It’s basically a monopoly; there’s no competition except the occasional pressure for “out sourcing”, which is more talked about than actually accomplished.

Here’s the typical California city package for you to compare to your own situation: Automatic “step” increases within each job classification, plus (until the last couple of years) an additional general increase granted to everyone; paid vacation and sick leave time 4-6 weeks a year plus 10-12 paid holidays; paid overtime, usually at premium rates, even for supervisors and middle managers, engineers and other professionals exempt from statutory overtime pay requirements; Civil Service protection, as well as union representation against arbitrary discipline, favoritism, etc. The stories you’ve heard, e.g., about the near impossibility of firing incompetent teachers are, unfortunately, true. The “due process” is endless.

But wait, it gets better. “Normal retirement” is at age 55, and if you are a police officer or firefighter, age 50. You get a defined benefit pension equal to 1.5 or 2% per year of service times your single highest year’s pay, up to 3% for cops and firefighters. And, of course, you get annual cost-of-living increases to your pension. There is often, in addition, a 401(k) type savings plan to which the city matches the employee contribution. Medical benefits are for life. The employee contributes, sometimes paying up to 25% of the cost. You decide whether that’s a better deal than you have.

Many people wonder why police and fire personnel get a far more generous package, both earlier retirement ages and a much richer benefit. The rationalizations are two: cops and firefighters, because of the nature of their jobs, have a shorter life expectancy after retirement, and since they “put their lives on the line daily” they are much more likely than other occupations to suffer serious injury or even death before retirement. Sounds plausible, but neither claim stands scrutiny.

Now, just like you, I respect and appreciate the work these public safety employees perform, and there certainly are risks and stresses in these occupations. But remember, these people chose these jobs, knowing exactly what they entailed before they applied.

Here are two facts that may surprise you. CalPERS, the largest state public pension system, keeps lots of statistics. Their numbers show that the post-retirement life expectancy of police officers, highway patrol officers, firefighters and other public safety personnel is identical to other public employees. And, if you go on the internet and examine the lists of jobs with the highest occupational fatality rates, they show that commercial fishermen, roofers, loggers, farmers, pilots, truck and taxi drivers have higher fatality rates on the job than police officers or fire fighters. When openings in public safety jobs occur, there are always lots of applicants, because they pay very well, have lots of opportunities for overtime and you can retire very young with a nice pension and generous health care. Many go on to lucrative second careers.

The public has only recently begun to focus on just how generous pay and benefits for public employees at almost every level have become in the last 15 years or so. The information is not readily available, because public agencies have many tools to hide or obfuscate it, and every incentive to do so. Ironically, federal employment is, in most respects, much less lucrative than at state, county and city levels. But the simple fact is that, blame whoever you want, the situation is unsustainable financially and simply must be corrected.

William Bradshaw
San Diego, CA

Read article »

Returning to a LEGAL Tax System - OPINION

Pat Palmer of Sebastopol on Celebrating tax Season...an opinion...

'Tis the tax season, so this is a timely topic, especially after reading stories of tight money from so many in this county. Instead of complaining, let's consider remedies. One solution that most of us can employ: get a raise in pay. No, your business isn't going to give you more, but you can take more home: by not volunteering to donate up to half of your pay to the IRS.

Note to "tax protesters": the "income" tax law is indeed constitutional, as written. It is an excise tax, like sales tax -which is voluntary, (you don't have to choose to buy stuff).

Just what is being taxed? Not earnings. According to the IRS code: "the exercise of Federal privilege" is being taxed, and it is measured by "gross income" or "wages" (revenue accumulated via the privilege). What Federal privilege are you exercising today? Earning a living? Existing? (there's no law preventing us from giving up our rights.) This "privilege" is defined in law, and most of us don't fall into that category.

What is unconstitutional is the way the IRS collects money: This excise tax is  fraudulently enforced as a mandatory, direct tax on earnings—and extorted by threat of imprisonment. Looks like criminal behavior to me! Racketeering defined: “Organized conspiracy to defraud or extort.” This accurately describes the “income” tax scheme which relieves its victims of up to half of their money every payday.

After 60 years of trial-and-error legal challenges to the "new" personal withholding tax (started in WWII, as the voluntary, and temporary "Victory Tax"), resulting in losses and jail time for well-meaning but legally ignorant tax-justice advocates, the IRS Code was finally cracked in 2002. The only safe, legal way to un-volunteer from this racket was uncovered by legal scholar Peter Eric Hendrickson. You can prove it to yourself by studying his website at www.losthorizons.com and reading his book: Cracking the Code: The Fascinating Truth About Taxation in America (12th edition). This is the result of his reading the entire 3.5-million-word, deliberately obfuscated statutes, regulations and legal precedents for the "income" tax, as far back as 1862.

After satisfying yourself as to the veracity of my words, you might be more comfortable acting on my proposed solution; in a nutshell: to start with, demand that your payer ("employer" means US Gov't) stop all “voluntary” withholding from your paycheck and then enjoy an instant pay raise of 30 percent or more. At the end of the year, you file your 1040 and 540 affidavits of self-assessment of the status of your compensation: as non-privileged (non-taxable), if applicable. Then you MUST rebut your payer's false allegations of “wages” paid, via the W-2 and/or 1099 forms. You do this by using "corrected 1099 information returns" and/or substitute W-2's: form 4852 for U.S. and form 3525 for California.

Lastly, if your payer had unlawfully refused to stop withholding, then you can claim a full refund of all of your weekly tax deposits -right on the U.S. and California tax returns. Enjoy the bigger check! You are now helping to stimulate the economy, like thousands of folks before you.

