Some info from early Sierra Environmental Studies Foundation docs

Just ran across the "Search the files of the Registry of Charitable Trusts" Calif. Attorney General webpage, and found some history on the Sierra Environmental Studies Foundation, the anti-environment charity vehicle of George Rebane, Russ Steele and John McDaniel; history which, not surprisingly, exposes more anti-environment roots.
(Also, SESF is "delinquent"; is this meaningful?)

What organization's name is on the W-2 form of CABPRO executive director Martin Light?

I'll bet you a dollar it's not CABPRO.
(nor California Association of Business, Property and Resource Owners)
(Update: it seems I would have lost the dollar, according to a former executive director.)


that is all...

Sat a.m. update: yesterday I asked this question of a former CABPRO director, who answered that he had no idea. Hmmm...
(A for-the-future etiquette resolution: next time, before asking a Q & thereby taking up 10 seconds of someone's time, when they're sitting around waiting, I shall request permission to take up the time & ask the Q. Apologies and mild groveling, for not having thought to do so.)

Why won't CABPRO provide its Employer ID number? Who are its clients?

The executive director and at least two board members of the Nevada County group CABPRO - California Association of Business Property & Resource Owners - are remarkably cagey about giving out the most basic information about their group.

Executive director Martin Light and local attorney and ex-candidate Barry Pruett have said CABPRO's a 501(c)(4); but the IRS has no record of this. On Oct. 4 I mailed a request to inspect their "tax exempt status" documents, left a phone message, and taped a copy of my request to the office door; I've heard nothing back.

Of the multiple phone messages I've left with the CABPRO office, none have been returned. Of the ten times or more that I've stopped by the office during working hours, the Closed sign has always been up.

While executive director Light had invited the SBC's Steven Frisch to "drop by" the office when Frisch was in town, the office was closed - and locked, and dark - when Frisch arrived at the date and time he'd announced he was coming. Two times.

I asked CABPRO Report blogger Russ Steele who might have information about the group, since phone calls to the organization weren't returned and Steele himself professed ignorance.

He suggested the board of directors.

I was able to reach two of them, Chuck Shea and Kim Janousek (Ms. Janousek is also CABPRO's agent, according to Cal. Sec of State records ); but they expressed displeasure at being phoned, wouldn't provide information about the group, and didn't consider it any of their business that their executive director wasn't returning phone calls.

I've sent a letter to the IRS suggesting that they look into this group's status.

If CABPRO is in fact a for-profit group - as a former executive director has stated, and as the 1997 National Center for Public Policy Research "green pages" lists it - who are its clients?

If it doesn't have an Employer ID number, who pays its staff and management?

KNCO quotes Steele on Prop 23, credulously

Next day update: KNCO's Rita Stevens told me that they are planning on running an opposing view, from APPLE's Tom Grundy. Thank you Rita, and KNCO.

Here's the SESF blurb, by Rita Stevens.
("S-E-S-F Executive Director Russell Steele says the [SESF] study took a scientific approach....")

um, right.

Ms. Stevens, may I recommend that you talk to Paul Emery...or better yet, Steve Frisch of the Sierra Business Council; Dr. Rebane and Mr. Steele - and CABPRO, parent of SESF - are in a spot of credibility trouble.

And if you have children, please take a look at this infographic (based on peer reviewed research) and consider what contribution you, as a member of the press, are making to their future.

Pelline - CABPRO drops "nonprofit" from membership form

Story here. Update - I should have looked further into this; it seems Steve Frisch should get the credit for having detected the change in the CABPRO membership form; after Todd Juvinall tried to pull the wool over our eyes with it.

Also, Rick Daysog of the Sac Bee has a new story out -
Green jobs rise in state, study finds

"...one key industrial sector is seeing robust job growth: the green economy.

In a study released Wednesday, Palo Alto-based nonprofit Next 10 and Collaborative Economics Inc. of Mountain View found that manufacturing jobs in the state's green sector grew by 19 percent between 1995 and 2008...."

The IRS weighs in, confusingly, on CABPRO

Today I called the IRS "verify a nonprofit" phone line (toll-free; 1-877-829-5500), spent half an hour on hold, then spoke with Cynthia, who said no, she couldn't find any record of the California Association of Business, Property and Resource Owners having tax exempt status.*

I asked, "are there any penalties for misrepresenting your group as a 501c4?" and this is where it got complicated. She said - and I'm repeating this from memory & somewhat fallible notes - that even though the group has no IRS Letter of Determination as a 501c4, it can still *call* itself a 501(c)(4) if it's organized and run in accordance with 501(c)(4) regulations.

