"Plan Bay Area is Racist" - testimony from Walnut Creek 4/22/2013 (This is the "disruption" that the MTC wants to avoid in public meetings).

Fable: The Fox and the Stork

One day, Mister Fox invited Miss Stork for dinner.
Miss Stork was very pleased with the invitation and accepted.
However, Mister Fox only pretended to be a gentleman and had a very sly personality.
He thought about how he could deceive Miss Stork.
Mister Fox prepared a delicious soup. He arranged the food on flat plates.


It was impossible for Miss Stork to eat from the plate with her long beak.
Any effort from the stork to try to grip some food was useless. Miss Stork was so very sad.
Mister Fox could easily finish his plate with his lapping muzzle.

A few days later, Miss Stork returned the invitation from Mister Fox.
Without a moment of hesitation, he replied that he would go to Miss Stork’s dinner party.
He hurried to be right on time.
Mister Fox praised the politeness of Miss Stork for the re-invitation.
Miss Stork was preparing wonderful meat. She cut the meat in bitesize pieces.
The appetizing smell made his desire for the food irresistable. Mister Fox was very hungry.
But Miss Stork had made her plan how to serve dinner.
She had thought about how she could torture the fox.
She arranged the food into tall and slim vases.

For the stork, it was a convenient way of eating.
Her long beak could go in and out the vase easily.
By all means, the snout of the fox wouldn’t enter the vase.
Mister Fox left the dinner party with drooping head and tail,
The hungry guest had to leave without having any food.
Miss Stork had her revenge on Mister Fox.

 

Moral of Aesops Fable: "One bad turn deserves another."

 

FABLES: King Canute on the Seashore

by: James Baldwin, The Book of Virtues

Long ago, England was ruled by a king named Canute. Like many leaders and men of power, Canute was surrounded by people who were always praising him. 

Every time he walked into a room, the flattery began. "You are the greatest man that ever lived," one would say. "O king, there can never be another as mighty as you," another would insist. "Your highness, there is nothing you cannot do," someone would smile. "Great Canute, you are the monarch of all," another would sing. "Nothing in this world dares to disobey you." 

The king was a man of sense, and he grew tired of hearing such foolish speeches. One day he was walking by the seashore, and his officers and courtiers were with him, praising him as usual. Canute decided to teach them a lesson. 

"So you say I am the greatest man in the world?" he asked them. "O king," they cried, "there never has been anyone as mighty as you, and there never be anyone so great, ever again!" "And you say all things obey me?" Canute asked. "Absolutely!" they said. "The world bows before you, and gives you honor." "I see," the king answered. "In that case, bring me my chair, and we will go down to the water." "At once, your majesty!" They scrambled to carry his royal chair over the sands. 

"Bring it closer to the sea," Canute called. "Put it right here, right at the water's edge." He sat down and surveyed the ocean before him. "I notice the tide is coming in. Do you think it will stop if I give the command?" 

His officers were puzzled, but they did not dare say no. "Give the order, O great king, and it will obey," one of then assured him. "Very well. Sea," cried Canute, "I command you to come no further! Waves, stop your rolling!. Surf, stop your pounding! Do not dare touch my feet!" He waited a moment, quietly, and a tiny wave rushed up the sand and lapped at his feet. "How dare you!" Canute shouted. "Ocean, turn back now! I have ordered you to retreat before me, and now you must obey! Go back!" 

And in answer another wave swept forward and curled around the king's feet. The tide came in, just as it always did. The water rose higher and higher. It came up around the king's chair, and wet not only his feet, but also his robe. His officers stood before him, alarmed, and wondering whether he was not mad. 

"Well, my friends," Canute said, "it seems I do not have quite so much power as you would have me believe. Perhaps you have learned something today. Perhaps now you will remember there is only one King who is all-powerful, and it is he who rules the sea, and holds the ocean in the hollow of his hand. I suggest you reserve your praises for him." The royal officers and courtiers hung their heads and looked foolish. And some say Canute took off his crown soon afterward, and never wore it again.

