Next week, Søren Simonsen and Alan Matheson are guest speakers at a presentation of The Next Steps, the first update of the Sustainable Design Assessment Team findings published in a report last fall.
On the evening of June 22nd, the SCDC will host a regional Town Hall meeting at 7 p.m. in the Hales Performing Center on the campus of Southwestern Oregon Community College. The guest speakers will be Soren Simonsen, the 2010 Coos County SDAT Team leader, and Alan Matheson of Envision Utah. Also joining the consultants will be Shelley Mastran, Program Leader for the National Endowment of the Arts “YOUR TOWN” program, which focuses on downtown revitalization, a key identified need for Coos County communities.
Prior to this meeting a day long training session is to be conducted. According to Sandy Messerle, “The Next Steps will involve the setting of priorities and design of implementation plan through public focus groups throughout the region. The leaders/facilitators of these focus groups are being trained by Simonsen and Matheson in the successful processes and strategies utilized for these purposes in case studies in other areas where successful public collaboration has successful results”.
The “SDAT Steering Committee”, whoever they are, selected the leaders of the focus group, at an undisclosed location and through some unadvertised process based upon the following criteria;
The trainers/facilitators invited to participate in this process were selected because of their previous training in community collaboration by the Ford Family Foundation and Leadership Coos programs. Others invited by the SDAT Steering Committee have 10 years or more of successful community partnership experience and collaboration.
Also invited to participate in the process first hand are government leaders at the regional and local levels, who will need to understand the processes in order to understand and respond to the input we will derive through the public process moving forward.
Not to worry, however, for the 99% of us who do not meet these parameters set by persons unknown still have a chance to participate. Messerle says, “…in order that the process continue to be inclusive and transparent, we have contracted with PEG Broadcasting to film and televise the events in their entirety. Anyone with an interest in the training will be able to access it via Channel 14”.
It is unfortunate that so much time has passed between this update and SDAT evaluation without any marketing or publicity. Many people have simply never heard of the SDAT report, including several members of a recent committee chosen to select a new commissioner. A media release addresses the year long silence this way.
“Now that the county and community leaders and residents of Coos County have had several months to review the recommendations of the SDAT team, it’s time to begin the process of community validation, prioritization and development of an implementation strategy towards a sustainable future for Coos County and, in fact, our region,” says Geiser-Messerle.
The final SDAT report encouraged involving all stakeholders not only those aligned with the chamber or Roseburg Lumber’s Ford Family Foundation. “Public participation is the foundation of good community design. The SDAT involves a wide range • of stakeholder viewpoints and utilizes short feedback loops, resulting in sustainable decision-making that has broad public support and ownership.”
On another note. Last fall, during a BOC meeting Sandy Messerle promised to provide a copy of the SCDC budget. Here it is June and despite several emails and requests the budget has not been forthcoming. If anyone else has access to this budget please forward. Everyone, please send your request to Sandy Messerle here
Here’s whats coming to your local theater soon. If you haven’t seen the commercials for these turbines yet, you will soon. The ship is off course, we need to tack now, or we will be on the rocks. Watch Gasland and see how you feel about good old Natural gas for our future fuel.
HOUSTON | Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:13am EDT
(Reuters) – General Electric Co’s Energy unit on Tuesday said its latest turbine design for natural gas-fired power plants will consume less fuel and emit less carbon dioxide than existing GE turbines.
GE Energy is introducing an upgraded Frame 7FA gas turbine to help power plant operators reduce costs and emissions, the company said in a release.
U.S. utilities are expected to build more gas-fired plants in the next decade due to increasing gas supply and the uncertainty of costs tied to proposed carbon legislation.
A typical combined-cycle plant using two new 7FA gas turbines with a single steam turbine would save $2.1 million per year at a gas price of $6 per million British thermal units, the company said, compared to a plant with GE’s existing 7FA turbine.
The more efficient plant would also avoid emissions of 19,000 metric tons of CO2 annually compared to the earlier version, GE said, the equivalent of the heat-trapping emissions of nearly 3,800 cars.
“We have amassed technological advances from across our expansive portfolio of power generating and aviation turbines and delivered them in this upgraded 7FA turbine,” said John Reinker, general manager of gas turbine products for GE Energy.
Natural gas power plants emit only about half the CO2 of traditional coal-fired plants. CO2 is the primary gas blamed for global warming.
