No to Newcomb bike bridge
Editor: On Nov. 18, the Sonoma City Council voted to locate a bicycle and pedestrian bridge crossing Fryer Creek at the end of Newcomb Street. There were three options before them: a bridge at Newcomb, a bridge at Pickett Street, or no bridge at all. Most of the residents in the immediate neighborhood of the Newcomb site, including the two residents most directly affected, object to the bridge at that location for safety, privacy, security and the cost, which would be higher than at the Pickett site.
There is admittedly strong support for the location at the Newcomb site by some cyclists, including members of the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition. One cyclist from El Verano hails the Newcomb location as “striking a balance between the greater good and private interest.” A member of the Community Services and Environmental Commission says it provides the “best connectivity,” in effect forming a perfect bike path loop of the city.
The Pickett Street option, for the most part, was barely considered by the city council, even though it would, 1. Follow the current bike/pedestrian path through Carter Park that crosses Fryer Creek Drive just north of Pickett Street; 2. Not adversely impact homes right next to it; 3. Cost less. So now the city will use between $180,000-$410,000 in Community Development Agency bond proceeds and Transportation Department Clean Air funds for another bridge across Fryer Creek.
Is it really a greater good to spend this kind of money on another bridge when we have a state and a country that is wallowing in debt to say nothing of the interests of individual homeowners? This does not sit well with me. So I say, beware of those who speak to the greater good, they hit West Spain Street last year and Fryer Creek this year, your neighborhood could be next.
Paulette Lutjens
Sonoma
Time to pay for ‘free’ education
Editor: As a former teacher, I want to applaud both David Donnelley and Maurine Whisenand-Solomonson for their informed and fervent commentaries on the sorry state of support for education. There is plenty of blame to go around, but especially for the state legislature and laws requiring a two/thirds majority for tax revenue increases. Proposition 13 passed because the legislature failed to pass appropriate property tax reforms. Legislators should have been reproved … or maybe guillotined.
With respect to parcel taxes, it should be noted they are nearly always approved by a majority of the voters, even though such taxes are regressive in nature.
For example, a parcel that brings an income pays an equivalent amount as one that brings in none, such as a residence. Note also some residents were dissuaded from support of the school tax because it followed rather closely on the hospital tax. Of course many voters supported both. Give them an A.
I support most state and local taxes, but I would like to see a more equable system. Some thought I was joking when I recommended a “garage tax” in the style of the old English “window tax.” Such a tax on every unit of covered or enclosed parking would require something of renters as well as property owners, yes, even though the garage is used for storage, and the cars are outside. Just a thought.
I think we all support free public education, but we also need to pay for its “freedom.” Teachers have enough to contend with.
Pat Spicer
Glen Ellen
Vendors should manage Farmers Market
Editor: On reading the recent articles and editorials, I feel a distinction should be made. The citizens of Sonoma who attend the Sonoma Valley Certified Farmers Market should be distinguished from the select group of citizens of Sonoma who have applied and been discouraged from being vendors in the market.
Market management has received no complaints from citizens of Sonoma who attend the market. From the discouraged vendors who complained, management also has received no complaints. I do not doubt there have been complaints, but whom and what are they, and what substance do they contain? Apparently, discouraged vendors have found a sympathetic ear that separates them from the possibility of management’s exploring the complaint. This is interference with market management. One result of this interference is the suggestion that the Sonoma Valley Certified Farmers Market does not favor local vendors. Close examination of market management makes this claim inaccurate.
Discouraged vendors who complained at a recent city council meeting were rebutted at a later city council meeting. The market management is grateful for that opportunity. The public rates the Sonoma Valley Farmers Market number one in the county, so it is apparently managed well, supporting both certified farmers and the public.
Recently, the statement was made that “vendors should not be on [the market management] board.” Since vendors know the many requirements that farmers market vendors must satisfy, and the concerns of a certified farmers market, aren’t market vendors best suited to manage it? Extending the concept introduced in that statement then concerned citizens of Sonoma should not be on the city council.
Concerned citizens should comprise the city council, and farmers market vendors should manage the Sonoma Valley Certified Farmers Market.
Russ Bedord
Sonoma
Goal: soccer balls for all
Editor: I am a sophomore at Sonoma Valley High School and I am looking for a little help on a social responsibility project I am working on for my Spanish class. My plan is to collect soccer balls or money to buy soccer balls to send to children in Peru, South America.
My hope is to help provide the tools to increase exercise and create a love of organized sports to a community which has little resources. I came up with this plan because I think it is important to reach out to those in need, and I think this would be a good way to do so.
Since I live in a great community with many athletic resources and I have experienced the advantage of generous coaches who have made a real difference in my life, starting by providing the soccer balls is one way to help kids who are less fortunate.
I have sent letters to a number of organizations in search of an area or group of children who would really benefit from the balls. If anyone has any ideas, contacts, access to soccer balls or suggestions, I would appreciate your input as I am trying to achieve this goal.
Don’t be shy; the more soccer balls the better. I realize I might also need help with shipping, so anything you can do would be appreciated. Thank you in advance.
[EDITOR’S NOTE: For those interested in helping or reaching out to Sam, please e-mail lilkeech4@gmail.com.]
Sam Keechler
Sonoma
A house with heart
Editor: Here at Julie Atwood Events, we’d like to express truly heartfelt thanks to everyone who attended “A Vintage Holiday” on Nov. 21. We realize you have many organizations and causes, all needing and requesting your support. We’re also critically aware of the myriad, wonderful options for Saturday nights in Sonoma!
We try very hard to give our guests a terrific time at all our charitable events, in return for your support of these community assets. We hope that, by opening “the house with heart” for a fabulous party, residents of Sonoma will see Vintage House in a new way. Our incredibly generous vendors and sponsors back us up with amazing donations. This maximizes the direct contribution generated by our events. Thank you to all who helped create Vintage House, and to everyone helping us to maintain and increase its contributions to our community.
Julie Solomon Atwood
Sonoma
Why rebuild the Planning Commission?
Editor: I agree with Herb Golenpaul; something seemed to be missing in the discussion on the structure and appointment of Planning Commissioners. The issue as I understand it was whether to change the appointment process from an application process with the mayor and a councilor conducting interviews and selecting a commissioner to each councilor appointing a commissioner…or not. What did Ms. Gallian have to do with that and why did she have to recuse herself? Councilwoman Gallian’s position as relates to her husband who sits on the Planning Commission was resolved months ago.
I do not support the Planning Commissioners being appointed therefore bypassing the application process and as Mayor Steve Barbose rightly pointed out perhaps overlooking valuable candidates. It also seems Councilwoman Gallian had every right to participate in the discussion.
Yvonne Bowers
Sonoma