Future Housing
After years of protecting open space and wildlands through UGBs and Community Separators, Sonoma Valley finds yet more housing developments being proposed in unincorporated rural areas. The state has a policy of transit-oriented development to reduce greenhouse gasses through the reduction of vehicle miles traveled and the protection of open space. Meanwhile, state and county bureaucrats, at legislators’ direction, are pushing for increased housing in unincorporated areas to meet general and affordable housing goals. This puts our residents at dangerous wildfire risk due to evacuation congestion on small county roads and reduces the ability of the state to reach 30% open space protection by 2030, the governor’s policy for combating climate change.
We need development that takes into consideration climate change, community housing needs, fire safety and the need for rural land to support the local economy—both the agricultural and viticultural aspects, and the hospitality industry. One obvious example is the conflicting restraints put on the county for creating a plan for SDC (“Seeing Potential,” Bohemian, Jan. 5) which, if built with an emphasis on fiscal feasibility instead of the future well-being of the entire community, will adversely affect the entire Valley. Shouldn’t the state pay for the site clean-up and open the door for other approaches to funding the development like a land trust?
Nancy Evers Kirwan
Sonoma
MAGA Reality Show
A Trump-Tim Scott ticket is a sure winner in 2024. Trump’s base is the reality show-sitcom laugh trackers, and there are more of them than people watching PBS. The intellectual down-side of Trump’s base is bottomless. Fast forward to 2028 and the Lindsey Graham–Marjorie Taylor Greene winning ticket: more of the same. 2032 and Donald Trump Jr., and the end is near.
Neil Davis
Sebastopol