Fable: The Evil Wizard and the Secret Chamber

Había una vez un hechicero que, disfrazado de mendigo iba de casa en casa, llevándose a las muchachas más bonitas que encontraba, y ninguna volvía a ver a sus padres.      Un día fué a pedir limosna a la casa de un hombre que tenía tres hijas muy hermosas, la mayor de las cuales le dió una gran rebanada de pan. Al volverse ella, el hechicero la tocó en el brazo y, aun contra su voluntad, la pobre muchacha se sintió obligado a entrar en la cesta que el mendigo llevaba a cuestas; una vez dentro de ésta, el hechicero se la llevó con el a su casa, situada en medio de un espeso bosque. Todo era allí magnífico, y había todo cuanto la muchacha pudiera apetecer. Pasado algunos días le dijo el hechicero que se veía precisado a emprender un viaje, por lo cual le entregaba las llaves de la casa, añadiendo que la dejaba en libertad para recorrer todas las habitaciones, excepto una, y previniéndola que, si entraba en aquella habitación prohibida, moriría. Al mismo tiempo le dió un huevo y le encargó mucho que no se lo extraviara. Cuando el hechicero se hubo perdido de vista, empezó la joven a revisar oda la casa, encontrando todas las abitaciones llenas de bellos objetos. Por fín, llegó a la puerta de la cámara prohibida y, después de vacilar por un momento, la curiosidad la venció y entró. El espectáculo que se le ofreció a l vista la dejó aterrada: vió un sinnúmero de muchachas que habían sido hechas prisioneras, y todas ellas estaban como dormidas. La joven, impresionada por la inmovilidad de aquellos cuerpos, salió corriendo del cuarto, huyendo todo lo más lejos que le fue posible. En su espanto, dejó caer el huevo que llevaba en la mano, el cual no se rompió, pero cuando lo levantó del suelo, notó que se le había manchado de rojo, y a pesar de lo mucho que lo intentó, no pudo limpiarlo. Pocas horas después volvió el hechicero, y al momento pidió a la joven las llaves y el huevo que le había dejado. Tan pronto como vió las manchas rojas en el huevo, comprendió que había entrado en el cuarto prohibido y la derribó al suelo, y arrastrándola hasta la cámara secreta, la dejó allí encerrada con las otras. El hechicero se dirigió de nuevo a la casa en que había pedido el pan, y esta vez se llevó a la hija segunda. También ella se dejó vencer por la curiosidad, y corrió la misma suerta que su hermana. El brujo entonces, capturó y se llevó a la única hermana que quedaba, pero ésta era muy astuta, de tal manera que, cuando recibió el huevo y las llaves, sin la menor tardanza depositó el huevo con mucho cuidado en una alacena. Cogió luego la llave y se dirigió a la cámara prohibida para averiguar qué había en ella. Con gran estupor vió ue el suelo se hallaba cubierto de muchachas sumidas en profundo sueño, y que entre ellas estaban sus dos hermanas. Como era más juiciosa que las otras, tuvo mucho cuidado en conservar el huevo bien limpio. Cuando el brujo regresó a casa, corrió la joven a su encuentro, llevando las llaves y el huevo; entonces, viendo él que estaba limpio, exclamó: - Tú serás mi esposa, ya que has sabido resistir la prueba. Pero el hechicero ya no podía obrar a su antojo, porque su prometida había roto el encanto y hacía lo que quería de él; valiéndose de esto se fué al cuarto prohibido y despertó a las durmientes prisioneras que estaban allí encantadas. Luego dijo al brujo: - Antes de que me case contigo, debes llevar, una cesta llena de oro a mis padres. Tomó una cesta muy grande y mandó entrar en ella a sus dos hermanas, a las que cubrió con una capa de monedas de oro, para que no se vieran. Hecho esto, dijo al hechicero que cargara con la cesta y que tuviera buen cuidado de no entretenerse por el camino, pues ella le estaría vigilando desde una ventana. El hombre se cargó la cesta a las espaldas y echó a andar, pero era la carga tan pesada, que se caía de fatiga. Sentose, pues, para descansar, pero en el mismo momento oyó una voz que salía de la cesta y le decía: "Te estoy mirando desde mi ventana." Creyendo que era la voz de su futura esposa, se puso en marcha otra vez, haciendo mucho esfuerzo. Cada vez que trataba de descansar ocurría lo mismo, hasta que, por fín llegó a casa de los padres, donde dejó la cesta. Mientras él hacía este camino su prometida cogió una cabeza de cartón y la colocó en una ventana del piso superior, como si fuera alguien que vigilara. Luego dió libertad a todas las víctimas del hechicero y repartió invitaciones para la boda. Finalmente se cubrió el cuerpo con plumas, de modo que pareciese un pájaro raro y nadie pudiese reconocerla. Así salió de la casa. A poco encontró a algunos de los invitados, que le dijeron: - ¿De dónde vienes, ave, tan hermosa? - De las Casa en que el brujo se desposa. - Y ¿qué hace, dí, la linda prometida? - Después de haberse puesto muy pulida, con el traje nupcial engalanada, a la ventana la dejé asomada. Cuando volvió el brujo a la casa, miró hacia la ventana, y viendo la cabeza, creyó que era su futura esposa. Entró precipitadamente; más, apenas lo hubo hecho, los parientes y amigos de las tres hermanas, que le aguardaban allí para vengarse del mal que a ellas les había causado, cerraron las puertas y pegaron fuego a la casa. Este fué el fín que tuvieron el hechicero y su cámara prohibida.