GE said it will manufacture the upgraded 7FA turbine in Greenville, South Carolina, and begin shipments in early 2012.
Some of the first new 7FA turbines will be used at the proposed 586-megawatt Oakley Generating Station in Oakley, California. The plant is being developed by Radback Energy and is expected to be transferred to Pacific Gas and Electric Co after reaching commercial operation, GE sa
I signed up to participate in the public transportation group with the original SDAT day at SOCC. The meeting I participated in, could have been a meeting of the Port of Coos Bay and it’s fan club. They overwhelmingly dominated the meeting; since after all, these people are professionals at meetings and their games, they dominated the session. (Their careers depend on that savvy.) I was disappointed that our facilitator did not seem aware of this. Of course, these people had been her guide during the short time they were in the area, the people who have hired her, in a sense. They essentially controlled the environment and the discourse and I’m sure the results show that.
Why no comment cards at the end of the session? Seems that kind of input is helpful, especially to the facilitator, and would reveal shortcomings of the system used.
I also felt that the time was too short to cover the open agenda. If I were facilitating, I would have established one goal to be accomplished at the beginning. As it was, I heard only one new idea during the hours spent. Which, on reflection, is not bad.
Some people will NEVER, EVER stand and fight for one damn thing.
NEVER !!
And that is how this group of grifters are allowed to continue to make absolutely fools of those of us trying to live in Coos County.
You don’t see any problem with private invitation only all day meetings, attended by a select group of individuals? Are you serious?
Do you think they’re baking cupcakes for the rest of “us?”
My guess is these ‘committees’ and their direction was decided long before the rest of us were even aware of them. And this “public” meeting will mean absolutely nothing, nothing.
But if you want to play with them blindfolded with one arm tied behind your back and it makes you feel you are a part of it, be my guest. But don’t expect your ‘participation’ to mean one damn thing, because it doesn’t.
Its not a coincidence that the people objecting the most to the Jordan Cove Project, are also the people with enough foresight to see that gas and oil are doomed as future energy sources, despite the advertising blitz the industry is currently doing, touting the same line about all the jobs their creating for america. Yes we need the jobs, just not those jobs for a dying industry, Its also not a coincidence that the same people promoting LNG also are the first to tell you that solar, wind, and wave are not ready for prime time “YET”. They’re wrong and we know it. These people don’t want to miss the boat just in case their current idea fails. They might lose power if that happens.
Here is what will happen. The chamber, FONSI, SCDC crowd will suddenly discover that renewable energy and green industry is where it is at and embrace it as if it were their idea and never give credit to the likes of Jody McCaffree or moi. Personally, I don’t care as long as they do it.
One would almost suspect that the ‘elite’ are afraid of having the informed public working side by side because their incompetence would be revealed. Next, we will see them trying to co-opt the renewable energy movement. And about time, too!
This is same load of crap the timber beast, Roseburg Forest Products,the DTO, CCDand South Coast Business Development and the Port has been feeding the people of Coos and Douglas counties for the last 40 years. Everyone who agrees with their schemes is welcome and included but anyone who asks questions is frozen out. These self serving jerks have produced jobs for themselves and a wasteland for everyone else. They have no credibility out side of their little circle jerk and any ideas they come up with will be the same old same old. I am just waiting for the first train to arrive in Eugene.
Dear Ms. Messerle, you are obligated by law to release tax returns upon request. Your predecessor did so, upon request, and in excruciating detail, and at the speed of light. Certainly a budget would easier to release. You are spending the taxpayers money – for what? You are being paid an exorbitant salary and perks – what have you accomplished? I would not want the people to see that SCDC spends about $200,000 annually and accomplishes nothing. At least nine of the other jobs creating organizations around town do something. When you arrived here and were given the job, you promised to “go slow”. Nobody expected you to go this slowly.
Subterfuge is not claimed above. What is claimed is the continued adherence to the old way of doing things around here and that the very recommendations of the SDAT report are being ignored.
Although I’m glad you’re watch-dogging this, I’m not too concerned about this development. The town hall meeting is where the visioning and planning will take place. Greater transparency in the selection of the facilitators would have been desirable, but I don’t think it undermines the process in any significant way. I don’t suspect subterfuge because any hint of surreptitiousness would completely invalidate the whole idea behind the process. I could be wrong, but I don’t think that’s what SCDC is up to with the SDAT project. If strong-arming its objectives was the goal, there are far more effective ways to do it.