Thoughts on Rules and Regulations....

Recently, I have been asked my opinion on the nature of rules and regulations as they apply to any number of different Sea Ranch issues such as fuel load management, view restoration, membership dues assessment, the DCEM and even the process of campaigning itself.

Rather than comment on each one individually, I'd like to share my general thoughts on rules and regulations, as I believe they can be applied to the specific concerns listed above.

I may take a while to get there, but I promise that I will.

As an ethics practitioner, I find that in dealing with organizations both large and small, the desire to establish an ethical culture is a strong one. However, it's never as easy as folks think, and it doesn't happen over night, but over time.

Most organizations have stated values, often in the form of a mission statement. That's a good start. However, talking a good game and playing one, are two entirely different propositions. Considering the following quotation:

“As you go forward in life . . . you will be confronted with questions every day that test your morals. The questions will get tougher and the consequences will become more severe. Think carefully, and for your sake, do the right thing, not the easy thing.”

Now consider the above quotation's attribution:

— Dennis Kozlowski, ex-CEO of Tyco, in a commencement speech at St. Anselm’s College two weeks before his resignation and indictment (New York Times, June 4, 2002)

This illustrates what can happen when a person's (or organization's) stated values are inconsistent with their operational values. In other words, they fail to "walk the talk."

To combat this rather unfortunate dynamic, an employee code of conduct is often added to the mission statement. This frequently is accompanied by an exhaustive set of rules and regulations outlining clearly what is expected, and what sanctions will be imposed if those expectations are not met. Outstanding!

However, here's where the "rubber meets the road," as it were. If these rules and regulations are not consistently and even handedly enforced, it creates 2 things which will pretty much guarantee failure with regard to establishing an ethical culture.

1) Failure to enforce a rule creates cynicism toward the rule itself. (People don't take it seriously. Think the 10 items or less check out line at the super market or the 65 mph speed limit on US 101.)

2) Failure to enforce a rule also creates cynicism toward that person or persons who have the moral/ethical responsibility to enforce the rule. (Think a parent who fails to enforce the "be in bed by 9 PM rule" or school teacher who fails to enforce the "no gum chewing in class rule.")

Ok. So, what's does that have to do with being a Sea Ranch board member? Well, I think it's pretty obvious really. Since there are enough rules and regulations on The Sea Ranch to keep the Supreme Court busy for 20 years, a board director must be willing to take on an enormous moral and ethical responsibility.

To clarify further, if the rules governing The Sea Ranch are to be meaningful, a board director must enforce and stand by them, even if it means damaging a relationship, being embarrassed or losing an election.

It has been said quite accurately, that principles are only meaningful if we're willing to stand by them when they become inconvenient. "Bravo!" I say.

One of the things most talked about during election season is a candidate's "character." Although I think it has become way too politicized, I view that as an important quality. Character has been defined as "ethics in action." I agree.

How we take the measure of person's character has much to do with our own personal beliefs and perspectives. That being the case, we will disagree from time to time with regard to a person's character. Such is the nature of legitimate debate in a democratic society.

However, I often call to mind the words of Dan Coats, a former senator from Indiana, as I think his thoughts on character seem to transcend our differences with regard to assessing a person's character:

"Character cannot be summoned at the moment of crisis if it has been squandered by years of compromise and rationalization. The only preparation for the heroic is the mundane. Habit is the daily battleground of character."

A final thought about rules, regulations and laws. Senator Sam Ervin who chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee during the Watergate hearings, liked to describe himself as "just a poor country lawyer from North Carolina." That may have been true.

But, he was also much more. Sam Ervin graduated at the top of his law class at Harvard and was regarded as one of the preeminent scholars of his time with regard to Constitutional Law. In text books, the US Constitution is often described as "the law of the land." The law doesn't get any bigger than that.

And, it wasn't an accident that Senator Ervin was the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

So, when we're looking at laws (or rules & regulations) and the even handed and consistent application of them to solve our problems, we should consider what Sam Ervin said,

"The law is not self executing. The law will prevent some people from breaking it and will punish some of those who do. But, the law will not make good people. Only religion, character or ethics will do that."

Second Candidate Statement

For further information regarding my candidacy contact me at: 785-3176 (H) or 559-280-6820 (cell)
email: johnforenti@gmail.com



In my first candidate statement, I felt you needed and deserved to know what decision making process I would use to establish my positions on issues affecting The Sea Ranch.

In my second candidate statement, I will state what my positions actually are on those issues.

I feel you need and deserve to know that as well.

I will also state my philosophical positions with regard to being a board director, as I believe this is the bedrock foundation which determines how effective, successful and significant a board director will be.