Once there was an evil wizard who, dressed as a beggar, would go from house to house asking for alms and would steal the prettiest girls he could find. None of them could ever return home. One day he knocked on the door of a house where lived a man with three beautiful daughters. The eldest opened the door and gave him a piece of bread. When she gave it to him he touched her arm and hypnotized her. Then he made her enter the basket that he always carried on his back and took her to his house which was situated in the midst of the woods. Everything there was magnificent, and she had everything she could wish for. After a few days the wizard told her that he had to go on a journey, that he would leave her the keys to all the house, and that she could enter every room except one. If she should enter that room she would surely die. Also, he gave her an egg and asked her to take good care of it. As soon as the wizard was out of sight, the girl looked into every room and found beautiful things that delighted her. At last she approached the prohibited chamber and after a moment's indecision, her curiosity won and she entered the room. What she saw made her tremble. There were hundreds of girls that had been kidnapped and all looked as if they had fallen asleep. The girl, frightened at the sight, went running out of the room as fast as she could. In her haste she dropped the egg that she carried in her hand, but it did not break. When she picked it up she noticed that the egg had turned red, and although she tried to clean it, the egg stayed red. After some time the wizard came back. He noticed what had happened to the egg, struck the girl, and dragged her into the prohibited chamber, where he left her with the others. The wizard then went back to the same house and stole the second sister and the same thing happened to her. He went back a third time and kidnapped the younger sister, but this sister was very wise. When the wizard gave her the keys and the egg, she took the egg and deposited it in the cupboard. Then she took the keys and went into the prohibited chamber. She was amazed at seeing so many girls lying as if in a profound sleep. Amongst them she recognized her two sisters. She left the room and closed the door. When she heard the wizard returning, she took the egg and the keys and went to meet him. "You shall be my wife because you have resisted curiosity," he exclaimed. As the girl had broken the spell, the wizard had lost his power and she could do with him as she pleased, so she went to the prohibited chamber and awoke all the girls. Then she went to the wizard and told him. "Before I marry you, you must go and take a basket full of gold to my parents." She took a great big basket and in it she hid her two sisters covering them with pieces of gold. Then she told the wizard to take the basket but not to stop on the road because she would be watching him from the window. The man took the basket and started walking but soon was worn out by fatigue. He sat down to rest, but immediately heard a voice which said "I am watching you from my window." Thinking it was the voice of his future wife, he got up and walked a while longer. Every time he tried to rest, the same thing happened, until finally he reached the house where his fiancée's parents lived. There he left the basket. In the meantime, his future wife took a piece of cardboard and made a head which she placed on the window sill of the second floor, making it look as if someone was watching from the window. Then she went and let out the other victims and invited them all to her wedding. Finally, she covered her whole body with feathers, disguising herself as a rare bird so that no one could recognize her, and left the house. Soon she met some of the guests that she had invited to the wedding and they asked her: "From where do you come beautiful bird?" "From the house where the wizard is being wedded." "And please tell, what does the beautiful bride do?" "After being all dressed up in her beautiful wedding gown she leans out of the window looking down." When the wizard returned home, the window of the second floor was open, he looked towards it and saw the head there. He thought it was his future wife and he ran excitedly into the house, but upon entering he encountered all the family and sisters of the girl, who dragged him into the chamber, locked the door and set fire to the house. And this was the end of the wizard and his prohibited chamber.

Lesson in Liberty-Should Majorities decide Everything?

Stalinist Urbanism

One Bay Area Plan is coming to Marinwood-Lucas Valley 

[Editor's Note: The ideas of Smart Growth and the One Bay Area Plan are similiar to the autocratic land use planning under the Soviet power. The author of this article reaches many of the same conclusions that we have concerning Smart Growth.  Freedom and responsibility under democratic self rule are preferable bureaucratic oppression and tyranny.]

Excerpt from Urbanism under Stalin

Postwar development brought historicism to new extremes in the form of monumental plazas, dramatic statues, and seven famous "wedding cake" high-rises built throughout the city between 1947 and 1953. The largest and perhaps most extravagant is Lomonosov Moscow State University (MSU), which includes a botanical garden and extensive landscaping connected to the park along the river at Lenin (currently Sparrow) Hills.


MSU today.


Fearful symmetry, 1949.


An earlier design, 1947.


Open land around the new building, 1954.


New development, 1957.


An older house prepared for demolition to accommodate the Universitet neighborhood along Leninsky Prospect, 1957.

Housing for everyday citizens remained terribly insufficient, as elites were given beautiful apartments in the city and cottages in the country. New residential development tended to follow a kvartal model, in which buildings of roughly 5-10 stories were bounded by a city block with shops at street level and shared interior courtyards. Today, at least in the more affluent neighborhoods of Moscow, these structures have aged well. They combine density with pleasant landscaping and easy access to amenities. This model influenced the development of larger apartment blocks in "microdistricts" after Stalin's rule. These places are generally not considered beautiful. Still, there is much to be said for the kvartal idea.


Kvartal-like courtyard at lower-right corner, beside the residential tower at Kudrinskaya Square, 1954.

