Honyocker's Perspective

Jake might have something to say about that.

Infrastructure & Planning vs. Petty Politics

Who could possibly argue that a few hundred grand in a county of half a million isn’t a drop in the bucket?  In high times and low, we all need to recognize that the publicly paid pension of a single retired police officer (namely the likely new mayor of Santa Rosa) is somewhere around $150k annually – which is significantly greater than the cost of the next stage of study for a core piece of planning infrastructure.

So why then would this important connector between one of Santa Rosa’s largest employers, largest & thriving educational institutions, a future railway station and an expanding retail mall get the squelch treatment?  Because of petty, petty divisiveness and bitter politics.  That’s why.  Namely: councilman John Sawyer.

I had the chance to send a message to the folks I most respect on the Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Board last week – and through the accidental “reply-all” feature by one of the most outspoken members of the BPAB, my original message is now into the public record.  (Brown Act, etc)

So, I’d like to share that whole give & take with you.  First is my message to the BPAB members, then a response by the “senior at large” member, and finally my response.  Along with all the CC’s and BCC’s. I’ve merely removed the personal email addresses out of respect for the recipients.


from Jake Bayless
sender-time Sent at 8:04 AM (GMT-08:00). Current time there: 9:35 AM. ✆
to Beryl Brown,
Beth Dadko,
Dusty Rhodes,
Mark Adams,
Paul Klassen,
Peter Stanley,
Steve Frye,
Tracey Jones,
Barbara Moulton
date Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 8:04 AM
subject Video of a cyclist riding on Steele Lane vs. 101 Overcrossing…
mailed-by gmail.com
Dec 5 (2 days ago)
Hello there-
I hope this note finds you & yours doing well. 

I’m sure you are probably aware of the various things at stake at the upcoming City Council meeting this Tuesday.  Councilman Sawyer has made it clear he intends to revisit the SRJC/101 overcrossing item in order to potentially kill or stall the project.

This morning I came across this recent video of a cyclist riding on Steele Lane & Guerneville Rd from Mendocino to the railroad tracks:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMd8jqZtvo8

What I’m most struck by isn’t how appalling an unsafe conditions are for a cyclist (they are, and City planners need to be held accountable) but by what a mess this route must be for a pedestrian.

Thanks for your service to Santa Rosa – please speak at Tuesday’s at City Council’s meeting.  For the life of me I cannot understand how good planning, foresight and infrastructure have become the petty political pawn that they have become.  The public and the council need to hear from you if you agree.

Fondly,
Jake Bayless  (former BPAB member)


from Dusty Rhodes
sender-time Sent at 10:21 AM (GMT-08:00). Current time there: 9:36 AM. ✆
to Jake Bayless,
Beryl Brown,
Beth Dadko,
Mark Adams,
Paul Klassen,
Peter Stanley,
Steve Frye,
Tracey Jones,
Barbara Moulton
cc John Sawyer
date Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 10:21 AM
subject RE: Video of a cyclist riding on Steele Lane vs. 101 Overcrossing…
mailed-by sonic.net
Dec 5 (2 days ago)

What crap!

If one is afraid to cross under the freeway on a bike just get off and walk in the ped. lane.

Note that most of this route shown is marked with bike lanes.

It is not worth $20 million of tax payers’ money to build this overpass for a very few people on bikes.

Pedestrians on Steele Lane will not walk a half mile out of their way to use the overpass.

If this overpass is needed for SMART (read dumb) access let them pay for it.