Issue Positions


1) The Budget

I am in favor of the 2008-2009 budget, and though I have serious concerns about the future impact of a 10.5% dues assessment increase, would have voted for it had I been a member of the board. Here's why.

Let me be clear, I am not pleased about 10.5% assessment increase. However in 2001, the average price of a gallon of gas was $1.51. Currently, the average cost of a gallon of gas is $3.17 ($3.66 in California); well over a 100% increase.

I'm not pleased about that either.

The point is that energy costs have gone through the roof, and we need to realize we're all going to be affected by that, in addition to ordinarily expected increases due to improvements and new projects. Does that mean we should anticipate a 10.5% increase again next year?

No.

Actually, the 2009-2010 projected assessment increase is approximately 8.77%. It's still more than we would like, but it's not 10.5%. In addition, 8.77% is only projected, not etched in stone. As a board director, I would work with other board directors, Association Staff and the Finance Committee to explore options which might allow us to reduce the 8.77% increase, and it is my firm belief that we can.

However, it would be disingenuous to promise the membership that dues will stay the same or decrease. While I certainly would approve of that, I believe that the reality of our situation makes it very unlikely.

2) Bluff Erosion

I support, without reservation, the notion that bluff erosion with all its geological, engineering and political considerations, should be addressed with due diligence and all deliberate speed. Bluff erosion is inevitable. However, that doesn't mean that we can't or shouldn't address the concerns of our neighbors on the bluff, whether they live in the north, south or the heavily hit Sea Ranch Unit 28, near Walk On Beach.

I agree with many that the bluff erosion issue is a political "hot potato."

My reaction is this: "Throw it to me. I won’t throw it back, and I won't drop it."

3) Fire Prevention

Dry areas of our state which are subject to hot desert winds are different from The Sea Ranch, with its on shore ocean breezes and wet climate, which reduce the danger of fire significantly.

However, I am also aware that my neighbors and I, who live in the forested areas on the east side of Highway 1, would be most impacted by a fire, should one occur.

I’m also sensitive to the concerns of those who have lived through terrifying wild fires such as those which struck the Oakland hills and many areas of Southern California.

An effective risk management strategy strives to prevent the likelihood of something bad happening, but when it does, the strategy then strives to reduce the amount of damage that will occur. I believe our Fuel Management Plan does both.

Consequently, I am in favor of the Fuel Management Plan as constituted, would have voted for it as a member of the board and will support future efforts to improve the program.

4) Community Service District

As I believe the long term benefits and advantages of local control by Sea Ranchers are obvious, I am in favor of the continuing efforts of The Sea Ranch Association with regard to becoming a Community Service District.

5) The Sea Ranch Water Company

It is my position that The Sea Ranch Water Company, with an estimated value in excess of 50 million dollars, is our greatest community asset, and as such, I am in favor of its continuing upgrade generally and specifically with regard to Tank #8.

6) Design Compliance and Environmental Review

I believe having recently completed construction of my Sea Ranch home in June 2006, gives me a "real time" perspective with regard to the challenges facing both association and design committee members.

It is my position that the duty of a board member is to support both members of the design committee and members of the association. I also reject categorically the notion that the relationship between association members and the design committee is necessarily adversarial.

I believe that notion to be seriously misguided and counterproductive.

In addition, it has been suggested that the design committee presents a moving target that is impossible to hit. I respectfully disagree, as that suggestion ignores reality. Sea Ranch homes are constructed all the time.

I maintain that the design committee doesn’t present a moving target. The Sea Ranch is known throughout the world for its unique and visionary architecture. That’s not because the architectural design target is a moving one, but rather because it is a small one. And, it should be.

7) John Fox

It is my steadfast belief that Community Manager John Fox is a visionary who has taken The Sea Ranch Association to a new level of service and expertise. Subsequently, I endorse without reservation, his continuation as Community Manager and all efforts to support him and his staff.

Philosophical Positions

1) Fiscal Responsibility

I am in favor of exploring all avenues of cost savings including, but not limited to, the following:

A. Contracting with outside entities, whether persons or businesses
B. Utilizing existing staff having expertise outside the parameters of their current job description
C. Accessing the enormous supply of intellectual and creative “candle power” of Sea Ranch Association members

I believe the economic interests of Sea Ranchers will be best served by addressing needs before desires. However, I will not cut corners nor will I advocate doing things “on the cheap.”

In addition, I will not place the burden of cost cutting measures on the backs of Sea Ranch Association staff who will stand for hours, in the cold, dark, wet night repairing a water main break to make sure Sea Ranchers have hot running water to bathe and cold clear water to drink.

Finally, I will not be part of any group, or work in concert with any group, that seeks to do that.