I can’t imagine why a payer would not want to stop withholding. >From a balance-sheet perspective: thousands of dollars per year, per worker could be saved in payer’s contributions. Only fear of the racketeers would stop them, unless they could find honest lawyers who would choose to apply the law.

I can hear the liberals moan about how their social programs (and for the conservatives -their military adventures) would lose funding if we fail to volunteer our compliance with the “income” tax scheme. Poppycock! Have you ever looked at the reverse of your tax payment check? It was cashed by a private bank called Federal Reserve, not the U.S. Treasury. Your donations never see a government program—those are paid for by loans. All income tax receipts pay the interest on the so-called "national debt".

The definition of "federal privilege" needs to clarified in order to make sure all the loopholes are closed, so that all who use it will pay for it.

Only the innocent are benefited by my proposed solution. This excise tax on federally privileged activities will finally be properly paid by all federal employees, contractors and beneficiaries of federally-created monopoly advantage, such as medical doctors, lawyers, bankers, pro sports team owners, etc. Also include corporations that possess federal concessions such as oil, mining, utilities, broadcasting, drugs, banks, etc. And don't forget international business: U.S. corporations that rely on federal political pressure, military and intelligence activities to acquire and protect their foreign assets. These infamous non-payers are definitely “federally privileged.”

As you can see, returning to a legal tax system accomplishes fiscal relief for the private worker while the fat cats who use lobbying to get government corporate welfare will be properly charged for their advantages. As Moses declared, “Let my people go!” Make the legally liable taxpayers pay their fair share, and release the non-liable. Let us (private earners) seize our rights by grassroots action, because rights are not going to be given from on-high.  Vote with your wallet and your public servants will cease to be your masters.

Pat Palmer, Sebastopol

For more information on the Law & Logic behind this opinion - please visit http://www.losthorizons.com/

Read article »

Sticks and Stones by Will Shonbrun

Sticks and Stones…
By Will Shonbrun

Despite the old adage it’s known by most that the impact of words – harsh, accusatory, judgmental or condemnatory – last and fester far longer than bodily bruises. Words matter. Ask the preacher or the politician or the pundit. Ask the dictator. First come the words, then the actions.

Since the latest tragic event in Tucson we are hearing from politicians and pundits alike – some of them – to turn down the inflammatory and violence-oriented rhetoric, to cool the hate speech, and to understand that such words have consequences, as we’ve been told so many times. It happens every time these kinds of brutally insane and heart-wrenching rampages occur.

Of course words matter. It’s an old, old story, but we’ve only to look a short way to past history: the rationale for stolen land because its inhabitants were godless savages; an excuse for slavery, one of the depths of human depravity, because its victims weren’t fully human; the Nazis’ rise to power on the defamation of Jews; the oppression and subjugation against women and minorities and their relegation to second-class status; the McCarthy Era, and the arousing of our nation to go to war in East Asia or the Middle East through fear and the demonization of some “enemy.”

Calls for more civil discourse, less personal attacks, and easing off violent, militant words and symbols are heard throughout the land, as always follows tragic, senseless killings, and while this is the proper and right response, it is undermined by a fundamental hypocrisy in our culture: We are a violent people.

We tell our children that problems cannot and should not be solved by violence, and that our differences cannot be rectified through aggression, but what do we show them on the world stage?

We invade countries that we disagree with when we believe it is in our interest to do so, and we manufacture the reasons and rationales to get our people to accept, support and fight in these wars. But ‘invade’ is a too surgical, too clinical word. It does not describe the reality of the act. A recent example: Before our military set foot in Iraq in 2003 we rained bombs and missiles on sections of the country for two weeks. Remember “shock and awe”?

Those bombs and missiles not only destroyed, rendered into rubble, buildings and infrastructure, they tore apart human beings: families, babies and children of people who just happened to be living in the wrong place, at the wrong time. These were other human beings, no different than our families, friends and neighbors; no different than us. Our military, before and during the invasion of Iraq killed, brutally and violently murdered and maimed a countless number of people no different in their hopes, dreams and desires than you or I. That’s the reality of war. Indiscriminate bombing and so-called collateral killing was done in Vietnam and Cambodia as well, and there’s no reason to believe it will not happen again.

We tell our children not to engage in violence to solve their problems and it’s the first thing we resort to. We exhort our children and our fellow citizens to eschew violence and physical aggression while at the same time manufacturing and selling arms – machinery that kills people and destroys cities and countryside – to practically all the nations of the world. We spend about half of our entire budget fighting and preparing to wage wars. How can we tell our children, tell ourselves, to seek non-violent solutions when our actions belie our words?

We are currently cautioned by our leaders, the putative more reasonable and intelligent ones, to cool the rhetoric and incitement to violence-laden language, while at the same time sending drones to kill designated enemies regardless of who else happens to get killed or wounded in the process. We preach non-violence and at the same time justify the use of torture. Torture! We have a Congressman recently calling for the assassination of Wikileaks’ Julian Assange – not a trial to establish innocence or guilt, but an assassination; a mob hit. This is and other such utterances are the level of discourse from some of our political leaders and extreme right wing pundits.

How can we expect our people to behave respectfully, to debate differences honestly and logically, to keep our national discourse civil when the reality of how we act and what we say projects just the opposite? Only when we stop exhorting and resorting to violence in order to get what we want will we be able to bridge the divides that have grown deeper and wider in our country. Only when our actions mirror our words will we be able to advise our children and tell ourselves and the rest of the world how to live in peace. Will such a time ever come?

Will Shonbrun is a writer who lives in Sonoma, CA.