"But how can anyone tell if they are?" I asked, and she answered that, well, if the IRS audits them, it can.

* Groups also legitimately wouldn't show up on the "tax exempt" list if they're "Subordinate units that are included in group exemption letters" (link) - so that's another Q to ask executive director Martin Light, if we can ever track him down. Was anyone able to stop by the CABPRO dinner at Penny's Diner last night (link)?

NCFocus posts labeled "CABPRO"

Rebane dances around CABPRO's legal status

Here.
The comments on that post by Enos, Frisch and Pelline do make the point - which isn't answered.

Rebane in short: CABPRO is a private corporation, and only its members know for sure whether it's a nonprofit or not. He says this even though CABPRO executive director Martin Light and attorney Barry Pruett have said it's a 501(c)(4); and apparently he thinks it's none of our business, whether Pruett and Light have misled us - or, somehow, been misled themselves.

From Pelline:

CABPRO's newsletter states:
"While CABPRO is a not-for-profit organization, we have deliberately declined the 501c3 status for two reasons."

So Barry Pruett said the group is 501c4 nonprofit, George said it is a "private California corporation," and the newsletter said it is a "not-for-profit" corporation.
Which is it? (link)

George Rebane responds:

JeffP - You unfortunately reason as if those descriptors are somehow mutually contradictory. (link)

Well, if they're not contradictory, it's a 501(c)(4), in which case either they'll be showing their paperwork very soon, else the IRS will come 'a'knockin'.

I wonder what the consequences are, for misrepresenting one's organization?

(It could be that CABPRO _is_ a 501(c)(4), but the secretiveness of those involved - failing to return phone calls or email, deleting comments from multiple parties asking for verification, dancing around the "is it or isn't it" question, inviting the SBC's Steve Frisch to "drop by" when the office is always closed, etc - doesn't indicate candor or trustworthiness.)
------
Also, KVMR news director Paul Emery comments to Rebane re last month's KVMR Steve Frisch-George Rebane Prop 23 debate:
"George...you completely disregarded the protocol that I established for the show. Hopefully it was your inexperience in media forums that led you to disregard my instructions. " (link)

Comments on the secretive CABPRO at Chez Pelline

Former The Union editor Jeff Pelline is a prolific blogger, and his comments section still hosts the most intelligent conversation in Nevada County - due to his frequent posting, his "real name" comment policy, and his blog's providing largely threaded comments.

But for a commenter, there's a downside, in that comments there get buried - both due to the commenting community's activity and also due to Gresham's Law kicking in, polluting the threads by the repeated raising and rehashing of the same old arguments.

One consequence of this burial is that parts of the narrative sometimes get lost.

So - this post will be a repository for comments I - and others? - have posted there related to the secretive folks at CABPRO, where global climate destabilization is "globull warming".
(Feel free to add your substantive CABPRO comments below.)

"...the CABPRO folk are afraid of [my] questions; which – for me at least – makes it hard to get answers. ... The org was founded in the early 1990s, during a recession, when money was tight." (July 29; link)

"All we have is Barry(*) saying CABPRO’s a 501(c)(4) on his blogpost. Journalism is a discipline of verification, so I’ve left Barry a comment asking how to see documentation." (Sept 22; link)

"Re CABPRO’s nonprofit status, I should also note that my comment asking about it did not survive moderation over at Barry Pruett’s blog. ..." - (Oct 2; link)

"fyi, re [my] "Steve, you need to ask Martin *when* the CABPRO office is open." - my comment at the CABPRO Report blog, making that point, did not survive moderation. Anyone know who that blog’s moderator is? Russ Steele – who posts there – claims not to know." (Oct 4; link)

"Fortunately, the IRS doesn’t care whether CABPRO finds the request interesting. Stay tuned…"
(Oct 4; link)

"[CABPRO’s the 2-story bldg] On the ground floor; the doors with the letter taped to them, officially requesting to see their Application for Tax Exemption and its last three Annual Information Returns.
:-)
The IRS (in Pub. 557) requires them to make the docs available for public inspection even if their office hours are nonexistent." (Oct 5; link)

Closed mouths, thin skins at CABPRO

I have questions about Nevada County's antiregulation lobbying group CABPRO; I haven't been able to get answers via phone to the CABPRO office, via phone to executive director Martin Light, or via phone to founder Kim Janousek.

So I left a comment over on Russ Steele's Aug 10 post on the CABPRO blog:

Russ, how do I get in touch with someone from CABPRO, please?