Stalinist urbanism draws upon a number of ideas raised in the 1920s for the socialist city, including the modernization of infrastructure, communal housing, employment and amenities close to home, ubiquitous public transportation, and the integration of green space. However, basic human needs were neglected in favor of industrial development and an image of grandeur. Human rights were given even less concern. This abuse of power in the name of socialism is an enduring tragedy. Stalin's massive urban modernization projects made it possible for Moscow to accommodate a great influx of people. But I'm not sure if they improved living conditions on the whole, or if the ecological consequences can be justified.

Stalin surveying a construction site, followed by Voroshilov, a removed person, and an unidentified person, mid-1930s.

In some ways Moscow's high-density living, extensive public transportation system, and accessible parks sound like a contemporary planner's dream. However, after reading about Stalin I've become more sympathetic to the flip side of this equation, the suburban house with a small park (ie, yard) of one's own, where we can adapt the environment on a smaller scale without imposing our will on others. Can urban condos and parks meet those kinds of needs?
"Increased public spending on health and physical education," a section from the Second Five Year Plan, 1934.

This might seem like a loss of faith in cities, but the real problem is abusive power. Stalin accomplished many things in Moscow that have proven of enduring value. But process is at least as important as results in this case. Great places can come about through autocratic, democratic, capitalist, and socialist means. But for the good of daily life in cities, a democratic socialism sounds preferable to autocratic socialism or democratic capitalism. Oppression and exploitation must give way to freedom and responsibility.

Remembering Marinwood's Past

HEY, WASN'T THIS US?

A little house with three bedrooms,
one bathroom and one car on the street.
A mower that you had to push
to make the grass look neat.

In the kitchen on the wall
we only had one phone,
And no need for recording things,
someone was always home.

We only had a living room
where we would congregate,
unless it was at mealtime
in the kitchen where we ate.

We had no need for family rooms
or extra rooms to dine.
When meeting as a family
those two rooms would work out fine.

We only had one TV set
and channels maybe two,
But always there was one of them
with something worth the view.

For snacks we had potato chips
that tasted like a chip.
And if you wanted flavor
there was Lipton's onion dip.

Store-bought snacks were rare because
my mother liked to cook
and nothing can compare to snacks
in Betty Crocker's book.

Weekends were for family trips
or staying home to play.
We all did things together --
even go to church to pray.

When we did our weekend trips
depending on the weather,
no one stayed at home because
we liked to be together.

Sometimes we would separate
to do things on our own,
but we knew where the others were
without our own cell phone.

Then there were the movies
with your favorite movie star,
and nothing can compare
to watching movies in your car.

Then there were the picnics
at the peak of summer season,
pack a lunch and find some trees
and never need a reason.

Get a baseball game together
with all the friends you know,
have real action playing ball --
and no game video.

Remember when the doctor
used to be the family friend,
and didn't need insurance
or a lawyer to defend?

The way that he took care of you
or what he had to do,
because he took an oath and strived
to do the best for you.

Remember going to the store
and shopping casually,
and when you went to pay for it
you used your own money?

Nothing that you had to swipe
or punch in some amount,
and remember when the cashier person
had to really count?

The milkman used to go
from door to door,
And it was just a few cents more
than going to the store.

There was a time when mailed letters
came right to your door,
without a lot of junk mail ads
sent out by every store.

The mailman knew each house by name
and knew where it was sent;
there were not loads of mail addressed
to "present occupant."

There was a time when just one glance
was all that it would take,
and you would know the kind of car,
the model and the make.

They didn't look like turtles
trying to squeeze out every mile;
they were streamlined, white walls, fins
and really had some style.
One time the music that you played
whenever you would jive,
was from a vinyl, big-holed record
called a forty-five.

The record player had a post
to keep them all in line
and then the records would drop down
and play one at a time.

Oh sure, we had our problems then,
just like we do today
and always we were striving,
trying for a better way.

Oh, the simple life we lived
still seems like so much fun,
how can you explain a game,
just kick the can and run?

And why would boys put baseball cards
between bicycle spokes
and for a nickel, red machines
had little bottled Cokes?
This life seemed so much easier
and slower in some ways.
I love the new technology
but I sure do miss those days.

So time moves on and so do we
and nothing stays the same,
but I sure love to reminisce
and walk down memory lane.
With all today's technology
we grant that it's a plus!
But it's fun to look way back and say,
Hey look,guys, THAT WAS US!

Editor's note: This poem was sent to me by a neighbor who moved to Marinwood in the early 1960s. It was an affordable place to raise his family and call home.  Now political and financial interests want to destroy this community they call "sprawl" in favor of high density low income apartments and condominiums.  Although he wants to stay in our neighborhood, he is fed up and will be moving to another state soon. He is concerned with crime, more taxes and decline in property values,  He has been a pillar of our community for decades and will be missed.