Read article »

2011-An Optimists Perspective

By Vesta Copestakes

OK, it helps to be an optimist - but for those who find it difficult to look at life through rose colored glasses, I’m going to give you a few reasons to feel good...right now!

JOBS: While it’s true that there are more people on unemployment than we’ve seen in a very long time, our government has also been generous about providing unemployment benefits longer than usual. It’s not just a sense of consideration for those in need, it’s also an intelligent way to keep money in circulation. Unemployment checks get taken to the grocery store which not only pays for food, but also pays for employees at the store, etc. What goes around comes around.

AND...some people who have been collecting those checks have also been working odd jobs on the side and coming to the conclusion that they have skills they can sell. If you can’t FIND a job....CREATE a job! As a person who has been self-employed most of my adult life, I can tell you that there is a lot more job security working for numerous clients than one employer. It’s the old cliche about not putting all your eggs in one basket - the more baskets you have, the better!

ENVIRONMENT: You might be getting frightened by Climate Change, plastic floating in the ocean, acid rain, etc., but think about how far we have come in our consciousness about the environment. When I was young, we had dead rivers. Now we have scientists studying every detail of our environment to turn the tide. Loggers have embraced forest management instead of hating tree-huggers. Fisherman are seeing the logic of taking care of our waterways so they have more fish to catch. Environmental awareness is rising across the planet. It’s simply getting better!

WAR: There was a time when people thought nothing of fighting over ideas, land, money, women...religion. And yes, we still have people who think that way, but they are less and less all the time. We now know that education wipes out not only ignorance, but helps people take care of themselves, their families, and communities. A full belly makes people less hungry for what others have.

I have two theories on how peace will be achieved over time. OK, a long time, but it’s already happening.

As people of various races, nationalities, and religions blend families, we have less reasons to think of each other as Us vs. Them. We’re becoming genetically related. The more we blend, the less we see our differences, and the more we feel connected. It’s hard to kill someone you care about.

Another one of my theories is that we are becoming more economically dependent upon each other. A global economy fosters mutual dependence. The more dependent we are upon each other the less economic sense it makes to fight. We don’t covet what others have...we NEED a mutual exchange of objects and money to make our own lives better. This mutual dependency will make us less likely to have wars.

HUMAN RIGHTS was not even a topic of discussion not that long ago. Now we actually boycott countries if they don’t treat their people right. Economic sanctions have become more powerful than weapons.

Yes, there are still racists and people who hate what they fear. That narrow viewpoint is giving way to tolerance. In my lifetime we went from segregation to inter-racial marriage. From homosexuals hiding in the “closet” to the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and soon, marriage between any two people who love each other It’s coming. It all takes time.

MENTAL ILLNESS: There was a time when “crazy” people were locked away. Now we know that there are ways to help people and we feel compassion for them instead of being afraid of them. PTSD didn’t exist before it was named. “Uncle John’s never been the same since he came back from the war” has become, “we need to help him!” Science and understanding are changing our perspective.

DRUGS AND ALCOHOL: When I was a kid, drinking alcohol was an evening ritual and no one ever talked about Aunt Julie the alcoholic. Now we get on law enforcement’s case for not taking the license away from anyone who has too many DUIs. The first thing investigated at an accident is whether drugs or alcohol was involved. It wasn’t always this way! What was once private shame is now public concern.

BOTTOM LINE: You can be negative and miserable or you can choose to look on the bright side and see that things are getting better all the time. You don’t have to be angry. You can be happy. Who says anger is the only way to effect change - try happiness!
 

Wishing you a HAPPY 2011!

Read article »

Shepherd Bliss Learns from Two Year Old Children

The Magic of Two-Year-Olds

By Shepherd Bliss

The biggest surprise of my 2010 was relationships with four unrelated two-year-olds, who are so full of magic and life-giving vitality. I am 66-years-old and have never had two-year-olds in my adult life. They have become this college teacher’s teacher.

I have known Ruby since her birth. I remember when a dozen adults commemorated the passage of Diana seven years after her death. Our sadness differed from Little Miss Goldilocks, as some call Ruby, who was bubbly and buoyant. I known that death and life are theoretically connected, but there it was in her presence and continuing enthusiastic participation in life. Ruby’s energy managed to shift ours and lift our sadness to joy as we remembered the good life that Diana had. Children belong not only at weddings, but also at funerals and memorial services.

River came to my farm one day, and we immediately recognized each other as kin. River re-parents me, though I am thirty-three times as old as he. He radiates contact with some primordial energy that was there before we arrived and will continue after we expire. He tends to unite people and draw their attention closer to the ground as they watch him interact. Yet when he visits my classes he sits calmly in one of his parent’s laps and seems to give even deeper attention than some of my adolescent students.

When we play together people ask if I am the grandfather, since there is a physical resemblance, given our olive skins and long eyelashes. I just smile in response.

Ruby is one of River’s “girlfriends.” They have such a unique dance when they see each other, open their arms, and move toward each other. They even hug and kiss.

River’s French grandparents recently visited. They modeled the importance of the grandparent-grandchild relationship. These two-year-olds evoke the grandfather archetype in me, which feels as if it has a biological base. I do not have my own children.

Nor did I not have grandfathers. Lightning struck one dead on our Iowa family farm as he went out to get his son. The other, whose name I bear, being the third in this line-up, was thought to be dead. But in my thirties we got a letter from him, in his long search for his first-born son. “I’m too old to start having a father,” my father responded, since he had been told that his father had abandoned him as an infant. I, however, responded, and we struck up a good conversation. My brother even met our grandfather, and liked him. “Deceased” was on the envelope of my last letter to him, as we were planning to meet.

