Cisco’s Vice President of Global Innovations Rick Hutley, who will speak in Grass Valley on Friday, is one of the most visible tech executives nowadays. I used to write about Cisco for The Chronicle at the tech giant’s beginnings, and years later, I heard Hutley speak. Here he is at a tech show in Las Vegas last year, discussing “collaboration.” It would be a good topic for Rick to address when he speaks here.
As “TechForum” expands under the watch of SESF, a think tank with a highly partisan political track record, I hope the group collaborates with the community to choose speakers from all sides of the political spectrum.
It will be imperative if groups such as the county and county-funded groups, such as the Economic Resource Council, are going to be “sponsors.”
After all, our county is a diverse bunch. SESF board member and “research director” Dr. George Rebane lives here, but so does Dr. Judith Kildow (who helped invite CARB’s Mary Nichols to speak in Nevada City). Our family fully expects all of them to collaborate on any county-sponsored speaker series.
Tech leaders also are a diverse bunch, and they call for addressing many of the country’s problems, such as education, healthcare and — yes — global warming. Here’s a bipartisan Silicon Valley policy and political group I used to write about for years, TechNet. It is the policy and political network of the CEOs. Here’s the TechNet statement on the value of AB 32, the state’s climate change legislation.
Filed under: Uncategorized
“A fat piece of human debris”? —
My puzzlement over private “think tank” SES Foundation’s role as “host” of a speaker series where our county, the Economic Resource Council and others were listed as sponsors did not go over well on SES board member, research director and “TechForum” host George Rebane’s blog, “Rebane’s Ruminations.”
My post raised the issue of a launching and hosting a nonpartisan community lecture series (like successful ones sponsored by TechNet in Silicon Valley) from a group with a decidedly partisan track record. But it did so in a perfectly straightforward and civil matter.
After all, the SES Foundation has issued alarmist and politically partisan reports on the environment, community planning and global warming for years, and even county officials questioned the veracity of one of them (on government pensions) in a newspaper article in The Union in 2008.
It read: “Deputy County Executive Officer Joe Christoffel said McDaniel’s figure of $48.1 million represents what the county would be short if it had to pay off all its pension liabilities immediately.”
That’s not how it works, though — you don’t pay it off immediately. I provided the links to the reports and articles. Check them out.
I also suggested a double standard of the SES Foundation in supporting its own lecture series but attacking a previous one, where CARB Chairman Mary Nichols spoke. (For background, Nichols is a nemesis to some of the SES board members, because of her support of AB32, the state’s global warming legislation). In fact, some SES board members lobbied our county supervisors to table that lecture series — and that’s just what happened.
The vociferous political activism of several of the SES Foundation’s board members is hardly a community secret, either.
But instead of attacking the message, anonymous “sock puppets” were freely allowed to attack the messenger on “Rebane’s Ruminations.” Some examples:
•A fellow named “Billy T” commented on George’s blog that I was a “fat piece of human debris,” “fat boy” and a “fat sailor” — all in separate posts.
•”John Galt”: “Let your supervisor know” that Pelline is “unworthy” (i.e., lobby them to oppose renewing a contract to manage the county’s tourism website — never mind the merits of their work).
•”Gregory” said: “I am not a moderate,” he made fun of my liberal arts degree at UC Berkeley and said I have “little knowledge” of math and science. (In fact, I have voted for Democrats and Republicans over the years, including our state Senator Doug LaMalfa, and I took math and science courses in college). Sign your name Gregory!
•”Billy T”: This fellow also made light of letting one of George’s regular commenters post where our 9-year-old son went to school this fall, apparently to “win” a discussion — an issue that required our family to meet with the school and law enforcement officials and discuss safety.
All of this is the price we pay for “free speech” in our community, no doubt a reflection of the community’s past “power structure” (but not the present or the future). We are a community in transition — a more diverse bunch.
Let’s hope George Rebane and his friends at SES Foundation — who have been entrusted with the task of hosting a community lecture series “sponsored” by the county, ERC and others — can help spark a more intellectual and insightful debate than one that focuses on whether somebody is a “fat piece of human debris.”
And let’s be transparent about what this group has stood for and hold them accountable for a successful lecture series. That’s not too much to ask.
Here’s the latest this morning from one of our former county supervisors and current CABPRO Executive Director Todd Juvinall on SES Foundation board member’s Russ Steele’s blog:
“Perhaps the lefty blogs here and elsewhere receive George Soros money? Media Matters and many on the left do there dirty deeds and then complain that every conservative blog gets Koch Brothers money in order to defame them. Maybe the “sailor” gets some dough from Georgie?”
