I’m going to miss Todd Juvinall (one of our former county supervisors) during his short stint as CABPRO’s executive director. For a while it was “back to the future” in our county for extremist dialogue in the growth vs. no growth debate, among others.
Juvinall, who founded the group, has done his best over the years to paint with a broad brush and blame all of our woes on “liberals.” It is political polarizing at its best. Personal attacks and misinformation sometimes are part of the MO as well.
This week, in a well-publicized growth debate, Todd blamed “Marin County residents” for filmmaker George Lucas’ abrupt withdrawl of a big studio project. In fact, it was a small group of vocal extremists, just like the ones we experience here.
Most people are in the middle, even in Marin. Lucas lives in a modest neighborhood – around the corner from where our 1,000-square-foot-home was located. George just added on (much) more than the rest of us, snapping up some adjacent land, but he was a good, quiet neighbor. And he consulted the neighbors when he expanded.
Most residents like Lucas, and are sad that he’s not going ahead with the studio project. By Marin standards, our family was conservative, too, just like most of our neighbors.
Todd’s characterization is extremist and simplistic, just as it is in our county. It is not constructive.
CABPRO and its supporters have become part of our county’s subculture, going back to the days of NH2020 and the supposed “Gang of Four,” a pejorative term for some progressive county supervisors.
CABPRO’s views on growth and “land rights” have been supported by The Union publisher, old-guard “electeds” in Grass Valley and some leaders of NCCA (the contractor’s group) from time to time.
But times are changing: Our demographics are “purple” now. “Enviros” are working with conservatives. The nonpartisan effort to “Save the Yuba” was a shining example. Collaboration is happening. The internet is changing how we communicate and interact on growth issues; there’s no communications bottlenecks, as in the past – at KNCO, The Union and so forth.
FIELD OF DREAMS?
Here’s an example: The other day, I was surprised to hear that a group has been quietly meeting with civic and business leaders and electeds to promote a big resort in our western county to boost business. It could include a hotel, golf course, event center and so on – a “destination” resort if you will.
Most of the “big wheels” in town know about it. I’m sure The Union publisher must know about it, so I’m surprised to see that it’s getting no ink. I’m a big believer in transparency.
The reaction to the project has been mixed. People are wondering if the project is the proper scale, whether there’s financing, whether our population can support it and so on. The golf project Darkhorse is brought up. This sketipism comes from both sides of the political aisle. It is not “anti-growth liberalism” – it’s pragmatism.
On the other hand, it could create jobs and needed tax receipts.
At some point, the proposal being discussed more privately is going to surface and a more public dialog will ensue.
But here’s what’s different than before: I predict it will be a switch from the past, when people like Todd (or Drew Bedwell and others) tried to polarize the residents. Or the dominant media tried to control the discussion (or outcome for that matter). Instead, it will be a thoughtful, sober, democratic discussion about our future.
It will show, once again, that we’ve graduated from the “rock throwing” era. We are in the process of defining our future, and it is a more democratic, thoughtful process.
Filed under: Uncategorized
Very good read here Jeff. Well balanced.
Surprise? I remember when the Maidu community talked about building a nice event center like the one in Roseville and conservatives went nuts with accusations that the Maidu meant only to build a casino. We knew then that their real intention was to sway that opportunity for themselves. Republicans are never about “community” because they are about greed.
I’ve lived here for 33 years and would love to have a nice olympic size public pool/ kiddie acquatic park and event center in Grass Valley on the grounds of a nice park.
On that note, it’s been a stretch to get bike lanes, walkable communities, and hiking trails done in this county. It’s obvious from the lake of sidewalks and parks that Nevada County has a lot of work to do.
Jeff:
When the proposed project surfaces and public debate begins, I certainly hope that it results in the kind of civil dialogue and “thoughtful, sober democratic discussion” you point to.
It’s an imaginative concept that warrants serious consideration, and may bring some very divergent folks together for the common good of he county.