2) A Board Director’s Greatest Asset

A board director’s greatest asset is his or her ability to find common ground while working “with” rather than “against” others in order to protect the integrity and welfare of The Sea Ranch and Sea Ranch Association Members.

In asking for you vote, please know that I would consider it both a pleasure and honor to represent you on The Sea Ranch Board of Directors

First Candidate Statement....

Contaact me by phone at: 785-3176 or cell: (559) 280-6820

Hopefully, you have all received the Candidates First Statement. At this time I would like to address the nature and content of those statements.

First let me say that my opponent's statements were well written and worthy of a serious read. As a former Sea Rancher of the Year, Dibby Tyler quite appropriately listed her years of meritorious service and admirable accomplishments. It was very impressive. Dibby would make a wonderful addition to the already fine group of board members we currently have. I strongly urge everyone, to cast one of their two votes for Dibby Tyler. Obviously, since it's my hope to join her on the board, I would appreciate receiving the other.

Derek Bray and Chris Beach took the opportunity to list the positions they have taken or will take on issues which focus on items such as membership dues and fire prevention. As indicated in their statements, their perspectives are from those of an engineer and a builder. I chose a different life path. My perspective is from that of an "ethics practioner," which by training and education (Josephson Institute of Ethics, 1994) is my profession. Rather than list my positions, I chose to outline the process I will use to establish those positions.

You need and deserve to know that.

Though I was specific in my statement as to what that process involved, let me be more so now. I am an ethics practioner, not an academic, however, the 3 step decision making process I use is based on enduring ethical philosophies established centuries ago. I'd like to share them with you.

Step 1

Ethical decisions take into account the interest and well being of all those likely to be affected by the decision and who have a moral claim on the decision maker to make the decision wisely. This is known in the "business" as a Stakeholder Analysis.

The underlying philosophy of this step is the Golden Rule. Lest anyone think the Golden Rule is unique to Christianity, consider that one of the first times we see it is in 500 BC, when Confucius says,

"What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others."

175 years later in 325 BC, Aristotle said,

"We should behave to others as we wish them to behave to us."

There are more examples to be sure, but the point is simply this. The Golden Rule in one form or another is part of nearly all major religions. In addition, the fact that it is embraced by people of considerable intelligence and divergent outlooks is evidence that it is an enduring moral truth.

Step 2

Ethical decisions put the core ethical values of honesty, integrity, respect, compassion, fairness and justice which are common to democratic societies above others, such as those engendered by self interest or personal bais.

The philosophical underpinning of this step is Immanuel Kant's Categorical Imperative. Kant asserts that ethical values are moral truths which require absolute adherence in spite of social conventions and natural inclinations to the contrary. In other words, and to add color to this rather drab academic description, we are required to honor these principles come "hell or high water."

Step 3

There may come a time when we must choose between competing ethical values described in step 2. When that time comes, we are obligated to choose that value which produces the greatest good for the greatest number.

The philosophy here is Consequentialism, also referrred to as Utilitarianism. This philosophy was espoused by people such as Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. They argued that the propriety of a decision was contingent on the consequences it produced.

I realize that this decision making process is somewhat complex and nuanced. But, so is being a Sea Ranch Board Member.

I believe that Derek Bray and Chris Beach are qualified to be board members and will be good ones if elected. They are one, an engineer and the other a builder. By training, they also tend to be pragmatists. As such, their first instinct will often be to get as much information as possible and then based on that information, do what works. As a general rule, I find that to be an admirable trait.

However, I believe I offer a significant and distinct alternative to the strictly pragmatic. Allow me to illustrate the alternative and draw the distinction.

As an ethicist by training, I will have a tendency not to do what works, but to do what is right.

Experience has taught me that what works is not always what is right (see Balco, Enron, Mark McGwire, Marion Jones and Ken Lay). What is right is also not always what is obvious. Often, it is complex and nuanced, requiring a decision making process and mind set that accommodates those complexities and nuances. In addition, though these concepts are not always mutually exclusive, many times a decision maker must choose between what works and what is right. I'm confident you know what my choice will be.

It has been written that principles are only meaningful if we're willing to stand by them when they become inconvenient. The test of a person's ethical integrity comes when the price of doing the right thing is more than they want to pay. Rest assured that if elected to the Sea Ranch Board of Directors, I'll pay the price.

Please also understand that I believe both Derek and Chris are principled. In addition, I don't take the position that I'm more principled. That would be unnaceptable, inaccurate and disrespectful.

It's just that I think ethical principles are more a part of my decision making "DNA."

My first statement was about my decision making process. As I stated earlier, you needed and deserved to know what that process was. In my second statement, I'll state my positions on fire prevention, membership dues, the budget, bluff top erosion, in addition to numerous others. You need and deserve to know that as well.