[GPSCC-chat] MH Times Column for 10/1

[Wes Rolley]

I had a problem deciding what to think about Morgan Hill mayoral race. I 
don't think that I was the only one. The signs posted all over town 
don't begin to give us any idea of what the candidates will actually do 
when they are elected and the one mailer I have gotten, from Art 
College, only reiterates the point that he is not happy with the manner 
in which the City has protected our tax dollars.

I did, however, have a means to resolve this for me. Since I write this 
column, I decided to ask each of the three to comment on an issue that 
is very important to me with the warning that I would use it for this 
column. I wrote: "I believe that our response to climate change, or lack 
of such a response, is the defining issue of our age.

I want to know: (1) do you agree with that position? If not, then why 
not. (2) what do you believe our local community should be doing now in 
response? (3) are you willing to provide local public funding in support 
of any project you identify in the answer to #2?"

There are many important issues with innumerable advocates demanding our 
attention. I focused on climate change because it is the one issue, 
other than the use of nuclear weapons, that has the potential to end 
civilization as we are living it now. As Co-Chair of the EcoAction 
Committee, Green Party US, I spent many hours on this issue, analyzing 
all of the reports including those of the climate deniers. To summarize 
several years of study, one side of the argument has facts, the other 
has a well financed disinformation machine.

Art College's response to the first question was "No, I do not agree 
with your position. The science and research done to arrive at you 
conclusion was faulty, manipulated and full f errors. I cannot support 
junk science and this is truly in that category."

College has clearly not done his homework. The climate denial 
disinformation from Sen. Inhofe (R-OK) on the Senate's web site, 
published at government expense, are more filled with errors, 
distortions and lies than anything written by any climate scientist. It 
would seem that College has lost faith in science as an institution, 
much as he seems to have no faith in our local government as an 
institution. Such a view is not uncommon these days, but will be the 
subject of another column. It is, however, not the view that I want my 
Mayor to have.

College has been effective independent voice, calling attention to the 
failings of our city leaders at times. He should continue speaking out 
while he devotes more time to understanding what climate change is 
really about and how it will affect us all.

Marby Lee was a bit closer to what I think, but was also unwilling to 
deal with the problem. Her response to my first question was: "I believe 
that there are many issues affecting our community, and many questions 
about the validity of climate change. To call this one issue the 
defining issue of our age is to discount all the challenges our 
community, state, and country face at this time." Like College, Lee has 
voiced doubts about climate change, or at least it's importance. If she 
has other issue that she feels are more important, she has not made that 
clear to me.

Lee's response to my second question tells me more about her "Morgan 
Hill has taken a very proactive environmental agenda, and while I agree 
there are some actions that should be taken to keep our environment 
clean and safe, I also get concerned when actions in support of this 
agenda are a detriment to our economy -- I have mostly seen this in 
higher costs to implement such an agenda." This is the pseudo argument 
of Prop 23, that we can not afford to do anything about climate change 
now while the economy is so bad. This argument, often voiced by the 
anti-environment lobby, will never change. It will always be the reason 
for doing nothing other than continuing the policies that make the 
problem worse. Lee's willingness to condemn us, and our children, to an 
unpleasant future for short term gain should not by rewarded by election 
to higher office.

Only Steve Tate seemed willing to take effective local action. In 
response to my third question, Tate wrote "I believe it is still a high 
Council priority, it is definitely for me, but we have to deal with our 
financial situation. We do still have Tony, he is still pursuing many of 
the programs/strategies on a priority basis, so we have not in any way 
abandoned our efforts."

I don't always agree with Tate, but he will have my vote in that he 
takes my issue seriously and is willing to work to make effective local 
change.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cagreens.org/pipermail/sosfbay-discuss_lists.cagreens.org/attachments/20100930/7512db69/attachment.html>