Such memories return as I think about the grandfather energy, and how important it can be, and why I refused to father a child. Fortunately, I had wonderful uncles, on my mother’s side, especially my farming Uncle Dale. He was my sweet masculine model.

Opal came to me through River when we were at a farmers’ market. She began following River. Like Ruby, Opal is blonde and bright blue-eyed. River and Opal recently connected for some Christmas music. River got there first with his dad Laurent. When I arrived they were sitting on the floor together. After a while Laurent wanted to buy some books, so he placed a meditative River in my lap. Then Opal arrived; she got very excited and started jumping up and down when she saw River, who looked at her and then back to the calming music. Opal had so much excitement at seeing River that she did not come very close—electricity in the air--but walked around him into the store, smiling and looking his way, as if inviting him to follow. This come forward/go back went on for around half an hour, much to the delight of others in the store. They finally touched, but only briefly.

We then went to a restaurant to eat. By this time River was getting more excited. After eating he would alternately chase Opal around the restaurant and lead her on, again to the delight of the adults there. Once outside on the grass, the chase continued as they climbed up the “mountain” where I was standing guard, keeping them away from the road, and would send them down.

River initiated the “All Fall Down” game, verbally and physically. Opal would repeat the words, but did not seem to understand them at first, or fall down. Eventually she did fall down on the grass. It was as if they were bowing with devotion to the ground that holds all of us up. I watch how quickly they learn, especially from each other, if they are protected by adults, but not over-protected. They fall and with the aid of those flexible spines get up again. By falling we can learn how to be flexible and get back up.

Opal and River also ended up hugging and kissing. Both Ruby and Opal seem to take more initiative toward River, who alternately holds back, responds, and takes some initiative.

At Ruby’s recent second birthday party I met Asher, the youngest of this gang. He came toward me with his arms outreached, as if he recognized me. I instinctively bowed to him and opened my arms, picking him up. He promptly laid his head on my shoulders, which he did a few other times that night, both of us with large smiles. I later invited Asher and parents to a night-time boat festival on the Petaluma River. His eyes were full and his smile bright, as he pointed at one boat after another that came by, drawing our collective attention. His joy ignited our joy.

There is so much that I adore about these four young ones. I teach communication to college students. Each of these children, in their own unique ways, are peak communicators. They radiate connection, curiosity, sweetness, tenderness, and vulnerability. They have a lot to teach adults, as well as other children. It reminds me of the phrase from the old book, “Be ye not like a child, you will not get into the Kingdom of Heaven.”

There is another side to this story of my growing attention to two-year-olds. The recent death of two-year-old Callie Murray hit me hard. She would have been three on the day that I began writing this, Dec. 25, the birthday of baby Jesus. She was walking across the street hand-and-hand with her mom Ling Murray on Dec. 1. A student from Sonoma State University, where I teach, who was using a phone in her car at the time, crashed into them, killing tiny Callie and severely injuring her mother.

Since then I have had trouble getting that crash out of my mind and my nightmares, so I have been talking to my students about the dangers of texting and cell phones. May tiny Callie’s tragic death guide us to appropriate behavior. May we adults cherish and nourish the life that all young ones bring into the world and care for them.

I look forward to seeing each of my two-year-old friends again into whatever future might remain for me. So however old you may be, it is not too old to have young children in your life, to enjoy them, and be part of the village that we all need—young and old. They need us and we need them.

My 78-year-old friend Doug Von Koss recently sent me the following that James Broughton wrote on his 80th birthday: "Stand firmly, sit serenely, mutter profoundly, sing outrageously and dance all the way to your death."

Shepherd Bliss teaches at Sonoma State University, has maintained a farm in the Sebastopol countryside since l992, and can be reached at sb3@pon.net

Read article »

9500 Liberty Documentary Screening in Santa Rosa

On Friday October 29th the Police Accountability Clinic and Helpline is inviting the public to join them in a free screening and discussion of the documentary "9500 Liberty" at 719 Orchard St, Santa Rosa CA beginning at 7pm.

"9500 Liberty" is a documentary about what happened in Prince William County, Virginia when elected officials adopted a law requiring police officers to question anyone they have "probable cause" to suspect is an undocumented immigrant. The film reveals the startling vulnerability of a local government, targeted by national anti-immigration networks using the Internet to frighten and intimidate lawmakers and citizens. Alarmed by a climate of fear and racial division, residents form a resistance using YouTube videos and virtual town halls, setting up a real-life showdown in the seat of county government.

The devastating social and economic impact of the “Immigration Resolution” is felt in the lives of real people in homes and in local businesses. But the ferocious fight to adopt and then reverse this policy unfolds inside government chambers, on the streets, and on the Internet. "9500 Liberty" provides a front row seat to all three battlegrounds.

Immediately following the film screening, there will be an open discussion about the issues raised in the film, and how to build the strength of our movement for justice and police accountability. Driver's license checkpoints, car impounds, police targeting immigrant communities are all continuing issues here in Sonoma County. Sonoma County Sheriff Cogbill claims that immigration status has no effect on his enforcement policies, while at the same time regularly holding people not convicted of any crime for Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Sheriff Cogbill has also made it clear that he will not follow direction from the Board of Supervisors regarding his department’s policies concerning immigrants.

The Police Accountability Clinic and Helpline (PACH) exists to document police abuse, and to help survivors of Police Abuse find safety and support. PACH participates in community based civil rights education. PACH meets the second Tuesday of every month at 719 Orchard St, Santa Rosa, CA 95404. We can be contacted at 707-542-7224 or by e-mail at: info@pachline.org

Read article »

Proposition 19 FAQ by Omar Figueroa, Attorney

Below are some Frequently Asked Questions 

about California State Marijuana Initiative

Proposition 19 

on the November 2010 ballot, written by Omar Figueroa, 

a defense attorney for marijuana growers and patients. 