Why are 500+ acres at St Vincents/Silveira Ranch an Affordable Housing Combining District?

Viturally all of the land from the 101 freeway to the Smart Train line has been given the Affordable Housing Combining District designation.  This is well over 500 acres and coincides with the imagined development that Peter Calthorpe envisioned in the 1980s. The Smart Trail is over a mile to the east from 101.  This is a HUGE area that has the potential for thousands of units of affordable housing at 30 units per acre.  It easily could DOUBLE our area population.

But the Community Development department is telling us than they "only 3.5 acres is needed to build 224 units of housing."  

Curious,  I began to ask questions.  "Why is so much land set aside for affordable housing? " "How much land will be set aside for essential commercial services, schools, and other dwelling types?"

I was told to consult the County Plan and the Housing Element for answers  (500 pages of planning goobledy gook).   

"You are interpreting it wrong" they told me. 

 "Okay",  I said, "then please point out to me the exact language that limits development to 3.5 acres   I did not receive a cogent response.

Why do YOU suppose they want to set aside so much land for their plans?   Why can't they state their plans explicitly?     

Come to the Planning commission on June 22nd to speak up for the future of our neighborhood

See the staff report from May 28th and for June 22nd.

Trust us. We are planning for the future of Marin.

Welcome to your New Family Home at Wonderful Marinwood Village!

The Toxic Avenger from the film The Toxic Avenger

For years and years, it is alleged that the dry cleaner who leased at Marinwood Plaza, dumped toxic waste down his drain and over the fence behind his store.   The Marinwood Plaza site is now contaminated at unacceptable levels according to state laws.  Although some mitigation measures have taken place the toxic waste site is far from clean. According to State regulators the damage is much greater than previously reported.

The "brownfield" contaminated site now extends under the freeway on ramp and clear across to the east side next to the Silveira ranch.  To properly clean the site,  hundreds of cubic yards of soil will need to be cleaned, replaced and sealed to prevent further environmental damage and to make it safe for human habitation. The containment is PCE which breaks down into multiple toxic compounds. It is now illegal for use in California.

The site is also home to two high power microwave transmission towers

on the southeast corner of the property. 

Microwaves are also a known health hazard

All hidden behind a 16 foot soundwall barrier that will reduce traffic noise

but still subject inhabitants to roadway pollutants.

Would you choose to move your family to Marinwood Village?

We MUST insist that Bridge Housing do a full Environmental Review and treat toxic waste to the highest levels of safety.  We will not allow a "negative declaration" to avoid rigorous review.

If you care about the community, you will care about the health of the residents, the quality of Dixie schools and the financial integrity of the Marinwood Village proposal

Speak up for your rights and your community!

How Developers " Play to Win" over Stupid, Racist, NIMBYs in Marin

"Something is not right here. They told me high density housing was going to be great for Marin."

Editor's Note: Today, I got an invitation to a professional seminar promising to unlock the secrets of "countering public opposition against development". Of course, we have been under assault by the Board of Supervisors, Planning Commission, Developers, Bankers and Housing activists for several years. Their dream is to turn Marin into a urban "smart growth" Shang-gi-la while most Marinites are happy with the human scale, garden communities close to nature we have today. We are happy to grow when it occurs the "Marin way" with concern for the total community, not just for developer dollars. For your amusement, try to identify all of the techniques being used on us.

How to Fight the ‘Not in My Back Yard’ Syndrome

Steps to mitigate opposition, build community support
By Al Maiorino | May 10, 2012
From Ethanol Producer

You have plans to build a biorefinery. Jobs, tax revenue, and much more are the benefits that will resonate with the community. At the first public hearing, however, opposition arises due to fears of having such an industry in the community. The entitling agency takes notice, and now you must build support, long after you have announced your plans and opposition has solidified


Why? Residents near the proposed site have created an opposition group to fight the project. Despite the fact that the new plant would generate renewable energy for many communities and improve the local economy, the community doesn’t seem to understand these benefits. The residents say the new facility would be too close to their homes and may potentially be hazardous to their health. They say it would create too much noise, pollution, and traffic, and would obstruct their views. You realize the opposition is a roadblock that may halt or even destroy the project. Now what do you do?

This problem is not so uncommon. This practice of communal opposition to development— the “not in my backyard” syndrome, or NIMBYism— blossomed in the 1980s. During that time, community concerns were often reasonable and justified. While those days are gone, the sentiment of opposition remains, and the “backyard” has grown so vastly that NIMBYism affects companies all over the world. With modern technology and strict government regulations, however, the inconvenience caused by any sort of development is usually reduced to a minimum.

Get the Message Out

Very often, the opposition stems from misinformation and poor communication between project representatives and the community. In this case, it is better to play on the offensive. Instead of waiting for the opposition to grow, present it with the facts.