Dusty Rhodes, Member, bpab


from Jake Bayless
sender-time Sent at 10:42 PM (GMT-08:00). Current time there: 9:36 AM. ✆
to Dusty Rhodes
bcc Beryl Brown,
Beth Dadko,
Mark Adams,
Paul Klassen,
Peter Stanley,
Steve Frye,
Tracey Jones,
Barbara Moulton,
John Sawyer,
eolivares@srcity.org,
Vas Dupre, Marsha,
gwysocky@srcity.org,
Veronica Jacobi,
Susan Gorin,
Bender, Jane,
jours@srcity.org,
sbartley@srcity.org
date Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 10:42 PM
subject Re: Video of a cyclist riding on Steele Lane vs. 101 Overcrossing…
mailed-by gmail.com
10:42 PM (11 hours ago)

Hi Dusty-

Nice to see you’re still not afraid get in the muck and express your extreme views from the anti-tax, anti-infrastructure perspective!  An admittedly unusual ax-to-grind for a board who’s M.O. is “developing project lists and priorities” for planning recommendation.  Nevertheless…
Fact is, Dusty (and Mister Sawyer), we live in a society that values planning, foresight, and (amazingly – please don’t be surprised) paying it forward.  Noble projects usually are expensive – and long term.  This one is hardly a surprise to anyone – the fact that it has become some sort of “payback’s-a-bitch” affair says more about the sponsor of its demise, frankly, than anything else.
I really just wish there was some way to make you realize this isn’t about bikes – it’s about bitter politics.  It’s just a transportation project.  It’s a connector.
It’s about doing the right thing. It’s about our kids, and the community we wish to leave for them.  Hell, we’re certainly not leaving them any gasoline.
Hope you change your mind and do the right thing.
~jake

12 | 07 | 2010 Posted by | Bikes, Neighborhood Activism, News, Trains | Leave a Comment

Are we going to be SMART about this?

…or are we going to continue being narrow-minded, short-sighted press democrat lemmings?

I’m hearing lots of chatter about the “news” that SMART, our beloved underfunded regional railway system, doesn’t have the cash.  See also:  references in the “agenda packet”

How short our collective memory is.

When we passed Measure Q to fund SMART in 2008, we all thought that we were AT the bottom of the economic meltdown!  We figured (and SMART calculated, and we voted supporting) that there’d be the standard post-recession boom right around the corner!  So while the feds & Wall Street argue about who knew the economic collapse was coming, when, and how bad, certainly we-the-voting-public had no idea just how bad it might still be, several years later.    We’re all still waiting for the boom.  We’re all waiting for the uptick in tax revenues that SMART’s (our) measure Q was designed around.  Well: Surprise!

We passed a sales tax initiative to accomplish commuter rail in the North Bay – an ideal public goal (which still stands as an ideal public goal).  So now that sales taxes haven’t stacked up like we all thought they would, this has suddenly become another government boondoggle?  No.  That’s just not accurate, no matter how many times you say it!

SMART doesn’t have the money because WE haven’t paid it in the form of the sales taxes WE agreed to pay!  It’s OUR freaking fault, gang!  While there may ultimately be a handful of cost overruns, we voted for it anyway knowing full well that’s the nature of the beast!  Today’s issue isn’t about inflationary overruns either.

Now, hindsight being what it is, the taxation equation of the SMART measure probably SHOULD have had some sliding scale consideration to account for this.  It didn’t.  Perhaps a rewrite of measure Q is in order?

We have to decide: do we take the long view and accept it for what it is with a revised longer timeframe?  Or do we come up with an additional stopgap funding measure?

We can choose to stand back and point fingers at the problem, get all blearey eyed mad and make fun of it, -OR- we can buck up, take some personal ownership of the problem and decide what’s right is to give it a hand back onto its feet, pat it on the butt, and push it along down the tracks.

What’re you going to do?

11 | 03 | 2010 Posted by | blog-o-rama, News, Trains | Leave a Comment

Levi’s GranFondo Cyclists in Hospital – PD Trolls Wage War.

Serious threats with looming felonious repercussions have been removed from the Press Democrat’s forum website in the last 12 hours.  I was able to preserve a screenshot of the page, and the threats against Sonoma County Cyclists (image below).