For a copy of the full text of the initiative, please go to the end of this article.

Frequently Asked Questions about Proposition 19
by Omar Figueroa

Would Proposition 19 legalize marijuana across California?

No, because Proposition 19 would only change California law, not federal law, which classifies cannabis as an illegal Schedule I controlled substance. With respect to state versus federal jurisdiction, there is concurrent criminal territorial jurisdiction across most of California, meaning any violation, however petty, can theoretically be prosecuted in both state and federal courts. If Prop. 19 passes, possession of marijuana will remain a violation of federal law; however, under state law, “any person 21 years of age or older” will be allowed to personally “possess, process, share, or transport not more than one ounce of cannabis, solely for that individual’s personal consumption, and not for sale.” Seminally, anyone 21 and over would be allowed under California law to cultivate “cannabis plants for personal consumption only, in an area of not more than twenty-five square feet per private residence, or, in the absence of any residence, the parcel.”

What if someone possesses or cultivates more than an ounce, or cultivates in an area of more than twenty-five square feet?

If the cannabis is possessed or cultivated for medical use, no problem. According to the California Supreme Court in the 2010 landmark case of People v. Kelly, “a qualified patient may possess and cultivate any amount of marijuana reasonably necessary for his or her current medical condition.” If someone cultivates an area of more than twenty-five square feet for personal non-medical use, that remains a felony under California law, but if it the cultivation is solely for personal use, and not for sale, the person may qualify for what is referred to as “felony diversion.” Since Prop 19 defines “one ounce” as “28.5 grams”, someone who unlawfully possess more than 28.5 grams for personal use would be guilty of a misdemeanor. If Prop. 19 passes, people could still go to jail for unlawful possession of marijuana. The maximum punishment for misdemeanor possession of more than 28.5 grams of marijuana would remain up to 6 months in the county jail and up to a $500 fine, although with Prop. 36 many defendants would still be sentenced to treatment instead of jail.

Assuming Proposition 19 passes, will it be legal for people to be lighting up joints in public?

No. Prop. 19 makes it clear that “nothing in this Act shall permit cannabis consumption in public or in a public place” or “smoking cannabis in any space while minors are present.” Thus, while the possession of 28.5 grams or less by those 21 and over would be legal, the consumption in public would not. On the other hand, Prop. 19 expressly allows the “possession and consumption, in any form, of cannabis in a residence or other non-public place, and shall include licensed premises open to the public authorized to permit on-premises consumption of cannabis by a local government.” This contemplates Amsterdam-style coffee shops or “smoke-easies” licensed by local governments for the purpose of raising tax revenues.

--------------
“Like an increasing number of law enforcers, I have learned that most bad things about marijuana - especially the violence made inevitable by an obscenely profitable black market - are caused by the prohibition, not by the plant.” Joseph McNamara - Former San Jose Police Chief
--------------


FULL TEXT of the Changes California Law to Legalize Marijuana and Allow It to Be Regulated and Taxed. Initiative Statute.

Allows people 21 years old or older to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use. Permits local governments to regulate and tax commercial production and sale of marijuana to people 21 years old or older. Prohibits people from possessing marijuana on school grounds, using it in public, smoking it while minors are present, or providing it to anyone under 21 years old. Maintains current prohibitions against driving while impaired. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Savings of up to several tens of millions of dollars annually to state and local governments on the costs of incarcerating and supervising certain marijuana offenders. Unknown but potentially major tax, fee, and benefit assessment revenues to state and local government related to the production and sale of marijuana products.

Section 1: Name
This Act shall be known as the “Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010.”

Section 2: Findings, Intent and Purposes
This Act, adopted by the People of the State of California, makes the following Findings and Statement of Intent and Purpose:
1. Findings
1. California’s laws criminalizing cannabis (marijuana) have failed and need to be reformed. Despite spending decades arresting millions of non-violent cannabis consumers, we have failed to control cannabis or reduce its availability.
2. According to surveys, roughly 100 million Americans (around 1/3 of the country’s population) acknowledge that they have used cannabis, 15 million of those Americans having consumed cannabis in the last month. Cannabis consumption is simply a fact of life for a large percentage of Americans.
3. Despite having some of the strictest cannabis laws in the world, the United States has the largest number of cannabis consumers. The percentage of our citizens who consume cannabis is double that of the percentage of people who consume cannabis in the Netherlands, a country where the selling and adult possession of cannabis is allowed.
4. According to The National Research Council’s recent study of the 11 U.S. states where cannabis is currently decriminalized, there is little apparent relationship between severity of sanctions and the rate of consumption.
5. Cannabis has fewer harmful effects than either alcohol or cigarettes, which are both legal for adult consumption. Cannabis is not physically addictive, does not have long term toxic effects on the body, and does not cause its consumers to become violent.
6. There is an estimated $15 billion in illegal cannabis transactions in California each year. Taxing and regulating cannabis, like we do with alcohol and cigarettes, will generate billions of dollars in annual revenues for California to fund what matters most to Californians: jobs, health care, schools and libraries, roads, and more.
7. California wastes millions of dollars a year targeting, arresting, trying, convicting, and imprisoning non-violent citizens for cannabis related offenses. This money would be better used to combat violent crimes and gangs.
8. The illegality of cannabis enables for the continuation of an out-of-control criminal market, which in turn spawns other illegal and often violent activities. Establishing legal, regulated sales outlets would put dangerous street dealers out of business.

