National RAB discussion

[arc@igc.org]

 CARRERPRO BBS PARTICIPANTS INTERESTED IN FORMING A NATIONAL RAB NETWORK
 ARC ECOLOGY

 RECENT DISCUSSIONS ABOUT NATIONAL RAB NETWORK STRUCTURE

There has been a bit of traffic on the Careerpro BBS lately regarding 
who will lead a national RAB network. A number of messages have been 
posted about Arc, or Careerpro or the establishment of a board of 
directors. I've taken some time out to think about the issues that 
have been raised and would like to make the following observations. 

> While a discussion of structure is entirely in order, we haven't 
 defined the project yet. 
> Aside from some short general principles, I don't think there is 
 any agreement yet on purpose and mission.
> The audience participating in the discussion is far too small to 
 be at all representative of the community-based parties interested in 
 the outcome of the discussion. 

Therefore we would probably benefit from an effort to more completely 
define what it is we want to do. We do however appear to have some 
agreement on two points:

1. There appears to be general support for a national RAB network/ 
 caucus of some sort.

There appears to be general agreement, at least on the Careerpro BBS, 
that there should be some form of ongoing coordination between RABs 
members beyond the discussions that are currently taking place on the 
net. While some individuals have expressed reasonable reservations 
regarding their past experience with the national entities, others 
seemed to be concerned that the current state of affairs around base 
cleanup necessitates the creation of a network or caucus despite the 
difficulties inherent in organizing a national effort. Most folks 
seem eager to see something built.

2. There appears to be significant interest in the January 1998 
Caucus meeting in Phoenix

Arc has received a number of positive responses on the upcoming 
January meeting. Organizations like the Rural Alliance for Military 
Accountability have expressed their interest (as RAB members) in 
attending the Caucus as have RAB community members and CoChairs. A 
number of individuals have asked about travel scholarships. Given the 
Email response combined with interest expressed to us from other 
quarters, Arc is moving ahead with the organizing of this meeting.

So clearly there is interest in creating a RAB network/caucus and the 
January meeting is coming up which will provide an appropriately 
attended forum to act on these points. Therefore we need some 
process for both defining what it is we want to accomplish and to 
develop a proposed structure for how we want to accomplish those goals. 

To accomplish that task, I would propose the following process: 

STEP 1. The development of Discussion Papers on mission and structure

Arc proposes that between now and January 2, 1998 Discussion Papers be 
developed which discuss proposals for the activities and structure of 
the RAB campaign. The papers needn't very long. However to really 
expedite the discussion, I suggest that the Papers should include a 
presentation on the following items:

> The author's view of the goals and objectives of the effort;
> The types of activities the author believes the entity should undertake; and 
> A discussion of the structure the author envisions as most likely 
 to advance the goals, objectives and activities they have identified.

STEP 2. The Distribution of Discussion Papers

Arc proposes that Careerpro and Arc agree to circulate the Discussion 
Papers. The Discussion Papers would circulated via Email and posted 
on the Careerpro BBS. Arc Ecology will mail out a synopsis of the 
various Discussion Papers we have received with our Caucus outreach 
materials and will provide full hard copy versions in the Caucus 
packets which will then be distributed to those individuals who are 
participating in the January Caucus. (Full versions of the Discussion 
Papers will be provided to all who request them regardless of 
attendance at the January Caucus)

The distribution of the Discussion Papers over the Careerpro BBS will 
hopefully generate ongoing discussion and refinements in individual 
papers. It is important to remember that the Careerpro BBS is 
monitored by individuals within the DoD, its contractors, the USEPA 
and other regulators. So if one wishes to raise strategic issues 
confidentially, send the Email directly to the individuals and/or 
groups you wish to talk to. 

Arc is proposing a cut off date of January 2, 1998 for the receipt of 
Discussion Papers. This is to enable us to distribute the Papers and 
the January Caucus packet in a timely fashion. It is not meant to be 
a cut-off of ongoing discussions.

STEP 3. The Discussion Papers will be presented, discussed, voted 
upon or tabled at the January 1998 Caucus 

Arc proposes that while there will of-course be ongoing discussion via 
the net and phones that the January 1998 Caucus meeting provide the 
forum for discussing and adopting the recommendations in these 
Discussion Papers. Arc Ecology is providing professional facilitation 
for the meeting. Any decisions at the Caucus meeting would represent 
the agreement of those at the meeting. 

