Selected letters to the editor on the Sonoma County open space issue

Selected Letters to the Editor on the
Sonoma County Open Space Issue

Note: Views expressed are those of the letter writers,
and not necessarily endorsed by CORP.

Published in the Press Democrat, March 25, 1999

More Trails

Editor: I am very happy to see the lengthy coverage of our open space district, for which I voted.

I think, however, that the mission of the district and what citizens voted on is not quite the way it has been characterized in The Press Democrat's coverage so far and how the district has been doing business.

The district was established to protect wildlife and agriculture and to promote recreational opportunities as well as for the protection of community separators.

The highest priority was and is outdoor recreation, including a trail system. Up until the recent proposed acquisitions of the Bohemia Ranch Park and the Crinella property in Forestville, this has been largely overlooked.

Propertly managed, the open space district will indeed put Sonoma County right up there with appropriate land management and open space aquisition for the public.

To keep faith with the voters, we must acquire more land for trails and protection of view sheds and fewer agricultural easements for the remainder of the term of the district.

Helen Shane,
Planning Commissioner
Sebastopol

Published in the Press Democrat, April 1, 1999

Open Space

Editor: Last weekend was a fine time for a hike. Unfortunately, as your recent series on our open space district showed, there are very few places the public can hike in the south county. Most of the closest places are in Marin, so that's where we went.

Marin open space district lands have signs that say, "Use and Enjoy." Our open space district lands have signs that say, "No Trespassing." We are being cheated.

Hank Zucker,
Petaluma

Published in the Press Democrat, April 2, 1999

More Access

Editor: The open space district's guided educational walks are a step in the right direction. I hope they will soon be scheduled more often, so that more than 30 people can appreciate firsthand some of the lands our open space sales tax has preserved. I envision a time when they will be a supplement to true public access.

Sonoma County residents need to make it clear that their intention, as it was when we approved the tax, is that an adequate proportion of this money be used for the ``public recreation'' that was included in the measure.

Although 8,000 acres with recreation potential have been purchased, the district looks to the county parks department to fund public access facilities, such as trails. Since there are about 18 parks and 80 miles of trails listed in the 1989 General Plan that have not yet been developed due to lack of funds, it's obvious the parks department's budget is not adequate to take on more new projects for a very long time.

It is reasonable to expect some of the $12 million per year the district gets to be used for this purpose.

Gladys Jennings,
Santa Rosa

Published in the Press Democrat, May 9, 1999

Don't touch

Editor: The scarcity of accessible public open space in Sonoma County is a serious issue for many residents. The intensity of the controversy over Bohemia Ranch is indicative of this.

Before moving here six years ago, I lived in the East Bay for 25 years. During that time I enjoyed the privilege of having a huge amount of public open space close to my home. The major disappointment for me about living in Sonoma is the rudimentary regional park system. What a paradox, to live in such a beautiful place but not be able to walk in it: Look, but don't touch.

One of the attractions about Sonoma County before I moved here was the Open Space District, which I presumed was actively buying land for public parks. Obviously, I was mistaken. Now I hear that the district is sitting on $40 million in funds during a time of rapidly rising land values. What are they thinking? This money needs to be spent soon before prices rise any higher and opportunities are lost.

This is a prosperous area; surely, we can affort a large park system.

Richard Ely,
Sebastopol

Published in the Press Democrat, December 24, 1999

Who benefits?

Editor: A small item in the Dec. 16 Press Democrat reports that the Board of Supervisors has agreed to pay $1.5 million open space dollars to protect 256 acres on Pepper Road from the development of seven homesites. The $1.5 million will go a long way toward building the one new house on the property that is allowed under this agreement.

The public benefit from this purchase is doubtful, since the land will still be owned by the partners and will not be accessible to the public.

I would much prefer my 1/4-cent open space sales tax be spent on more land with public access, such as the property on Taylor Mountain recently purchased for a regional park, as reported in the same article.

Eve Jordan,
Santa Rosa

Published in the Press Democrat, March 22, 2000

Another option

Editor: I read your editorial of March 8 regarding the lost opportunity for a South County Regional Park and would like to comment. There are, in fact, other prospects.

I personally am aware of a 450-acre ranch that is available and could offer a wonderful recreational day-use experience. Horseback riding, hiking, fishing and nature exploration are just some of the highlights.

The ranch has three streams, Willow Brook, Lichau and Copeland.

You can see fabulous views from San Pablo to Santa Rosa and beyond. Best of all, the ranch sits right in the middle of Sonoma Mountain. The owners have made county officials aware of this opportunity long ago. They are currently working with the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District.

This ranch offers a nice option and is simply a beautiful part of this area. With the Lafferty-Moon squabble out of the way, maybe now we can move on to a more productive use of our recreational funds.

Roger Gadow,
Petaluma

Published in the Press Democrat Petaluma section, May 3, 2000

Buy parklands

Editor: Upper Sonoma Mountain, with its undeveloped expanses of great scenic beauty close to our largest cities, should be the premier site for extensive new public lands in the county. And south county, especially the Petaluma area, is terribly short of parklands, by the county's own reckoning. (Details at www.sonomatrails.org)

Happily, county supervisors now seem to agree that our Open Space District should spend a big chunk of its tax money on parklands and other public open space. The District has begun buying land for Regional and State parks in several parts of the county, and still has some $40 million in the bank. Other state and local agencies are also flush with cash from the recent parks bond, Proposition 12, and can help purchase public lands.

So why are we even considering a park-for-development deal at Galvin Ranch, which would blight irreplaceable ridge views for park visitors, and probably for valley residents as well?

For the first time in many years, we are in great position to buy parklands. We don't have to trade our treasured ridge views for them.

The Board of Supervisors should roundly reject the current park-for-development proposal. It should also direct the Open Space District to identify and purchase suitable properties for extensive Sonoma Mountain parklands, at Galvin Ranch and elsewhere, in conjunction with other state and local agencies.

Larry Modell,
Petaluma