It is my hope that by preserving this, everyone can learn to take this kind of hate-speech more seriously.  While I understand that the folks at the PD have a very difficult job to do – every day – I do not want to see this potential evidence swept under the rug.  Doing so, in my mind, would equate to complicity.  It is not known if the original is lost forever, along with the offensive poster’s IP addresses, etc.

Currently, there are TWO Gran Fondo cyclists in the hospital with life threatening brain injuries.  One is a confirmed & witnessed hit & run (as reported), the other has evidence of a hit & run, but no witness, and an injured party with no memory of the accident on Coleman Valley Road.  The vehicle that is responsible for the confirmed hit & run is reported to have been seen on Coleman Valley Road around the time of the unconfirmed injury.

The community needs your help in tracking down and prosecuting these potential cyclist murderers.

Admittedly, the following may not be associated in any way/shape or form to the hit & run(s).  Nevertheless, it warrants your attention:
Please read the following screenshot of the now-removed PD Forum topic:  (Click for a Larger & original view)

see description for full text of forum page

The image above was taken from this URL prior to the removal/supression of the content:

http://forum.pressdemocrat.com/viewtopic.php?t=3579&f=6#p37736

10 | 12 | 2010 Posted by | Bikes, News | 3 Comments

I need your help.

Tasting Room Parcel Site Map

Parcel Site Map

I received this email below, along with many of my neighbors, from the steering committee that is working hard on the permit appeal for (opposition to) the Fort Ross Tasting Room on Meyers Grade Road.

Full disclosure: I am formerly a member of the steering committee of the tasting room opposition.  I departed the committee in August, and I have tremendous respect for the people and their huge efforts before, during and after my departure.  That said: Contrary to their wishes, I refused to remain civil towards the applicant because he has, on several occasions, directly and indirectly threatened me and my neighbors.  The permit applicant for this tasting room has threatened ALL his neighbors with investigations into our varied permitted, and potentially UN-permitted land use as retaliation against his tasting-room’s foes.  What I have seen, read and heard from the applicant and others amounts to nothing less than the extortion of our neighborhood to force his project’s approval and to squelch dissenting opinions.  That said, it’s important for anyone bothering to read this to have some background, however it is information that is fortunately NOT necessary nor effectual to the permit appeal itself.  The following information is.

The bullet points below are plain language reasons why this might probably matter to you.  Also important is the precedent this tasting room might set County-wide. This is something that will have much broader ramifications than simply a tasting room on the coast, as the applicant and his supporters would like everyone to yawn & believe. This tasting room, if approved, will open the door to tasting rooms literally ANYwhere in greater Sonoma County – all under the guise of “jobs” and “economic development”. Beware of the wolf in sheep’s clothing. more information & permit documents

Please take a minute to read the email to neighbors from the Opposition Steering Committee: {my comments in curly braces}


September 6, 2010

Hello-

Thank you for your interest in opposing the development of a tasting room at Fort Ross Vineyard on Meyers Grade Road.  A hearing before the Board of Supervisors is scheduled for Tuesday, September 21, at 2:30 pm in the Board of Supervisors Meeting Room. {please mark your calendar and attend!} It would be wonderful and is very important to have you and your friends there as a show of support!  It is also important that as many letters and/or e-mails as possible be sent, addresses and talking points provided below.

Written letters:

Supervisor District 5 – Efren Carrillo
County of Sonoma Board of Supervisors
575 Administration Drive, Room 100A
Santa Rosa, CA 95403

E-mail:

Efren Carrillo <ecarrillo@sonoma-county.org>
cc: Susan Upchurch <supchurc@sonoma-county.org>

Reference/Subject line:
Sept 21 Board Hearing – UPE09-0027

Talking Points:

Opposition Based On:

1. General Plan 2020 assures that visitor-oriented uses are compatible with and protect areas of the County with natural, undeveloped, scenic character.  {The tasting room is a large, commercial operation – NOT conducive to protecting the environment, nor the natural scenic character}