If some of the community knows about it, why is the majority of the community still in the dark? Is it so it can be “sprung” on us? Where will it be? Who will it impact? Most of us didn’t move here to live next to a mega resort. We are being told it is an “imaginative concept” without being told what it is. Oh, and is it compatible with a gold mine in the middle of town? Also, how will it impact the businesses that are currently struggling? The Holiday Inn Express didn’t exactly help the Holbrooke, for example. There are a lot of questions and currently no answers. I agree with Jeff. I little transparancy would be refreshing.
The times for Nevada County have certainly changed. The demographics are shifting radically and thoughtful creative county level responses are needed. There are many issues but perhaps the most serious is the growing number of homeless and the growing number of almost homeless. This is an economic problem second and a human problem first. These are people and they are becoming mentally devastated and debilitated to the point of helplessness. It is heartbreaking and will not be solved with status quo thinking. Status quo thinking is making the problem worse.
Quite frankly, there is no comprehensive and thoughtful solution to this problem in Nevada County. We need to stop kidding ourselves that handing out food, micro-shelters, emergency room services etc. do anything but kick the can down the road and exacerbate the problem.
Handouts create dependence. These are our neighbors and their numbers are growing.
To address homelessness or near homelessness a creative, intelligent, comprehensive and effective plan is needed. It won’t do to kid ourselves that such a plan is in place. It also won’t do to donate to ill conceived efforts or join a committee to talk about it. We have got to get serious about this, come up with a realistic plan and then act on it.
To help the homeless and near homeless it is necessary to help them to help themselves in small ways that build the skills and provides support for their efforts toward independence. There is no other way.
If you aren’t “do-gooder” and understand what I am saying, please contact me at
gregzaller@gmail.com.
In order to resolve California’s traffic congestion, we need to build more free ways. Similarly, to resolve the jobs problem we need create more jobs through development.
Exactly, Jim. When only one solution to a problem is even considered, better solutions are left in the dust.
… pave paradise and put up a parking lot!
I am really interested in reading about how we are all guilty sometimes of talking past each other. George Soros recently had something to say about perceptions–
“I should like to put before you a radically different interpretation of financial markets. It was inspired by Karl Popper who taught me that the participants’ interpretation of reality never quite corresponds to reality itself. This led me to study the relationship between the two. I found a two-way connection between the participants’ thinking and the situations in which they participate. On the one hand people seek to understand the situation; that is the cognitive function. On the other, they seek to make an impact on the situation; I call that the causative or manipulative function. The two functions connect the thinking agents and the situations in which they participate in opposite directions. In the cognitive function the situation is supposed to determine the participants’ views; in the causative function the participants’ views are supposed to determine the outcome. When both functions are at work at the same time they interfere with each other. The cognitive and manipulative functions form a circular relationship or feedback loop. I call that feedback loop reflexivity. In a reflexive situation the participants’ views cannot correspond to reality because reality is not something independently given; it is contingent on the participants’ views and decisions. The decisions, in turn, cannot be based on knowledge alone; they must contain some bias or guess work about the future because the future is contingent on the participants’ decisions.”
…and–
“My interpretation of financial markets differs from the prevailing paradigm in many ways. I emphasize the role of misunderstandings and misconceptions in shaping the course of history. And I treat bubbles as largely unpredictable. The direction and its eventual reversal are predictable; the magnitude and duration of the various phases is not. I contend that taking fallibility as the starting point makes my conceptual framework more realistic. But at a price: the idea that laws or models of universal validity can predict the future must be abandoned. Until recently, my interpretation of financial markets was either ignored or dismissed by academic economists. All this has changed since the crash of 2008.”
More here: http://www.georgesoros.com/articles-essays/entry/europes_future_is_not_up_to_the_bundesbank/
Interesting and important point, ” the idea that laws or models of universal validity can predict the future must be abandoned”.
In climate change I think this means we need to be planning based on probability rather than predictability–the argument that we can predict the future accurately is passe. What we need is data informed adaptive management of issues.
This is also true in so many other disciplines, and urban planning is one of them. Of course, no one is qualified to predict what this mystery project is or what its costs or benefits might be because there is no plan, so every comment is pure speculation.
