|
|
Post by jgaffney on Dec 13, 2008 10:33:59 GMT -5
What does it say about our priorities right here in Sonoma County when we hear constant complaints about reduced funding for schools, health care, etc., yet we spend $36 million to acquire the Jenner Headlands and "protect it from development"? A remote piece of land like that, and the other parcel that was bought north of Lake Sonoma, are so remote that development is far, far off. Plus, the best insurance against rapid development of remote parcels is a strong County General Plan and a strong Board of Supervisors.
Most of the open space property we have bought is either not open to the public, or only open with scheduled, guided tours. So, essentially, we are spending millions to protect our view, while continuing to lament reduced funding for schools and health care. What is wrong with this picture?
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Dec 13, 2008 12:58:12 GMT -5
Gaff, you expect the Stupes to actually put together a plan and stick to it? Jolly joker. I want someone to follow the money and see what the connections are between who got paid for the land and the various government officials at the county and state levels.
One of my gripes for years has been what you mentioned - the land gets bought for the public, but the public is exclueded from it. Now, I don't expect paved trails, running water, lights, picnic tables and such. But a half way decent parking lot and some portapotties would be nice. Don't bother to put in trails, just let people wander. Maybe put in a decent rifle range since the county doesn't have one.
I also agree that just about every piece of land that has been bought has been in no danger of development any time soon. And that most of them are so far out of the way that most people won't bother to get to them.
God forbid that we should throw money at a something that would actually solve some problems. If the funds were to be spent on schools and healt care, why, the capons wouldn't have those causes to use as an excuse to raise taxes. Better to not fund needed programs so they can point fingers of blame at those EEEEvil conservative.
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Dec 13, 2008 14:53:41 GMT -5
Maybe put in a decent rifle range since the county doesn't have one. ooooooowheeeeeeee!!! that's a good one, joe. when do you suppose that will happen?  |
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Dec 13, 2008 17:37:19 GMT -5
Most likely the third full moon of February.
But you know, if all the people who enjoy shooting sports were to write and call their supervisor, or maybe all the supes, once a month and point out that Tolay was partially paid for with DFG funds, and those funds came mainly from fishing and hunting licenses, and I think from excise tax on ammo, and that we deserved some safe place to practice our sport and teach others firearms safety, we could get some action. But it would take all of us consistantly contacting them. I would bet that there are at least 10,000 gun owners in SoCo that would love a local place to shoot. Have some facilities at least as good as Circle S in Marin Co., have a range master who is retired military or LE, charge 10 bucks a head per day, and the county may actually make money on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by harpman1 on Dec 13, 2008 18:24:22 GMT -5
Just like Headwaters in Humboldt, this little publicly owned jewel will be off limits to "trespassing" by its rightful owners forever.
Elitist Greenies using my $$ to buy playgrounds for nobody.
Clearcut the Headwaters!
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Dec 13, 2008 19:14:52 GMT -5
Good one Harpman.
I saw a bumper sticker once: Earth First! We'll log the other planets later.
|
|
|
|
Post by jgaffney on Dec 14, 2008 20:33:08 GMT -5
Don't lose track of the original premise for this thread: While we collectively wring our hands about the lack of education, housing and affordable health care for the downtrodden in Sonoma County, we are spending major bucks to buy pieces of land that will never be developed because the are too remote, and will never be open to the public because SoCoParks doesn't have the budget to staff them.
Where are our priorities? Why is it more important to "stop development" than it is to provide for them that's here already?
|
|
|
|
Post by jgaffney on Jan 14, 2009 14:01:15 GMT -5
This morning's PeeDee has more proof of this argument. The County is looking at making a 5% cut in their budget, and the advocates are wringing their hands over $21 million in cuts, with the possibility of more to come. Everyone wants to make sure that their program doesn't get cut. Meanwhile, the Open Space District brags in its Annual Report that they have spent $23 million on preserving properties so that we can enjoy the view. Is this where we want to spend our money? |
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Jan 14, 2009 16:54:55 GMT -5
 Trust you overseers, it is about Change. |
|