Posted by: Anna Haynes August 12, 2010 at 12:24 PM

It didn't survive moderation.

True purpose of TechTest from the Sierra Environmental Studies Foundation?

Updates: Apr 4, see response by SESF's Rebane here; March 30, minor updates(*) and edits for clarity; also see "Misc Facts about SESF/TechTest", a response by SESF's McDaniel (link).

For reference: my original posts on SESF from June 2006, from shortly after its resurrection; noting its odd origin and classification, and asking about its funding.

What's the real motivation - and funding - behind the TechTest college scholarships offered by the local climate-denial group Sierra Environmental Studies Foundation (site)?

The nonprofit SESF (its 501(c)(3) status restored; here's its blog) is a local outfit interwined with the local pro-property-rights, anti-regulation group CABPRO (blog).
SESF's principals include local retired engineers/ climate contrarians/ bloggers/ The Union columnists Russ Steele (blog) and George Rebane (blog). (Rebane has also recently been given a "commentator" spot on KVMR news (alas, not I*) ).

SESF generously sponsors an annual science-and-engineering TechTest for high school seniors - it's being given this very morning, in fact - and grants the highest scorers a total of up to 15k in college scholarships.

The grueling test (pretty much all physics and engineering) is preceded by two "how to work these problems" workshops by George Rebane, and succeeded by a "Survivor's Breakfast" with SESF principals and, last year, with Tom McClintock staffer Kim Pruett.

Students there today told me that last year's high score was 37%, and that the test was "crazy" - as in, very, very hard. Its difficulty is deliberate, "designed to let the eagles soar", according to Dr. Rebane (link).

The SESF intended further interaction with the students through mentoring (link)(*):

"For the coming term, in addition to TechTest2008, we are also setting up a new tutoring/mentoring program as a teacher resource for their science and math students. SESF has a growing list of volunteers who will be paired with students for augmentation and advanced study assignments. We are currently soliciting more volunteers with technology backgrounds who are willing to work with the county's young people."

The TechTest and scholarships get credulous local coverage.
--------------------------

You might ask why climate deniers are pouring such energy into science and technology education - when they do, after all, part ways so decisively from the existing consensus (infographics here) on climate change.

And you might ask where the money is coming from, for the scholarships or other aspects of the organization. Their IRS (nonprofit) Form 990 is no help, since with less than 25k income, they've never filed one.
The principals have said they are all volunteers, they're not being paid for their efforts.

I asked SESF's Director of Public Relations, financial advisor Mike McDaniel, about the scholarship funding. It's not a secret, he assured me; just local (*) people who cared about science and technology and educating our young people; I asked if I could know their identities, and he said he'd check.

The outcome: of the half dozen or so substantial ($500 or over) donors, McDaniel said he'd gone to pretty much all of them asking if they minded having their names known, and of all these donors, the only ones willing to be identified (*) were himself and Telestream (although, he said, clearly they were giving "for different reasons"). And he did say that two couples who donated were not local.

So, largely unknown donors.

What gets discussed at the breakfast? Russ reports:

"[Discussion of the weather] soon lead to a discussion [of] long term climate change and the impact of sunspots have on our climate. The discussion gave me an opportunity to introduce a those sitting nearby to my Dalton Minimum Returns blog, and the paper I wrote for SESF on Cooler Temps - Dalton Minimum Returns"

(I also seem to recall Russ saying he quizzed the students on what they were being taught about climate science in school, and [he] was disturbed that there was no requirement to present the "other" (read, not the consensus) side; but a quick google isn't bringing it up.)

Add all of this to the unwillingness of Russ to say that he and family aren't receiving direct-or-indirect compensation for his climate efforts, and the unwillingness of CABPRO executive director Martin Light (blog) to say what firm's name is on the 1099 or W-2 form the Executive Director receives, and, well, it's intriguing.

[2012-02-04 update: I've extensively edited the "in a nutshell" text below, removing allegations of intent - replacing "designed to" with "has the effect of", etc.]

So - in a nutshell, TechTest ends up advancing fossil fuel interests, as follows:

The TechTest lets SESF cozy up to the young sci/tech elite, the smartest - but still-impressionable - young people in Nevada County. Its extreme difficulty, like Dr. Rebane's often-difficult prose, doesn't so much "let the eagles soar" (actually, the eagles looked pretty darn cowed) as send a message of intellectual dominance, that someone designing a test that we-the-takers can't succeed at, or writing text that we-the-readers can't easily follow, must be smarter than us and better informed.