However, the paradigm that traffic impact and number of dwelling units is an accurate measure of environmental impact is outdated and needs to meet the dustbin. All data points to higher traffic counts reducing per capita traffic generation and thus ghg emissions. There is a direct inverse relationship between density and per capita VMT. The answer to traffic is neither “do not build it” nor “build more roads” it is design walkable, bikeable and transit served community and get out of your damn car.
Building good cities is not about serving the fringe dwellers.
And the paradigm that new low wage service sector jobs alone (as opposed to higher wage service and professional) improve the economy is BS. The answer is raising skill levels and services provided by the service sector, new intellectual capital, new creative energy, and innovation.
Wondering what defines a development as a foothills resort: hotels, condos, theaters, amusement parks, lakes, casinos,?
What would be the attraction that would divert people from Lake Tahoe, for example?
Magic Mountain North? Branson West? Auburn City Limits?
Gold rush architecture, local food and the arts. It’s the one thing that really makes GV/NC stand out from the crowd.
You make it sound like Disneyland, Steve.
I apologize if my post was oblique. What I mean is that Grass Valley/Nevada City has a set of amenities that very few communities can compete with. That amenity is the unique architectural style and pattern of its communities, the bounty of its surrounding farms, fields and ranches, and its growing reputation as an arts center. GV/NC is ‘authentic’; and authenticity is more desirable than any constructed Disneyland. No engineered lifestyle center can ever compete with the organic and gradual development of a small town–the blend of cultural influences, the diversity or architectural styles that come in over time, the monuments to individual expression–lifestyle centers and resort developments should serve the true asset, the authentic nature of the community.
http://www.sbcouncil.org/Publications/Mixed-Use-Handbook
I’m still trying to wrap my mind around this as I look through the lens of what I think of when you say resort. I keep hearing tourism and retirement. I don’t have a problem with that except that tourism might go more bust and retirement might want some balance.
It might be too soon to revisit the general plan but I feel this is a good time to develop a community vision.
So it is the difference between a community that is built with very tight controls and a community that evolves over time with respect for preserving the best of the past and long term vision for the future.
Tim, our research shows that it is really a combination of organic development in the days before zoning, and controlled development with flexible standards in the post war world, that works the best. In the Sierra, topography was the primary constraint. People built close together because they were building on river valley’s above the annual flood plain, below the steep slopes (like GV/NC) and along roads.
It is important to note that before zoning and design review became standard there were other social and community rules, often unspoken, that regulated building height, lot coverage, uses, and similar characteristics. I think the biggest issue is allowing for changes in zoning and standards to meet changes in technology and tastes, which in the modern era, are kind of out of synch.
Zoning can work against economic efficiency and hinder good development by sticking too closely to the previous technology and taste. For example, often to build a walkable community today developers actually have to change the existing zoning codes, or write alternative codes, because existing codes favor wide streets, auto-oriented neighborhoods, and poorly placed parking.
Greg,
A conference center, golf course, hotel and so on. Do we need one? Are we big enough to support one?
I think the answer would need to be informed by our collective vision for this community. I respect the right of developers within that parameter. If you were asking about a casino I think the answer would be more obvious.
I believe that if this pretty diverse community could come together on a common vision it would be good for everyone.
What about a four-year college or art school?
I favor a grass roots vocational school similar in principles to the LWCO ones in Pakistan. I believe schools should teach us how to be successful in occupation and life, which is quite different from what is happening now. Every day I take some action to make this happen and expect to get there somehow.
Wouldn’t something like that bring some fresh blood into this county?
Thought I might recommend an essay by Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus in the Breakthrough Journal. I’m recommending this here because I think we really need to start changing our approach on solving some tough issues.
http://breakthroughjournal.org/content/authors/michael-shellenberger-and-ted/evolve.shtml
What defines a resort? A stand-alone resort like Leisure World between NC/GV and Auburn or Colfax would not add much, except to the tax rolls.
A Magic Mountain/Waterpark at Rollins Lake might provide family fun.
We already have golf courses, conference centers, and hotels in town.
Could we just add more at the edges of town without building a whole new complex somewhere else?
What’s being discussed, at least for now, is a golf course/conference center/hotel, etc. in the unincorporated county. A “Water World”? Interesting.