LIAA's Dog and Pony Show Plays to Captivated Audiences

[XLFD]

Wikipedia says:  A "Dog and pony show" is a colloquial term which has come to mean a highly promoted, often over-staged performance, presentation, or event designed to sway or convince opinion for political, or less often, commercial ends. Typically, the term is used in a pejorative sense to connote disdain, jocular lack of appreciation, or distrust of the message being presented or the efforts undertaken to present it.  

The Land Information Access Association (LIAA) came into town with some trained dogs and trick ponies on May 15 to hold a public forum to explain their part and their reasoning in helping our community draw up their individual comprehensive master plans to make them resilient and sustainable.  The cost of the services they provide our area was estimated close to $200,000, and our community only had to pay a little over a tenth of that.  It is likely our area's Planning Committees will still have to spend the usual amount for drafting their master plan, which by state law they should be drafting every five years, but now they will have the option to throw in a lot of new material showing they have learned about the concepts being fed to them by LIAA. 

The following day, after our guests finished napping overnight at the Baymont, they had a "leadership conference" scheduled in the convention room there with community leaders scheduled to last about six hours. 

At both events there was no indication that our community leaders are doubting any of the information they're bringing to our table, even though most of it is speculative, and potentially costly to our community's future.  But there is a lot of indication that the showmen from LIAA are offering a tainted set of goods that they don't even believe in.  I was at both meetings and here is what I have to report.

Dog Show:  The May 15 Public Forum

Billed as a meeting "to discuss the [Resilient Ludington] project and to organize work groups on a number of community planning topics", the organizers looked to have a large turnout, as noted in this Press Release .  The website had an itinerary, but the people in attendance also got an agenda for the evening when they arrived for the 6:30 PM meeting in the basement of Ludington City Hall.  It looked like this:  Draft Agenda 5-15-2014 Meeting, and the agenda was kept. 

You will note that after a brief welcome consisting of a round-robin of introductions by everyone, the agenda has three presentations before ending with a more interactive exercise.  The first irony noted was that although it was noticed as a "public forum" and a potential open meeting and had quorums of public bodies (making it an actual open meeting), there was no period set aside for public comments. 

The first presentation was made by LIAA Executive Director Joe VanderMeulen, Ph. D.  Joe has a friendly demeanor and talks pleasantly about what sounds like pleasant topics, and concernedly about topics of concern.  He trumpets the extent and importance of what LIAA is doing for the community of western Mason County.  I would strongly consider buying a used car from him, or a cure-all potion that tasted like sugar-water.  His presentation allows no questions, has no new information, but sets up the second act.

The next presenter is the grand showman and self-designated 'State Climatologist', Jeff Andresen, Ph. D.  One could devote a whole thread to debunking the junk science he threw out for public consumption, leading with a lot of graphs and tables to make the unwary believe in 'climate change', but I already have in this thread which is worth reading again, because over 90% of his presentation and data sets were copied and pasted from the presentation he made at Monroe Michigan. 

The 10% that wasn't duplicated was more in tune with dismissing this last Midwestern winter, which set so many cold records and ice cover records that many of his charts and tables depicting Great Lakes conditions would look more foolish.  He made the same presentation at the beginning of the next day, so I will discuss it more there as a new irony emerged.  He was restrained at the end to answer too many questions due to time factors, but three were lobbed from the audience, all softballs that did not question any of his premises or assertions.  I almost thought these may have been 'planted' questions used to bolster his offering.

The third presenter was Dusty Christensen, LLA, once again of LIAA.  I don't know what LLA stands for, but the most appropriate I could find is "Low Level Agent" in LLA acronyms because he surely doesn't look like he's from the Lesotho Liberation Army.  Dusty's a young guy who comes off at his presentations as being one of LIAA's technicians; he has done a bit of statistical research on the area and his presentation dealt more along putting Joe's (LIAA's) visions into pragmatic action in our community based on our demographics, assets and liabilities. 

He set up the last exercise which allowed the audience to participate in small groups with each other, under the guidance of those present from LIAA.  Tables with recent aerial views of the western Mason County area were set up and groups were asked to label three of our most important assets and three of our most blatant liabilities.  The tangible results of this exercise is likely to be presented later, but they were collected and lightly discussed before the public was dismissed. 