2. This wine tasting room would set a precedent. There are presently no wine tasting rooms open to the public, year round, without reservations in vineyards on Meyers Grade, Ft. Ross, King Ridge Roads. {Regionally, there are many other roads and rural areas where the same precedent might apply}

3. The tasting room and special events will increase commercial traffic and also put visiting, alcohol compromised, drivers on our narrow, winding, often foggy roads.  {Roads with NO shoulder, and the same roads which are becoming more & more popular with recreational & competitive cyclists.  It is my opinion that Wine Tasting & cycling tourism are not compatible uses on roads which have not been designed to accomodate both uses.  Namely: roads that have no shoulder, where auto & bike traffic MUST share the roadway are not appropriate for tasting rooms that introduce ANY level or risk of inebriated drivers onto the road.}

4. More traffic, large events and drinking drivers increase the need for emergency medical, law enforcement and fire services.  {…Critical services that are already pushed to the max by existing uses}

5. This is a groundwater-scarce area. {!!!} The special events will occur during the driest months of the year and may compromise ground water availability to neighbors, who depend on wells and springs.

6. Large outdoor events create noise that interferes with the quiet and natural sounds residents and visitors treasure.

We {/I} Support:

1. Wine tasting rooms, events and sales in already existing commercial areas in Timber Cove, Stewarts Point, Sea Ranch, Gualala, Jenner, Duncan’s Mills, Monte Rio and Bodega Bay.  {Important to note: Denying this permit would NOT deny the owner the ability to market their wine and their vineyard’s terroir!  Denying the permit would send the message to a misguided APPLICANT (and others just like him, County-wide) that tasting rooms need to be put in APPROPRIATE places in Sonoma County.  This is a VERY important distinction!  My impression is that this opposition group (myself included) is NOT NIMBY, is NOT anti-business, and largely supports businesses and the wine industry in our area!}

2. Visitor services, such as parks, campgrounds, inns and stores, on Highway One, focusing on our unique redwood coast and ocean ecosystems.

For any of you who live in the area your personal insights are equally important to state.

Thank you for your time and please get involved! Feel free to share this message with others who might support the cause.

Nancy Feehan, Shawn Harb and Kay Barnes representing

The Steering Committee-Fort Ross Tasting Room Opposition

09 | 06 | 2010 Posted by | Neighborhood Activism, schwartz-o-rama, Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

When in Rome…

image

Have a Shirley Temple.

08 | 06 | 2010 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Huckleberry City!

image

Looks like this year is shaping up to be a bumper crop… which is particularly good, as huckleberry pie is the yummiest!

08 | 02 | 2010 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Advance Copy of Final Report

2010 cover imageI’ve just tracked down an advance copy of the Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury 2009/2010 Final Report.

Here it is for you to share:  ~12MB PDF

2010 Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury Final Report

06 | 29 | 2010 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Something stinky this way comes…

I’m a huge fan of vision, of ideals, of planning and of forethought… Equality, fairness, transparency – just some of the things that make our, my beloved communities strong.

I’m appalled by this.

SMART (an otherwise fanfuckingtastic idea) walks into the room and says, “oh yeah Mrs. Codding [and Codding Enterprises LLC], we would LOVE for you to spend a bunch of money on a study to convince us that we should put a train station closer to your poor languishing mall…”  Continuing:  ”Hell, if you spend that kind of money, it’ll be a slam dunk, too!”

So, Deborah Fudge.  What the hell are you thinking?  You don’t take campaign contributions from the Coddings who are wooing you to put your train station next to their mall.   I’m not even in your supervisorial district, so I really have not a lot of vested interest in this shit – but you can rest assured I sure do hope that my board of supervisors knows how to think more clearly and strategically than you apparently have here, honey:

See page 8 of THIS, your campaign contributions report. (.PDF culled from Sonoma-County.org)

Here’s my beef:

There is already enough reported hanky panky going on with my beloved trains.  The very LAST thing I want to see is more potential controversy to pull it down!   I am begging you!  Come clean, Deb.  Don’t try to smooth this over.  Do the right thing and air it all out.  Shine a little light.