STEP 4. The mission and structure discussion be held on January 27th 
in the afternoon 

To ensure sufficient time for the discussion, we propose amending the 
agenda we uploaded for the January Caucus. We propose a caucus 
meeting for the afternoon of the 27th. The meeting would occur while 
members of the DERTF tours Williams Air Force Base. Although this 
would lengthen the meeting somewhat, it would have the additional 
benefit of providing more time for the background and DERTF 
discussions on the 26th as well.

Clarifying Arc's position regarding the structure of the Caucus

While I appreciate Curt's endorsement and am concerned about issues he 
raised, I think his and some of the recent traffic has somewhat 
confused Arc's purpose in calling the January 1998 caucus meeting. 
I'd like to clarify it now. 

1. Arc is committed to building a national campaign around RABs

Arc supports the creation of a network of RAB community members. 
Like Sam Goodhope, we believe that the current situation is 
deteriorating. It is our view that the strategies implemented in to 
address the issue on the national level since 1990 have had very 
little real affect. In-fact we are quite concerned that we are losing 
ground that was gained in the 1980's with regard to base cleanup. We 
see a national caucus of RAB community members as being one of the 
more effective approaches we can be taking to rectify the situation.

Arc, like many groups, has seen the creation of a number of networks 
over the years that have done very little, so we're very much 
interested in participating in the creation of a group that will 
actually deal with the issues RABs face. We prefer to use the word 
caucus because it implies the group will be taking action. 

2. Arc has no fixed view of the structure of that campaign 

In-so-far as a structure is concerned, while Arc has its own point of 
view, we also believe that our opinions are best informed when they 
are informed by other people. We see a number of structures that could 
work. Some examples: 

> one model that has worked is the creation of a Caucus that has a 
secretariat that provides the administrative and campaign support; 

> another model is the distribution of very specific tasks such as 
technical support, maintenance of a BBS, outreach on Capitol Hill 
among specific organizations who in-turn are responsible for 
implementing a strategy that has been set by a general Caucus or a 
board of directors; 

> a third model would be to establish smaller working groups of RAB 
members to focus on developing policy on very specific issues such as 
health risk assessment or RAB guidances with the overall program 
coordinated by a RAB council or board of directors.

Each of these models have positive and negative elements to them. We 
are very much interested in hearing other perspectives on these and 
other alternatives. Furthermore, aside from the question of goals, 
objectives and structure there is the immediate question of how to 
address the issues being discussed by DERTF. As a result, Arc does 
not have a set agenda regarding the structure of a national entity or 
how it will operate. 

3. Arc's objectives for the January Caucus

Our objectives for the January caucus are therefore to: 

> Bring as many RAB community members from around the United States 
 as we can together to participate in the discussion
> Discuss topics on the upcoming DERTF meeting agenda
> Discuss and possibly create a national RAB caucus and structure

4. Maximizing the participation of RAB members

With all due respect to the valuable service that Careerpro provides, 
as I've stated in the past, one of Arc's ongoing concerns with regard 
to using the BBS as the vehicle for making these decisions is the 
audience participating in the discussion is far too small to be at all 
representative of the community-based parties interested in the 
outcome. From our point of view the more RAB members that participate 
in the discussion, the more likely it is that the outcome will reflect 
the opinions of most RAB members. The reason we believe the January 
Caucus is the logical venue for making such decisions is because we 
will be making every effort to get a responsibly sized sample of RAB 
members to attend from around the country. Decisions made at that venue wil
l have greater credibility because they will be more representative of 
RABs as a whole.

5. An open decision-making process

Arc is committed to democratic decision-making processes and the 
Caucus will be no exception. As indicated above, Arc will be hiring 
an independent contractor to facilitate the Caucus. If a structure 
is created for RAB community member cooperation at the January caucus, 
Arc's goal is that it be done as a result of an open deliberative 
democratic process involving the Caucus' participants.

6. Following up the Caucus

After the conclusion of the Caucus, Arc will be producing its 
proceedings and will distribute them back to all RAB members, and to 
all associated organizations and individuals that have requested 
copies. While the contents of the proceedings will be decided at the 
Caucus, presumably they will include the results of the meeting and 
details about the decisions that were made including points of contact 
to follow-up on the national RAB campaign.

So that's as much of our point of view right now as we know of it. I 
hope these comments are helpful in-terms of moving the discussions 
forward. Thanks for your interest.

On behalf of Arc Ecology

Saul Bloom