Peter Childs, Dan Taranto, Bonnie Blackberry and friends had a huge success at Monday’s GPU meeting. Not only were their ideas incorporated into the General Plan Update (GPU) as requested, Kevin Hamblin and the Supervisors and even myself starting using their words.
They have been a very influential and very under-reported group since they became active in this process as the leaders of the Public Participation Work Group.
I would like to report my thoughts about the Board of Supervisors GPU update later as I’ve been busy and am still processing what happened. We were having a contentious but interesting conversation during the break at the October 21st meeting and would like to continue that online if he is willing. (The same request goes out to Dan Taranto, Bonnie Blackberry, Tom Grover and Supervisor Fennell who are a “truly representative group of people”) I would like to explore what they represent as it seems to me the are heavily representative of property-rights or anti-enforcement interests.
But there I go again being contentious. The reason I’m writing this post is to really try to understand our differences and I would like to start with our disagreement about Supervisor Lovelace’s appearance on KMUD’s Morning Show on the 22nd. I think Mr. Childs complained that he disagreed with what Supervisor Lovelace was saying and I would like to know what exactly because after listening to his review of the process, I found it fair.
So please if any of you are interested let me know. I’ve spoken with each of you now and you have my email. Remember I am coming at this with much less institutional information that you and from a very different perspective believing that it is our county’s responsibility to err on the side of protection of natural resources for the long term rather than property rights. Also, somewhat anti-intuitively given my nom-de-plume, I believe that more democracy within the GPU itself is anti-democratic.
Seems like you have a downhill argument give those frames. (“downhill” as in easier)
*Enshallah is a beautiful Islamic word (imho) that means “God willing”, or as it tends to be used around the dining table (ie informally) when I visit my Turkish family – “hopefully”. As in when my Grandmother says “you will meet a Turkish woman, inshallah” (but she say’s it in Turkish and someone has to translate…it’s complicated) I do think it is relevant here, because I do mean this invitation sincerely. I would hope that Mr. Childs would see this as a sincere attempt to have an online conversation on a subject on which we fundamentally disagree and which I contend will have significant and far-reaching consequences for the future of regional planning. (because it is a sincere invitation)