06 | 02 | 2010 Posted by | Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Money where our mouths are…

Eight years ago my wife and I had one of the most fun days of our lives – we invited our friends & family to the Seaview ridge to join us on our wedding day… This is an (admittedly terrible) snapshot of our caveat for everyone in attendance:

“One Rule:  If you are planning on consuming ANY alcohol, we will insist you stay the night with us… We invited you because we like you – and we’d prefer not to send the fire trucks after you… Enough said.”

04 | 28 | 2010 Posted by | Uncategorized | 1 Comment

20100428 Communique

Rec’d today from Mr. Schwartz:

Dear Mr. Bayless:

In your posting on your blog you ask me to point out when you have missed something pertinent.

Although I do not think that continuing the conversation is particularly constructive at this stage of events, I regret that it has become necessary to respond to your postings and emails lest my failure to respond in your chosen forum is misconstrued by you or anyone else.

I find it really depressing that the tenor of your “communiqués” on your blog and your emails suggest that you would almost welcome the possibility of an accident occurring in our neighborhood so that you can say “I told you so” and then blame us. The problem with your attempt to lay a guilt trip on us on the subject of alcohol and traffic is that you should rather lay it on yourself because of your own complicity and inaction in what is going on right now. I will explain why so that you might consider a little more introspection on the subject.

You live at 33850 Kruse Ranch Road 10.6 miles and a 26 minute drive to the north of our tasting room site.

Less than ¼ of a mile and a minute or two further down Kruse Ranch Road from your residence to the West from Seaview Road is Fritz Hagist’s Ranch at 34895 Kruse Ranch Road where he hosts the Oktoberfest Blacksmithing conference every year. That event is usually a 4 day event where hundreds of blacksmiths and others interested in blacksmithing gather every year. A great deal of beer and other alcohol is consumed there yet I have never heard you once say that Fritz should stop his Oktoberfest. I have never once heard you say the Fritz should get a use permit for his activities or do a traffic study or any of the other studies that I voluntarily conducted. No, you just conveniently ignore something that goes on a stone’s throw from your residence on a road where your children actually play. You are probably aware that there was a drunken driving accident as a result of the excessive consumption of alcohol at one of those events. How do you square that with your attacks on our project which is a 26 minute drive away?

As I happen to have an interest in blacksmithing I think that the Oktoberfest is a wonderful event that encourages artisanal blacksmithing and social interaction. The event also brings people into the area and helps the local hotels, commerce and employment on the coast. It supports the arts and helps the community. Do you not consider those as positives?

There is currently a lot of alcohol consumed both on the Ridge and along Highway One at the many restaurants and places that sell alcohol where it is consumed on the premises as well as purchased for consumption later on the Ridge. I have seen local travelers throw beer cans out their truck and car windows. I regularly have to go along Meyers Grade and pick up empty beer cans that have been thrown out of passing vehicles and are trashing the neighborhood. So the suggestion that no one travelling our roads has any connection with alcohol is just not accurate

There are community events where beer, wine or champagne are sold or served from time to time. What are you doing to stop all the other alcohol consumption on the ridge and on Highway One? Have you ever protested about any of those?

Some say that they do not want one more car on the road. There are a number of other professionals, artists and artisans in the neighborhood that have retail businesses, studios, offices and even signs on the road that have lots of visitors and customers? The ridge is full of examples. Do you want them to all be required to go through the time consuming and expensive legal processes and hearings that I have done in order to follow the law? I would prefer not to interfere with what others have done but I resent attacks on our project which has painstakingly followed the proper process.

Are you and those who may share your opposition at this time going to require that everyone on the ridge who has not done so to date should now apply for permits and go through the whole expensive official process that I had to go through? We are after all “a country of laws not and not of men” Are you going to insist on a level playing field? Should I?

Is it wise for people in glass houses should not throw stones? I think that it is it is a dangerous and provocative practice and can have some very significant unintended consequences.