And the breakfast capitallizes on the influence that such an impression provides - the breakfasters will feel that if such smart people believe human-caused climate change is bogus, then this view has credence.

--------

(Recommended resource for Tech-Test-takers: SkepticalScience.com, for exposing misinformation )

----
 "We will be judged by those who come after us, both by what we did do and what we didn't do, in the time given to us."

Probable plagiarism at the CABPRO Report

In my previous post I reported that CABPRO executive director Martin Light had declined to say who "CABPRO Staff" were, that he's giving authorship credit to for posts like today's "Den of Thieves".

Well, we seem to have at least a partial answer: Googling some of the "Den of Thieves" text brings up a Reno fellow's Nov. 2009 blog post titled - surprise - "Den of Thieves", and with the same content. The blogger doesn't take credit for writing it, saying "...this came through my Inbox and I thought it was worth pondering".

So, assuming the blogger did receive it via email, there are two possibilites: first, that CABPRO staff is actually composing and sending out those "pass it on" right wing emails (which is possible, but seems is extremely (*) unlikely) - or that the CABPRO folks consider authorship and attribution information to be, well, cosmetic.
...which would indicate a rather laissez-faire attitude toward accuracy, that readers would do well to keep in mind.

I'm asking, & will report back what I hear about which of these possibilities actually happened.


------
Why this matters: CABPRO is the caliber of organization whose blog sports a category for "Globull warming" - it seems they're the kind of folks who're happy to disregard the science and put their own children at risk (pdf) - and yours - if it lets them score short-term political points.

Q&A with Martin Light, executive director of CABPRO

I've had some questions about CABPRO, the California Association of Business, Property and Resource Owners, the pro-property-rights, anti-regulation group whose CABPRO Report blog graces the far right column of Nevada County Voices - but the group's office on the ground floor of the Robinson Enterprises building is never, ever open, the five or six times I've tried to drop by, and when I've called and left messages on their answering machine, my calls haven't been returned.

So I called CABPRO Executive Director Martin Light directly, and he was kind enough to speak with me for a couple of minutes. Here are the Qs I asked, and what I learned.*

--------
Q: CABPRO is a for-profit organization?
A: No, it's a 501(c)(4).

Q: Many of the CABPRO Report blog posts (e.g. the most recent one) say they're "by CABPRO Staff"; who writes these articles?
A: That's privileged information.

Q: But others besides you are paid?
A: Yes, but their identities are privileged information.

Q: When you get a W-2 form or 1099 form for your work as CABPRO Executive Director, what is the name of the firm that's printed on the form?
A: That's privileged information.

Q: When is the CABPRO office open?
A: Various hours; it varies.

Q: When I asked the nice fellow at B&C [whose owners are CABPRO members] how I could look at back issues of the CABPRO newsletter, he said I could come down to the office and see them there.
A: They are available; we have those archived. [The last year or so are online; but if the fellow I talked to isn't a CABPRO staffer, said fellow can't say what I can and can't get from the office]

------------

So, now you know as much as I do. If you have questions about CABPRO that you'd like answered, please ask in the (moderated) comments and I'll see if I can find out for you.

CABPRO touts Varshney and Tootelian "small business" study, again, credulously

Martin Light posted on it here, and last month as well.

My comment, which is awaiting moderation there:

Martin, nowhere in this post do you bother to mention who the study's authors are, or explain why they're competent to do a good analysis.

It turns out that the authors of this report (pdf) are Varshney and Tootelian, the same pair who wrote the "cost of AB32" report which got panned by experts - it was termed "the worst I have seen on the subject" by this UOP professor, and other experts judged likewise.

The UOP prof says -
"I have 3 degrees in Economics and have completed a specialization in environmental economics and natural resource policy, and have published in peer-reviewed journals about global warming issues. Thus, I am qualified to conduct and review studies on the costs of AB32 and similar policies. Varshney and Tootelian's study is the worst I have seen on the subject and seems to reflect little training or experience in the area.... they have degrees in Finance and Marketing, not Economics (yes, there is a big difference and it shows here).... they are doing research outside their field of expertise that is confusing people, and muddying very important policy debates."

Martin, there is such a thing as competence; and if you want to make informed policy decisions, it matters.

Disclosure - *I* didn't take the time to read this study at all, much less read it carefully; I'm saving time - and getting a much better result - by relying on my network of trust here, outsourcing the "judgment" job to people who can do it far more competently than I can. I'd recommend you do likewise, if you are able to assess competence and intellectual honesty in others.