It is necessary to look for local support and build allies to form a supporter coalition. First and foremost, identify and create a database of local residents who are in favor of, against, or undecided about the project. A good way to begin is by carrying out a poll or a phone bank, asking local residents about their view of the renewable energy industry in general and your development plan in particular. The survey results may be published to showcase the positive attitude in the community toward the venture.

Once the database is created, it should be maintained and updated frequently for the campaign management to be aware of changes in local opinion. One way to do this is through a targeted direct mail and/or advertising campaign. A strong social media campaign is modern and necessary to spread your message, reach out to the community, and provide supporters with a communication outlet.

Organization of a database is crucial to the success of a campaign. Whether the identification process is achieved through direct mail, radio, phone calls or email, having an unorganized list of supporters and undecided residents doesn’t do your campaign any good. By inputting your supporters into a database, you can then separate them by town, county and legislative district for effective grassroots lobbying.

Now that you have distinguished supporters from opposition, the next step is to reach out to third-party groups that support the development. These groups could be anything from small businesses to a local decision maker. Companies or groups with whom you have had a positive relationship or who will benefit from your project should be encouraged to participate in the campaign. Do not focus only on third-party groups for support: Third-party groups are critical for your efforts, but often a few dozen “regular citizens” showing up to hearings and meetings can benefit your project tremendously.

Residents should express their support through writing letters to their elected officials or newspapers. Those who are looking to support further can attend public hearings, where they can speak about the benefits of the project. Most likely, an independent pro-group will have emerged by now and will actively participate in all aspects of the campaign.

Grassroots campaigns create a support group of members from the local community that can assist in your efforts. The support group can actively promote your project through social networking. Proactive support groups are also a great source of volunteers and as they volunteer, they’ll feel more committed and supportive of your project.

Campaigns should be designed based on several factors including the size of the population you are targeting, the level of opposition, and the length of the entitlement process. Many of these campaigns should research their territory, identify supporters, code them into a database, not rely solely on email, not focus only on third-party support and always be transparent.

Regardless of the industry or location, NIMBYism always presents itself in an attempt to curb a proposal. It can attack any project no matter how big or small. Employing proper campaign tactics and developing the right grassroots campaign can counter NIMBY opposition to your energy projects.

Be Proactive

Companies frequently wait until opposition arises to hire a public affairs firm. By then residents have solidified their positions on a project, making it all the more difficult for them to change their minds in your favor. While some may feel the “added cost” of a public affairs firm is not worth it to the project budget, think about how much it costs a project to be delayed weeks, months or years, or to be outright denied approval. You may choose to fight NIMBYism on your own. Experience shows, however, that hiring a specialized firm will provide you with the necessary tools and tactics to ensure a victory for your development. Trained professionals from a grassroots firm will make sure that the correct message from your company is being distributed to the community and that the silent majority is heard.

The way you approach the situation will make all the difference. You can choose to ignore the NIMBY fight, avoid communicating with the local community, and take the situation to an unnecessary level of tension. Or, you and/or a specialized team can develop a strategy, engage in conversation with the community, and encourage project proponents to voice their support.

Tyranny Bay Area

 

Randal O'Toole, author, environmentalist, smart growth critic spoke at "Great Debate" in 2013.

Plan Bay Area, a regional plan written for nine counties that surround San Francisco Bay was voted on in Summer 2013. This plan is so poorly written that it makes me proud to be an antiplanner; if I were a real planner, I’d be ashamed to be associated with a profession that could produce such a shoddy plan.

The main problem with the plan is that its main prescriptions were set in advance of any analysis of whether they would be effective. In fact, planners never did analyze whether those or any alternative policies would cost-effectively meet the plan’s goals.

Under California law, the plan must meet two goals: reduce greenhouse gas emissions and make housing more affordable. The heart of the plan calls for densification of dozens of neighborhoods in the region and expansion of rail transit service by more than 35 percent. The plan also calls for tightening existing urban-growth boundaries, so to achieve planned densification and accommodate an anticipated 30 percent population growth, the plan requires the destruction of more than 169,000 single-family homes.

Planners didn’t do any analysis to show that densification and rail transit will reduce greenhouse gases or make housing more affordable. Of the five alternatives considered in the plan, all but the “do-nothing” alternative target neighborhoods for densification and increase rail transit by more than 35 percent. While do nothing does not target specific neighborhoods for densification, it still densifies, and it also increases rail transit by 25 percent. So it is clear that planners really didn’t consider any alternatives other than densification and more trains.

A careful analysis of data in the environmental impact report reveals that densification and transit improvements together are projected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by less than 1 percent. All the other emission reductions that the plan takes credit for come from other programs, mostly programs done by other agencies. While the plan does not have any cost data, it is likely that those other programs cost far less than densification and rail improvements.

Even the less-than-1 percent reduction in emissions depends on planners’ optimistic projections that more rail transit will boost per capita transit ridership by 40 to 60 percent; in fact, despite all the rail transit built in the region in the last 30 years, per capita transit ridership has declined by 35 percent and per capita transit passenger miles has declined by 5 percent since 1982.

