I have finally come to the conclusion that the Santa Clarita Organization for the Protection of the Environment (SCOPE) is a complete “sham.” That is what one of its former members in a comment to The Beacon wrote; “In my opinion, Scope is a sham “organization”; which exist solely to further the agenda (s) of a select few persons under the guise of an open and inclusive committee or group.”

It’s my opinion that I would have to agree since the executive committee of SCOPE has been unresponsive to numerous email inquiries. You see, at the suggestion of Phil Hof, I filled out a membership application which was downloaded from the SCOPE website; and mailed it in with a $25.00 membership fee.

It’s been nearly six weeks and there has been no response. I’ve sent a number of emails to Lynne Plambeck and Phil Hof, officers of SCOPE, but there has been no courtesy of a response from either. I’ve even sent an email inquiry to Cam Noltemeyer, another SCOPE officer, for whom The Beacon has published unedited guest commentaries and she has not responded.    

Most organizations respond reasonably promptly to membership inquiries and requests for information especially groups that publicly state that they “welcome your participation in its many ongoing projects, and would be happy to supply you with additional information upon request.”

I wrote back in August; “Is SCOPE a private club, discriminating against certain members of the public who wish to attend their meetings or become a member of their organization? Are members of the Santa Clarita Valley community being disenfranchised by not being provided the appropriate meeting information? Is SCOPE really an entity that was solely organized to sue developers while masquerading as a non-profit?”

That appears to be the case based on my experiences thus far with the lack of communication to my inquiries. No response to my membership application; no acknowledgment that I sent in a check; and absolutely no professionalism on the part of the officers of SCOPE in running that organization. I know that I am not telling a lot of people something they didn’t already know but I did give SCOPE the benefit of the doubt.

They clearly appear to be okay with disenfranchising members of the community that wish to participate and contribute to local environmental issues. I wonder how they would react to being barred from participating in local environmental issues.

Add to that the fact that the SCOPE meetings seem to be inconsistent and squirrelly in the locations that they are held in. One can only draw the conclusion that SCOPE is not welcoming of just anyone from the community but rather a select group. This can only mean that they really are not an organization representing the residents of the Santa Clarita Valley.

It appears to be what I originally suspected; a private club for a very few who’s sole purpose is not to protect the environment but to stop all development at all cost. This is regardless of what any builder, land owner or developer capitulates to. For instance the setting aside of 150 acres of land for the San Fernando Spine Flower; also known as a weed!

Unfortunately SCOPE is not helping or protecting the environment, they are hurting everyone, including the environment, with their rigid, myopic and unreasonable demands that ultimately impairs everyone including the environment. By not letting a broader cross-section of residents participate, those running SCOPE have lost sight of the ultimate goal of protecting the environment.

In my opinion their flimsy lawsuits contribute to the waste of valuable resources; i.e. paper, energy, fuel, money that could buy land; and add to global warming in the amount of driving, burning of fossil fuels and carbon dioxide released form specious arguments in far flung locations around the county and state.   

As an environmentally conscience individual, I find it repugnant that a local organization like SCOPE would be so blatant in disenfranchising those that are interested in participating. Claiming they are welcoming of “the public” and then doing everything possible to shut out those that do want to get involved. It’s quite suspect that they are claiming non-profit status!

If SCOPE wishes to be inclusive then they must be responsive to new member requests, even from individuals that may have different points of view. It’s the bringing together of diverse points of view and finding the middle ground that ultimately makes for successful and progressive organizations. The alternative is the gridlock like we’re all witnessing in Washington D.C.

I’m still waiting for a response to my emails, but I’m just not holding my breath!

Dave Bossert- Commentary 

Dave Bossert is a community volunteer who serves on a number of boards and councils. His commentaries represent his own opinions and not necessarily the views of any organization he may be affiliated with or those of the West Ranch Beacon.