||| FROM KAREN PEARSON |||
OPALCO’s posting on January 20th 2026 of December 2025 Member Survey “Materials” Results is a building Materials list. “Materials” means physical objects for manufacture and construction. Materials does not mean information. OPALCO’s use of “Materials” in their title sets the tone for objects, and tells the mind this is objective – not story – strategically placing the mind in a very specific posture: from member to resource.
OPALCO’s use of “Materials” in the title converts persuasion into evidence and positions compliance as cooperation before ever reading any of the posted results because “Materials” deactivates scrutiny.
“Materials” says, these are the materials – neutral like lumber: legitimate, sound, reliable. And the “Materials” are building something real; no need to question, just review the legitimate list.
“Materials” disguises authorship and implies ready for use for a project already underway with a site, an architect, a blueprint, a builder, a timeline, and direction. Since the future is drafted, appropriateness is no longer being evaluated, and time replaces truth.
“Materials” is psychological pre-permitting because it positions the member as an assembly-line worker. So all due diligence is considered an obstacle, resulting in legitimate questions appearing as irrational, emotional, and anti-progress.
The survey is strategy – not information.
**If you are reading theOrcasonian for free, thank your fellow islanders. If you would like to support theOrcasonian CLICK HERE to set your modestly-priced, voluntary subscription. Otherwise, no worries; we’re happy to share with you.**
“December 2025 Member Survey “Materials” Results is a building Materials list. “Materials” means physical objects for manufacture and construction. Materials does not mean information.”
Gee wilakers Karen, that’s impressive. What are you, some kinda psychological, linguistical, speech interpretation therapist or something? I respect that, and I appreciate you sharing your observations. I can’t help but agree with you in the sense that the title does seem to give an air of (pre)acceptance to the survey… as if the whole survey is just a part of the process, just another item to check off on the long list to beginning site preparation.
But, with that being said… I love OPALCO. I love the people that work there, and I love what they do for our island. I hope that we, as a community, can come together and make decisions now (decisions that should have perhaps been made years ago), that will ensure our electrical needs for the future.
As Sadie, Bill, Elisabeth and others have stated, I also believe that conservation, (and also self-reliance) are key elements to any viable energy future that we as a community may have. I feel that it’s too bad, that is, that it’s not in our best interests, that whatever form of electricity we’re able to produce locally (like solar) has to be fed back into the mainland grid and not be island, or county, specific, (this being something that we will all suffer for during the coming mainland blackouts).
Watching friends for decades throughout the non-ferry served outer-islands thrive with the solar power they produce on site, (that is, power that is going to their own houses and not back to OPALCO and the mainland), is a clear indicator to me of what does work.