2. Purposes
1. Reform California’s cannabis laws in a way that will benefit our state.
2. Regulate cannabis like we do alcohol: Allow adults to possess and consume small amounts of cannabis.
3. Implement a legal regulatory framework to give California more control over the cultivation, processing, transportation, distribution, and sales of cannabis.
4. Implement a legal regulatory framework to better police and prevent access to and consumption of cannabis by minors in California.
5. Put dangerous, underground street dealers out of business, so their influence in our communities will fade.
6. Provide easier, safer access for patients who need cannabis for medical purposes.
7. Ensure that if a city decides not to tax and regulate the sale of cannabis, that buying and selling cannabis within that city’s limits remain illegal, but that the city’s citizens still have the right to possess and consume small amounts, except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9.
8. Ensure that if a city decides it does want to tax and regulate the buying and selling of cannabis (to and from adults only), that a strictly controlled legal system is implemented to oversee and regulate cultivation, distribution, and sales, and that the city will have control over how and how much cannabis can be bought and sold, except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9.
9. Tax and regulate cannabis to generate billions of dollars for our state and local governments to fund what matters most: jobs, healthcare, schools and libraries, parks, roads, transportation, and more.
10. Stop arresting thousands of non-violent cannabis consumers, freeing up police resources and saving millions of dollars each year, which could be used for apprehending truly dangerous criminals and keeping them locked up, and for other essential state needs that lack funding.
11. Allow the Legislature to adopt a statewide regulatory system for a commercial cannabis industry.
12. Make cannabis available for scientific, medical, industrial, and research purposes.
13. Permit California to fulfill the state’s obligations under the United States Constitution to enact laws concerning health, morals, public welfare and safety within the State.
14. Permit the cultivation of small amounts of cannabis for personal consumption.

3. Intent
1. This Act is intended to limit the application and enforcement of state and local laws relating to possession, transportation, cultivation, consumption and sale of cannabis, including but not limited to the following, whether now existing or adopted in the future: Health and Safety Code sections 11014.5 and 11364.5 [relating to drug paraphernalia]; 11054 [relating to cannabis or tetrahydrocannabinols]; 11357 [relating to possession]; 11358 [relating to cultivation]; 11359 [possession for sale]; 11360 [relating to transportation and sales]; 11366 [relating to maintenance of places]; 11366.5 [relating to use of property]; 11370 [relating to punishment]; 11470 [relating to forfeiture]; 11479 [relating to seizure and destruction]; 11703 [relating to definitions regarding illegal substances]; 11705 [actions for use of illegal controlled substance]; Vehicle Code sections 23222 and 40000.15 [relating to possession].
2. This Act is not intended to affect the application or enforcement of the following state laws relating to public health and safety or protection of children and others: Health and Safety Code sections 11357 [relating to possession on school grounds]; 11361 [relating to minors as amended herein]; 11379.6 [relating to chemical production]; 11532 [relating to loitering to commit a crime or acts not authorized by law]; Vehicle Code section 23152 [relating to driving while under the influence]; Penal Code section 272 [relating to contributing to the delinquency of a minor]; nor any law prohibiting use of controlled substances in the workplace or by specific persons whose jobs involve public safety.

Section 3: Lawful Activities
Article 5 of Chapter 5 of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code, commencing with section 11300 is added to read:

Section 11300: Personal Regulation and Controls
1. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, it is lawful and shall not be a public offense under California law for any person 21 years of age or older to:
1. Personally possess, process, share, or transport not more than one ounce of cannabis, solely for that individual’s personal consumption, and not for sale.
2. Cultivate, on private property by the owner, lawful occupant, or other lawful resident or guest of the private property owner or lawful occupant, cannabis plants for personal consumption only, in an area of not more than twenty-five square feet per private residence or, in the absence of any residence, the parcel. Cultivation on leased or rented property may be subject to approval from the owner of the property. Provided that, nothing in this section shall permit unlawful or unlicensed cultivation of cannabis on any public lands.
3. Possess on the premises where grown the living and harvested plants and results of any harvest and processing of plants lawfully cultivated pursuant to section 11300(a)(ii), for personal consumption.
4. Possess objects, items, tools, equipment, products and materials associated with activities permitted under this subsection.
2. “Personal consumption” shall include but is not limited to possession and consumption, in any form, of cannabis in a residence or other non-public place, and shall include licensed premises open to the public authorized to permit on-premises consumption of cannabis by a local government pursuant to section 11301.
3. “Personal consumption” shall not include, and nothing in this Act shall permit cannabis:
1. possession for sale regardless of amount, except by a person who is licensed or permitted to do so under the terms of an ordinance adopted pursuant to section 11301;
2. consumption in public or in a public place;
3. consumption by the operator of any vehicle, boat or aircraft while it is being operated, or that impairs the operator;
4. smoking cannabis in any space while minors are present.