For a public forum, this was the closest anyone got to be heard-- from this very directed exercise.  The public was dished out climate propaganda and fed a lot of homilies about what LIAA can do for them to make us more resilient and sustainable, whatever those terms really mean.  It seemed more like the introductory meeting of an indoctrination camp to me. 

Pony Show:  The May 16 Leadership Conference

It was unclear to me whether the general public was invited to the so-called 'Leadership Conference', so I arrived fashionably late and asked Ludington's own Community Development Director Heather Venzke Tykoski, who was manning the sign-in table, whether I could actually have a seat among the county's leadership.  I found out that I was able, and since I wasn't an invited guest, I was advised to make out a label for myself so that I could be recognized, and so I did.

And received a few papers to let me know what was going on and what was in store for the future; this included a synopsis of the day's activities, another "Agenda" if you will for the six hour summit:

I came in towards the beginning of Dr. Andresen's speech, and the place was freezing, literally freezing.  The outside temperature was 34 degrees and the Baymont planners had not took that into consideration, only putting the heat on at the last minute.  Most attendees, ironically still had their coats on while they listened to Dr. Andresen, State Climatologist, rattle out why global warming was occurring in a speech reminiscent of the previous night, except for the fact that you could often see his breath vaporize as it came out of his mouth.

Was this irony lost on the listeners, many who were there the previous night?  There was no outward appearance that it was during or after the speech; how could there be?  This is the state climatologist talking and shivering about how warm it will be in a few years.  Since this was a replay of his previous presentations I wondered about some of the self-contradictory aspects of his assertions. 

For example, he says that according to observations from Caro, Michigan the amount of rainy days has increased from about 90 days to 120 days per year since the early 19th century.  Then in a few minutes tells the audience that droughts, and conversely, heavy rainfall incidents are more likely to be occurring in the climate-crazy future.  Since NOAA rainfall charts show that there has been no trend in relative rainfall over the years, shouldn't a place like Caro, Michigan be less likely to have a sustained drought if they have 30 more days (and climbing) of rain per year now?  Shouldn't they also be less likely to have severe rainfall if the normal rainfall is more widely spread through the year?  That's what mathematics says is the case.  

Dr. Andresen, State Climatologist, continues to use charts and tables of questionable studies instead of straightforward ones from reputable weather services, while dismissing any sort of contradictory data that blows holes in his projections and theories.  In the one year since the Resilient Monroe speech, where he made predictions about how mild this and future winters were to be, he looks at his old charts, the computer-projections made with premises that have been proven flawed, and tells us with chattering teeth that our temperatures are going to be a lot higher in 85 years, and it will be a problem we will need to address now.  And yet, I saw no other members of the audience stifling laughter like I was forced to.   

The next speaker was a stand-in for the scheduled speaker, who nevertheless did a good job in explaining the economics about why people should buy locally if they want the money to stay within their communities.  She explained how little money is retained in the community when you buy at one of the chain stores, like Meijer's or Wal-Mart, or eat at one of the chain restaurants, like Taco Bell or McDonald's.  More than a quarter per dollar is retained locally when you eat at a locally based restaurant or buy goods at a local merchant than when you buy from a chain store centralized elsewhere.

After two more brief presentations concluded, the meeting served everyone pre-made lunches from Subway.  So much for the organizers buying meals from the local restaurants and keeping money in the community; on the other hand, the organizers of the event were from out of town so this worked better for them anyway.  More irony.

Those two presentations were about resiliency as regards community health and low-impact development.  The former presupposed responding to a few of the crises that Dr. Andresen said would come about through our 'constantly changing climate'.  The latter looked at schemes to creatively make parks and other constructions more sustainable, more green, and in the process more expensive and more difficult to maintain. 

While people were consuming their Connecticut-based chain store subs, the best presentation was given by Guy Meadows, a Ph. D. from Michigan Tech University.  He offered a very interesting lecture on shoreline dynamics, a lecture that was devoid of any reliance on climate suppositions.  He went over cyclical changes of the lakeshore along Lake Michigan showing some time-lapse photos and illustrating the physics of what happens along a shore when you consider the normal currents, obstructions, and the natural buildup and reduction of lakeshores.  Very informative, very well backed by photos and data over time, and very much attuned to common sense.  Very unlike the State Climatologist from MSU or the Urban Planning Doctor from UM that was to follow him, in that he avoided speculation and opinion, like a good scientist should.