Please post this response your Blog.

Having responded as you have forced me to do and I would now like to conclude the conversation and move on. I would like to make peace with you if you are willing to reciprocate. It may surprise both of us that we probably have more in common than separates us. Again I ask that you come over to the site and meet with me so we can discuss things and possibly get to know each other in person rather than continue an abstract conversation in the ether. If you wish to meet please let me know.

Lester Schwartz

__________________

Jake’s comments:

I’m sorry, I have work to do today that overrides my ability to respond point by point in belabored detail as I would wish… but here is a quick bullet retort, Mr. Schwartz:

#1:  My position remains that what your existing plan intends to do is willingly introduce a greater risk of the hazard of unfamiliar and inebriated drivers on the roads we rely upon.  I still can think of a myriad of ways you can accomplish your business wishes and still not have an active tasting room on Meyers Grade Road – a wholly inappropriate place for a tasting room.

#2: Fritz Hagist is a wonderful man, a longtime active member of the community (certainly longer than me), and someone who has earned the respect and admiration of his neighbors in the always kind, respectful and upstanding manner with which he conducts himself.  If what you are doing is some veiled threat towards his convention, his well being, rest assured that the community would come together in a heartbeat to make certain that his work as an artist, a teacher, a friend, neighbor and blacksmith would continue just as it has for decades.

And no, Fritz’s blacksmith event occurs once a year, and I have personally witnessed what you suggest to be wholly inaccurate:  the weekend event does not put drinking people onto the roads.  And if it did, I’m certain Fritz would do like the rest of us and require designated drivers.  He respects his neighbors safety.  You might have known this if you actually were interested, like so many of us are, and have shown up to see.  I’ll go ahead and call your bluff.

#3: You write to me as if I’m a tee-totaler… Not the case.  Beer, wine, parties, fun, naked women – all great things!  Of course, when done responsibly.   I suggested this to you months ago – while everyone I am working with has slightly different rationales for being opposed to your tasting room – my personal opposition is one that I know to be the case:  When people drink wine at tasting rooms, they generally ALWAYS leave slightly inebriated, and rarely have designated drivers.   Frankly, I think there’s room in our society for that in MANY places.      A driver having .02 BAC is fine – we all know – in most cases, in most adults, and on most roads.   But NOT on Meyers Grade, Fort Ross, Seaview, Hauser Bridge, Kruse Ranch, King Ridge, and many others – and certainly not for folks unfamiliar with the roads.  It’s as clear as day to me.

#4:  We all try to do our part to keep the roads clean from the n’er-do-wells who toss their garbage.  Good job.

#5:  There are all kinds of community events that involve social drinking!  It’s a great neighborhood!  And, inasmuch as I have personally witnessed, the vast majority of said events involve overnight camping (weddings, holidays, etc) and designated drivers, and all sorts of things to cope with what WE ALL know to be true:  the roads are unsafe with any level of alcohol in our systems.  Again, I’ll simply point out for the crowd that this bluff won’t work either.  I’ve only been a part of this coastal family for a decade or so… and in that time I have witnessed your attendance exactly zero times at any of these remarkable community events.  I’m sure I missed something you have attended or participated with… but we both know that’s just another bluff.

#6:  Unintended consequences?  As in: if I or the opposition group continue to push against your project you might start your litigious ways that everyone knows you have a penchant for?

For such an oblique threat, Mr. Schwartz, you can quote me any time you like – you’re an asshole.

You give me and so many people every imaginable reason to oppose a project that shouldn’t have been allowed to be initiated in the first place.  I look forward to following every procedural & legal remedy to make certain you come to the understanding that you are wrong, and friendly, courteous, righteous neighbors shall prevail.  We are a land of laws, and you have pushed against the boundary of permissible legal manipulation.

~jake

04 | 28 | 2010 Posted by | schwartz-o-rama | Leave a Comment

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.