Section 11301: Commercial Regulations and Controls
Notwithstanding any other provision of state or local law, a local government may adopt ordinances, regulations, or other acts having the force of law to control, license, regulate, permit or otherwise authorize, with conditions, the following:
1. cultivation, processing, distribution, the safe and secure transportation, sale and possession for sale of cannabis, but only by persons and in amounts lawfully authorized;
2. retail sale of not more than one ounce per transaction, in licensed premises, to persons 21 years or older, for personal consumption and not for resale;
3. appropriate controls on cultivation, transportation, sales, and consumption of cannabis to strictly prohibit access to cannabis by persons under the age of 21;
4. age limits and controls to ensure that all persons present in, employed by, or in any way involved in the operation of, any such licensed premises are 21 or older;
5. consumption of cannabis within licensed premises;
6. safe and secure transportation of cannabis from a licensed premises for cultivation or processing, to a licensed premises for sale or on-premises consumption of cannabis;
7. prohibit and punish through civil fines or other remedies the possession, sale, possession for sale, cultivation, processing, or transportation of cannabis that was not obtained lawfully from a person pursuant to this section or section 11300;
8. appropriate controls on licensed premises for sale, cultivation, processing, or sale and on-premises consumption, of cannabis, including limits on zoning and land use, locations, size, hours of operation, occupancy, protection of adjoining and nearby properties and persons from unwanted exposure, advertising, signs and displays, and other controls necessary for protection of the public health and welfare;
9. appropriate environmental and public health controls to ensure that any licensed premises minimizes any harm to the environment, adjoining and nearby landowners, and persons passing by;
10. appropriate controls to restrict public displays, or public consumption of cannabis;
11. appropriate taxes or fees pursuant to section 11302;
12. such larger amounts as the local authority deems appropriate and proper under local circumstances, than those established under section 11300(a) for personal possession and cultivation, or under this section for commercial cultivation, processing, transportation and sale by persons authorized to do so under this section;
3. any other appropriate controls necessary for protection of the public health and welfare.

Section 11302: Imposition and Collection of Taxes and Fees
1. Any ordinance, regulation or other act adopted pursuant to section 11301 may include imposition of appropriate general, special or excise, transfer or transaction taxes, benefit assessments, or fees, on any activity authorized pursuant to such enactment, in order to permit the local government to raise revenue, or to recoup any direct or indirect costs associated with the authorized activity, or the permitting or licensing scheme, including without limitation: administration; applications and issuance of licenses or permits; inspection of licensed premises and other enforcement of ordinances adopted under section 11301, including enforcement against unauthorized activities.
2. Any licensed premises shall be responsible for paying all federal, state and local taxes, fees, fines, penalties or other financial responsibility imposed on all or similarly situated businesses, facilities or premises, including without limitation income taxes, business taxes, license fees, and property taxes, without regard to or identification of the business or items or services sold.

Section 11303: Seizure
1. Notwithstanding sections 11470 and 11479 of the Health and Safety Code or any other provision of law, no state or local law enforcement agency or official shall attempt to, threaten to, or in fact seize or destroy any cannabis plant, cannabis seeds or cannabis that is lawfully cultivated, processed, transported, possessed, possessed for sale, sold or used in compliance with this Act or any local government ordinance, law or regulation adopted pursuant to this Act.

Section 11304: Effect of Act and Definitions
1. This Act shall not be construed to affect, limit or amend any statute that forbids impairment while engaging in dangerous activities such as driving, or that penalizes bringing cannabis to a school enrolling pupils in any grade from kindergarten through 12, inclusive.
2. Nothing in this Act shall be construed or interpreted to permit interstate or international transportation of cannabis. This Act shall be construed to permit a person to transport cannabis in a safe and secure manner from a licensed premises in one city or county to a licensed premises in another city or county pursuant to any ordinances adopted in such cities or counties, notwithstanding any other state law or the lack of any such ordinance in the intervening cities or counties.
3. No person shall be punished, fined, discriminated against, or be denied any right or privilege for lawfully engaging in any conduct permitted by this Act or authorized pursuant to Section 11301 of this Act. Provided however, that the existing right of an employer to address consumption that actually impairs job performance by an employee shall not be affected.
4. Definitions

For purposes of this Act:
1. “Marijuana” and “cannabis” are interchangeable terms that mean all parts of the plant Genus Cannabis, whether growing or not; the resin extracted from any part of the plant; concentrated cannabis; edible products containing same; and every active compound, manufacture, derivative, or preparation of the plant, or resin.
2. “One ounce” means 28.5 grams.
3. For purposes of section 11300(a)(ii) “cannabis plant” means all parts of a living Cannabis plant.
4. In determining whether an amount of cannabis is or is not in excess of the amounts permitted by this Act, the following shall apply:
1. only the active amount of the cannabis in an edible cannabis product shall be included;
2. living and harvested cannabis plants shall be assessed by square footage, not by weight in determining the amounts set forth in section 11300(a);
3. in a criminal proceeding a person accused of violating a limitation in this Act shall have the right to an affirmative defense that the cannabis was reasonably related to his or her personal consumption.
5. “residence” means a dwelling or structure, whether permanent or temporary, on private or public property, intended for occupation by a person or persons for residential purposes, and includes that portion of any structure intended for both commercial and residential purposes.
6. “local government” means a city, county, or city and county.
7. “licensed premises” is any commercial business, facility, building, land or area that has a license, permit or is otherwise authorized to cultivate, process, transport, sell, or permit on-premises consumption, of cannabis pursuant to any ordinance or regulation adopted by a local government pursuant to section 11301, or any subsequently enacted state statute or regulation.