On top of that, far from improving housing affordability, the plan admits that densification will actually make housing less affordable. The plan calls for mitigating this by subsidizing housing for a relative handful of low-income people, but those subsidies will probably just make housing even less affordable for everyone else.

California law requires that per capita greenhouse gas emissions from autos be reduced by 15 percent by 2040. As it happens, another California law, known as the Pavley law, requires that future cars be more fuel efficient. By 2040, that law will reduce per capita emissions from cars by at least 27 percent.

So how can the plan justify using subsidies to densify scores of neighborhoods and expanding rail transit when those policies will do almost nothing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions? Simple. Planners simply ignored the Pavley standards when calculating whether an alternative complied with the per capita emissions standard. Although they also calculated emissions with the Pavley standards, they nevertheless concluded that (without the Pavley standards) the only way to meet the 15-percent-reduction requirement was to densify and increase rail service.

In short, Plan Bay Area planners not only failed to plan properly, they were dishonest with their results. Next time someone asks me why I’m an antiplanner, all I’ll have to do is point to Plan Bay Area.

The Planning Commissioners and Community Development Staff who want to urbanize Marinwood-Lucas Valley

Leelee Thomas, Chief Planner, Marin Community Development Department lives in lovely Woodacre while pushing urban development on the rest of us.

Wade Holland, Planning Commissioner was appointed by Steve Kinsey

Margret Biele



Ericka Erickson of Marinwood also works for Marin Grassroots for "social equity" also a Steve Kinsey appointee.

Brian Crawford, Community Development Director and his staff

Don Dickenson, Planning Commission questions assumptions of Housing Element such as the density bonus that gives developers to build OVER allowable limits in the general plan.
Unfortunately, the other planning commissioners don't appear to care.



Katie Crecilious, Housing Advocate from Novato,  now Planning Commissioner advocated putting housing on school sites in Lucas Valley including Miller Creek Middle School and the Waldorf School in the last housing element. 

Pete Theran, Planning Commissioner listens to the public object to the Housing Element that has 400% MORE housing than required by the State.  300 of the 500 units are in Marinwood.

Wade Holland think most of the affordable housing should go in Marinwood because "they have the space".  He  blocked a senior development in the last housing element in his community of Inverness. 

Brian Crawford Community Development Director who lectures us on "social equity", owns a large tract of land in West Marin and Petaluma pushes big development on Marinwood/Lucas Valley.
He is one of the highest paid employees in the County.

John Eller, Architect/Developer of Affordable Housing , Planning Commissioner is an industry insider.

My Letter to Damon Connolly on the appointment of a New Planning Commissioner.

Damon Connolly is sworn in as District One Supervisor on January 6, 2015

Damon,

I hope you are settling into your new position.  We are all so proud of you in Marinwood/Lucas Valley as our Supervisor.

As you know, four planning commissioners are to be appointed in the next few weeks.

Although we tried mightily to secure a local person to represent the average District 1 homeowner's concerns, no one I know was able to submit an application for appointment.  The job requires too much of a working person or busy parent.  

Fortunately, you may have the option to reappoint Don Dickerson.  Although he voted in projects in the Marinwood Lucas Valley Area, many of us feel that he is thoughtful, sensitive to community needs and asks penetrating questions about planning.  He is well respected in the community and we think he is a good appointment.

The others commissioners do not have our support.  Most especially Enrika Erickson whose advocacy for Marin Grassroots seems to be inseparable from her objectivity in representing the community.  As a "social equity advocate" she appears to promote ideology over sound planning principles.

see: 

http://www.savemarinwood.org/2015/01/ericka-erickson-advocates-multifamily.html

Here is a clip of Erika suggesting that Single Family Home Zoning should be eliminated in Los Ranchitos area as it is a main factor of segregation in Marin.   I do not know where she get's her data "proving" this.  From her logic NO single family zoning should be allowed ANYWHERE in Marin.  This is a radical proposition that would destroy the suburban rural character of our district.

Likewise Kate Crecilious is an affordable housing advocate does not have our hicommunity support.  She petitioned the planning commission to put multifamily zoning on school sites in the Dixie School District.  Although this was quickly dismissed as impractical, it demonstrates her resolve of building high density subsidized housing at all costs in Marin.

All I am asking for is people with commonsense and without a personal agenda to serve the community.  Don Dickerson is a fine example but I'd prefer someone who is even more committed to sensible local planning for Marinwood/Lucas Valley. 

We should not be forced to be burdened with 80% of all the affordable housing quota in just two high density projects for all of Unincorporated Marin.

Thanks for listening.