The next speaker, Richard Norton, Ph. D., offered some of what he had in the past, but he seemed more dodgy about things this time.  Dr. Norton offered some of his views on two topics:  an oblique overview of his urban planning studies and the powers and authority inherent in an area's planning commissions.  Of everyone associated with LIAA, he is likely to be the most threatening, since he tells these planning commissions and governing bodies that they have powers greater than the rights of the individuals they supposedly serve.  It's a dangerous concept, and is the gist behind what the whole effort by LIAA and its donors is about. 

For sustainability and resiliency are feel-good representations that are hard to disagree with until you plan to put them in practice.  Most everyone wants to have their descendants inherit a planet with a rosy future; as stewards they should make sure the Earth can be maintained.  There is a lot of human activity that is wasteful, and cannot continue to be done indefinitely into the future without hardship. 

The problems arise when one considers how we are to meet the challenges of the future.  These concepts of sustainability and resiliency both fall under the United Nation's Agenda 21 guidelines in that the implementation cannot go forth without the loss of personal property rights and the host of freedoms that naturally come about from it.  When all property is communal, Utopia does not come about.  In practice, the opposite comes into effect: tyranny and exploitation. 

The concept of private property actually leads to the maximal utilization of the property, and the preservation of the value of that property to its owner.  This simple maxim is why the socialistic blueprints outlined in Agenda 21 and marketed discretely by LIAA and its partners in dismantling the foundations of private ownership of property is quite dangerous to our American way of life, and ergo our western Mason County way of living. 

I ducked out (for another appointment I had to make) after Liz Remick, the coordinator of Mason County Emergency Planning gave her presentation using the lingo of the sustainability crowd.  It is truly disheartening seeing the leaders of our community at this meeting (and all prior meetings) becoming followers of these academics and grant-bestowers without them showing the least amount of reservation into what they are getting into. 

If you think the road diet for Downtown Ludington was an aberration of their usual sanity, just wait until you see what they continue to devise-- devoting your tax dollars and property to their plans that are likewise not rationally based.  Here is their upcoming schedule of Community planning sessions  CAT Meetings  if you plan to go and be heard, you will probably have to interject yourself into the conversation and suffer the glazed-eye looks of disdain from the true believers.

[Willy]

Wonderful explanation of what transpired at those meetings X. I think local authority figures are flattered that they were picked to be a part of this LIAA agenda. Most of these people are small town personalities and when others who represent the "big time" views of the World show interest in them they fawn like teenage girls over a rock star. If those people would only do their homework about who is selling them this load of crap called " resiliency and sustainability" they just might figure out that they and the people they represent are going to be on the receiving end of a well place pole up our rears. I've been to two of these meetings and like you, I found out quickly that there is very little time or room for public comment. Only a few questions were excepted from the audience and those did have the appearance of being asked by "ringers". We have, in our local Government, a large cadre of dumb clucks who are easily swayed by slick sales people. There doesn't appear to be any independent thinkers amongst them , only a bunch of followers. How did we get so lucky. This situation is almost like a traveling salesman selling dumb hillbillys "magic potions" that when swallowed  will cure  all their ailments.

"Now what did that feller from LIAA say? Oh yeah he said we can be  resilient and sustainable. What the heck does that mean Floyd?"

"Well Jake I think that means we's no longer be having fleas in our drawers or jam betwixt our toes. Yahoo I'm all fer that".

[XLFD]

I am unwilling to believe that all of our local Planning Commission and other public officials are total rubes, but I do believe they are highly susceptible to peer pressure and generally unwilling to do any 'counter' research of their own when an alleged 'expert' or state official tells them something to believe in, and denying it may mean depriving their government unit from grant opportunities. 

[Willy]

Can you explain the almost total acceptance by our local officials of the BS spewed by LIAA without so much as a question as to why this Constitutional repressive agency is here in our community? Other communities have thrown these bums out and have even passed laws forbidding the implementations of Agenda 21's socialistic agenda. I have seen nothing but childish naivety demonstrated by our local officials. It's either that or they are true believers of socialistic governance and are more than willing to relinquish our freedoms and rights.

By the way X, I didn't know your name was Tom Roha.