Section 4: Prohibition on Furnishing Marijuana to Minors
Section 11361 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to read:
Prohibition on Furnishing Marijuana to Minors
1. Every person 18 years of age or over who hires, employs, or uses a minor in transporting, carrying, selling, giving away, preparing for sale, or peddling any marijuana, who unlawfully sells, or offers to sell, any marijuana to a minor, or who furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer, or give any marijuana to a minor under 14 years of age, or who induces a minor to use marijuana in violation of law shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a period of three, five, or seven years.
2. Every person 18 years of age or over who furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer, or give, any marijuana to a minor 14 years of age or older shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a period of three, four, or five years.
3. Every person 21 years of age or over who knowingly furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer or give, any marijuana to a person aged 18 years or older, but younger than 21 years of age, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a period of up to six months and be fined up to $1,000 for each offense.
4. In addition to the penalties above, any person who is licensed, permitted or authorized to perform any act pursuant to Section 11301, who while so licensed, permitted or authorized, negligently furnishes, administers, gives or sells, or offers to furnish, administer, give or sell, any marijuana to any person younger than 21 years of age shall not be permitted to own, operate, be employed by, assist or enter any licensed premises authorized under Section 11301 for a period of one year.

Section 5: Amendment
Pursuant to Article 2, section 10(c) of the California Constitution, this Act may be amended either by a subsequent measure submitted to a vote of the People at a statewide election; or by statute validly passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor, but only to further the purposes of the Act. Such permitted amendments include but are not limited to:
1. Amendments to the limitations in section 11300, which limitations are minimum thresholds and the Legislature may adopt less restrictive limitations.
2. Statutes and authorize regulations to further the purposes of the Act to establish a statewide regulatory system for a commercial cannabis industry that addresses some or all of the items referenced in Sections 11301 and 11302.
3. Laws to authorize the production of hemp or non-active cannabis for horticultural and industrial purposes.

Section 6: Severability
If any provision of this measure or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the measure that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this measure are severable.

Read article »

Ride for My Brother - David Copestakes

Life is not measured by the amount of breaths we take...

but by the moments that take our breath away.

Celebrating the Life of David Copestakes

October 6, 1956 ~ May 1, 2007

Today would have been my brother's 54th birthday. He loved to ride his motorcycle on the back roads of New Hampshire, so I took him on one of my favorite rides in Sonoma County.

Ride with me baby brother. I will love you always.

Three and one half years ago my brother was killed while riding his motorcycle. A young man driving a dump truck simply backed into the street - right into my baby brother while he was running an errand for his business. He chose to ride his motorcycle for that errand. Maybe if he had been in his truck, he'd be alive today - maybe not. Maybe if the driver of the truck had looked carefully, he would have seen my brother about to pass by. There are many what-ifs when accidents happen - especially of they take the life of someone you love.

After David was killed I paused briefly to decide if I would continue to ride. I had been in a serious motorcycle accident several years prior and had decided to ride again. My brother was proud of me for not surrendering to fear. He was a man who sought experiences. He was a participant, not an observer of life. That phrase above is what was printed on his memorial card because it was his favorite and expressed precisely how he lived his life.

I remember being in wonder when David told me about taking his catamaran out on the Atlantic Ocean and spending the night at sea all by himself. I was in awe when he hiked trails into the wilderness, seeking mountain peaks as goals to achieve. When he turned 50 he asked for my advice - should he throw a big party or spend the money on a motorcycle? Without a doubt, I recommended the bike.

He bought it in New Jersey and decided to ride it home to New Hampshire. The weather was turning cold and was about to rain. I begged him to hire a U-Haul and tuck the bike safely inside to drive home. No - he wanted to ride. When he called me on the road it was dark and very cold and had started to rain. I suggested he find a hotel and wait out the dark - but no - he carried on until he made it safely home. My Bro. He had a goal in mind and he was going to achieve it.

My brother lived only 50 years. When he was born our mother was put into a mental institution and David was raised by Foster parents for his first six years. The next six was pure hell for a child when my mother was released from the hospital and decided she wanted my brother with her. By the time he was 12, my father rescued David and brought him to New England to provide him a stable home and the love of a father and step-mother, Janet. This is where my brother's wounds were healed and he came to grasp a passion for life. He had survived and was grateful.

One of the phrases David used often was “that was then...this is now.” It's how he let go of anything and everything in the past. He placed no blame - he leaned on no excuses or reasons. So many people tell you that the reason they cannot succeed, are filled with fear, etc. is because of the miserable childhood they had. Not my brother, and he certainly could have claimed a truly miserable childhood if he had chosen to. But he didn't. The past was history and it's purpose was to build strength for the future, not to dwell on in the present.

The world lost a wonderful person when David died. He owned a successful business that employed 20 people. He lectured and taught people in his field. He inspired people with his smile and confidence in their abilities. He volunteered for things he believed in. He loved his wife and life partner, Sharon, with all his heart. He loved his family and friends with immense warmth.

When my daughter was young, we read a book about a family who lost their most-loved son. The father forbade anyone from talking about him because it was too painful. But the young man's little sister couldn't help herself. She told stories and recalled memories. Her father was furious and lashed out at her in anger - until - he realized that the stories were bringing his son to life in his painfully twisted heart.  The more stories his daughter told, the more the memories of his son brought warmth, joy and healing to his heart. In time everyone was encouraged to remember the young man with tales of his life and their experiences with him. The father's heart was calmed...his daughter's heart felt the joy of her love for her big brother.

I keep my brother David alive by recalling the sound of his voice....by remembering shared experiences...by recounting all that he was. I know that he will become a mere name in history when all who knew him are no longer on this planet. But while we are, I want to keep as much of him alive as is possible. He LIVES in my heart and mind. I HEAR him talking with me. I took him with me on my ride today so we could share what I love so much.

Look David - here's my favorite place to park and look down the coast...how about we ride to Valley Ford then take the road to Elephant Rock. You'll love it. They just paved it this summer. Nothing but cattle and sheep ranches for miles of perfect hills and curves - then - the reward of Tomales Bay and sun filtered through fog. It's getting cold...we'd better head back. 

Thanks for the ride bro. I will love you always.

Read article »