Yours,

Stephen Nestel

Ericka Erickson advocates Multifamily homes in Single Family Neighborhoods to Stop Segregation

see full June24, 2013 Planning commission meeting here

Ericka Erickson,  Marinwood Mom, Housing Advocate, and recently appointed Planning Commissioner will be submitting her recommendations for the Housing Element SEIR  (Environmental Impact Report) for Unincorporated Marin and the Housing Element that puts 70% of all affordable housing for unincorporated Marin in Marinwood-Lucas Valley on July 8th.

In her professional life she is a housing advocate and community organizer with Marin Grassroots (www.maringrassroots.org) where she is an advocate for "social equity"  In the above clip, she argues for the inclusion of the Los Ranchitos  affordable housing site in a single family neighborhood because single family home zoning is a "tool for segregation".  

We have no idea what data she uses to support this assertion but clearly zoning policy is being established on these ideological grounds.  So essentially, if multifamily homes have a right to be anywhere,then single family neighborhoods will become illegal in Marinwood-Lucas Valley.  

This is another good reason that you must speak out against the Housing Element.

See related story: Ericka Erickson, our newest planning commissioner

The Apartment building next door to you? Planners advocate placing multifamily homes in single family neighborhoods to "combat racism". Essentially this outlaws single family neighborhoods in favor of multiunit dwellings. Radical proposals like these have been implemented in Seattle over the outrage of the community. http://www.onehomeperlot.com/

It doesn't sound like a "planning exercise" to me.  These housing advocates are demanding immediate implementation of the Housing Element to build in our neighborhoods

Here is the petition being solicited by www.maringrassroots.org

Housing Element Petition

Dear Marin County Planning Commission,

            As advocates supporting social equity, racial justice, inclusivity, and fair housing in Marin County, we are writing to support the draft 2012 Housing Element.

            We recognize that the Planning Commission Staff has analyzed the best approach to increase affordable housing in Marin County in order to satisfy compliance with HUD.  We support policies and zoning designations in the Housing Element that allow and encourage affordable housing. We recognize that supporting affordable housing can be implemented best when the Marin County is following the State Housing law and the Housing Element draft guidelines.

            We urge the Planning Commission of Marin County to adopt the Housing Element in its current form and advocate for expanding affordable housing options that include lower to mid range incomes. Marin Grassroots issues the following recommendations in order to ensure that affordable housing is implemented to the fullest extent in accordance to the Marin County Housing Element:

1. In agreement with section V-9 2.k, (Promote and Ensure Equal Housing Opportunity), we support making information available regarding equal opportunity housing through a new and more inclusive study of Analysis of Impediments (AI) to Fair Housing. We ask that the Planning Commission be proactive and begin the AI immediately, in order to ensure that the barriers to fair housing choice are studied to their fullest extent. Additionally, members of the Action Coalition for Equity (ACE) be included as identifying stakeholders. We also encourage that the written material addressing equal opportunity housing rights is available at all public locations, including transit hubs.

2. Form a Steering Committee within 3 months of approving the Housing Element, to advise and oversee the implementation and timing of the Housing Element. The committee should ensure that the Housing Element programs work towards furthering the platforms of Title VI to affirmatively further fair housing by fostering inclusive housing patterns throughout Marin County regardless of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, or disability and ensuring that all programs are being conducted in a non-discriminatory manner.

3. Increase funds and resources for grant programs and government assistance to better incentivize local anti-displacement due to market rate housing and discrimination including lower-income status and race. Fund mitigations in Marin County, such as land banking and housing rehab.

We will be following and supporting the Marin County Housing Element. Thank you for your support to increasing fair housing and removing all barriers to discrimination to housing in Marin County.

Land belongs to the Community not remote politicians, developers and bureaucrats.

City Life In 2040 Propaganda

See more propaganda from this group: HERE

The "evolution" our single family neighborhoods in Marinwood-Lucas Valley

Portland, Oregon pioneered the "Smart Growth" planning concepts now championed by Marin County Planners and the Association of Bay Area Governments.  They believe in restricting growth to infill housing and setting urban growth boundaries.  By subdividing single family lots and building "tall and skinny" houses, and apartment buildings,  they fit more people per acre, leaving open space untouched.  This is what planners want to do in Marinwood-Lucas Valley.

Here are two examples in Portland, Oregon:

 

 

IN PORTLAND, FIVE SLIM-LINE HOUSES NOW OCCUPY THE SPACE ONCE OCCUPIED BY THE WHITE HOUSE ABOVE

Small side yards become single family homes in this example.

The Marinwood Priority Development Area (all land east of Las Gallinas) is likely to become condominiums and apartments at a minimum 30 units per acre to a maximum 50 units per acre. (3 to 5 story apartment buildings). All other land in Marinwood-Lucas Valley is likely to become 20 units per acre or slightly more intense development than the above example.  

Is this the kind of community you want to live in?    We need you to speak up against the 2012 Housing Element and Plan Bay Area that will forever urbanize Marinwood-Lucas Valley. 

Speak up for your community!

see related story: Priority Development Area will Urbanize Marinwood-Lucas Valley