No, Todd, the “sailor” doesn’t get “some dough from Georgie.”
This group needs to get outdoors. Even on a gloomy day, the Star Wars movie would be a good respite.
SES Foundation board member Russ Steele, supported by fellow board member Barry Pruett, is running away from the truth about this issue on his blog.
A rebuttal on Russ’ blog, “Setting the record straight,” is here.
http://2012nevadacounty.wordpress.com/2012/02/20/setting-the-record-straight/
•Russ claims that “The SESF Board does not currently have an official position on AGW.” But wait. Russ wrote a paper addressing climate change and said so in 2009, related during a meeting with Tech Test students: “The discussion gave me an opportunity to introduce a those sitting nearby to my Dalton Minimum Returns blog, and the paper I wrote for SESF on Cooler Temps – Dalton Minimum Returns? This paper is available on the SESF Web Site on the Reports Page.”
http://ncwatch.typepad.com/media/2009/06/bright-minds-and-sunspots-.html
When I clicked on this link on Saturday, I was directed to a broken link for the report. Now you just are directed to a list of the other reports. Either way, where’s this report that Russ pointed to. Why isn’t it on the website?
•Then Russ writes “SESF suggested that the county had to pay its unfunded liabilities right away. Not true.”
But as The Union article reads: ““Deputy County Executive Officer Joe Christoffel said McDaniel’s figure of $48.1 million represents what the county would be short if it had to pay off all its pension liabilities immediately.”
“The complete report can be downloaded (here)” according to a post here:
http://sesfoundation.org/reports-2/
But the written report is not available on the website — just like the one on climate change. Instead, there’s only a power point presentation on the report:
http://sierrastudiesfoundation.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nevco_ul_bos_27oct09_final_mcm.pdf
The complete report was widely circulated at the time of The Union article in 2008. Why isn’t it posted on the website?
•Russ also writes “SESF as an organization never attacked Kildow’s lecture series, as claimed. Our views are not the official views of the SESF Board, which is implied in the Sierra Foothills Report.”
Here’s what Russ wrote:
http://ncwatch.typepad.com/media/2011/01/omg-the-board-of-supervisors-are-about-to-endorse-a-science-re-education.html
” You may remember that Judith Kildow was the one who brought CARB Chairwoman Mary Nichols to lectures us on Ozone and the great benefits of AB32.” (sarcasm)
Here’s what George wrote (even cross-linking to Russ’ report):
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2011/01/politically-endorsed-science.html
“Given their well-known ideological bents and the tentative list of first year lecture titles/subjects, the organizers appear to be launching a program promoting California’s highly politicized AB32 global warming agenda (more detail on this is found here on Russ Steele’s NCMW).”
And here’s what the SES Foundation wrote about Prop. 23 in a report “Prop. 23, the impact on Nevada County.” The same opposition to the “global warming agenda” appear in both the official report and in their blog posts:
http://sesf.typepad.com/files/prop-23-tech-note_10-04a.pdf
“: Passing Proposition 23 to suspend the remainder of AB32 will have a positive economic impact on Nevada County, reducing the risk of escalating state mandated carbon taxes and fees.”
“Supporters further assert that suspending AB 32 will not affect global warming because California’s GHG emissions comprise only 1.4% of the world’s total emissions.”
Then, and I fail to understand this one at all, Pruett purports to speak for the “community at large.” What makes him think he is qualified and has the credibility to do that?
Let it go, guys. Post all the SES Foundation reports (including the one on global warming and government pensions) on the SES Foundation site, and let the public scrutinize your record. We need more transparency here.
And last of all, if it’s suddenly of great concern to you, please add a disclaimer to your blogs that the opinions on your blog do not reflect the official views of the SES Foundation.
It’s extremely important since you routinely cover the same topics on your blogs (AGW, government public policy, etc.) as the SES Foundation does. We need to know which hat you’re wearing, to avoid any perception that the community lecture series will be anything but a nonpartisan event. We look forward to a lecture series that exposes all views and is not one sided (a concern that you guys expressed in criticizing the Judy Kildow series). After all, we’re a diverse bunch here.
Thanks for listening.
An open forum, where “all” of our “diverse bunch”, could express their position through their expertise, is the only acceptable presentation we should expect. It has Nevada County as a sponsor, and if it has our name on it, our community deserves a level field.
Flat Earth or round? Some very eloquent “professional’s” could “sell” it either way,