The Union’s response to writing about the proposal to build a resort in our county: “Loose talk;” “rumor and innuendo”; “a discussion among friends about how to attract tourists to our community.” “Some stories are relegated to the blogosphere for a reason.”
Are you sure about that? Here are some more facts:
•There is a detailed, 24-page document about this project that the City Administrator of Grass Valley, Dan Holler, has emailed to some public officials and business owners to review. Though preliminary, it is being more widely circulated too, because it has raised questions and concerns.
•Keith Davies, the author of the proposal, and Holler also plan meetings with business owners to discuss a “Visitor Center” for Grass Valley. Longtime locals might remember Davies as the owner of Framastanyl’s Restaurant in Nevada City in 1980-87.
•City Council Member Dan Miller and Keith Davies and Robin Galvan-Davies together attended a tourism workshop at the Stonehouse Restaurant. Miller and Davies have been longtime friends. Dan supports their idea.
The community needs to ask why The Union and its editor/publisher is sitting on this news. The Union should ask the City of Grass Valley for a copy of the proposal that is being circulated — not just being “discussed among friends.” Why isn’t there more transparency about this proposal/process involving Grass Valley City Hall for such a big project?
This is a good example of how The Union has been a “bottleneck of communications” in our community for years under the guise of publishing a “legitimate newspaper.” Is the editor/publisher trying to “control” how and when information is shared with the community? Is The Union being a watchdog — or a lapdog?
Here’s The Union’s response to a query raised on the “Town Talk” feature of its website:
“Thanks for your interest, but The Union is a legitimate newspaper that does not print rumor and innuendo. Some stories are relegated to the blogosphere for a reason. However, we in the newsroom have followed up and talked to multiple sources in the various public agencies about the possibility of the mega-resort and have been informed that the proposal is so preliminary that it is basically amounts to a discussion between friends about how to attract tourists to the region. “There is a lot of loose talk and little else,” said one public official asked about the proposal.
“If the proposal gains traction, and private investors display a willingness to put up the considerable capital necessary for such a project, it will have to be proposed to the Nevada County planning commission and proceed through a rigorous public process that would likely take a number of years. If and when that happens, you can be sure The Union will deliver timely and relevant factual information that is properly sourced. Thanks.
Filed under: Uncategorized
There is no reason to get people all riled up about a destination resort proposal at this time. The proposal is just a lot of hot air if there is no real site and if the project supporters are looking for free land. In this case the Union may have a good point because there is nothing wrong with City leaders reading internal memos about vague concepts for proposed land development projects. It will be in the project supporter’s interests to release information to the public when a specific concept can be proposed with a real site and proposed land uses
If the destination resort proposal is “hot air,” why is one City Council member promoting it, along with the Davies, and the City Administrator emailing the plan to public officials and business owners? They already are riling up people. This is how I got wind of it. A 24-page document is not “vague.” The public has a right to know what public officials are discussing about their community.
Also, why is Keith Davies, the same person who is proposing this project, involved in discussions about a Visitor’s Center in Grass Valley?
BTW, here’s information on a report that Stephen prepared for the City of Grass Valley on Glenbrook Basin Redevelopment:
http://sierrafoothillsreport.com/2011/05/05/study-focuses-on-glenbrook-basin-redevelopment/
The “Grand Resort” is just a pipe dream, until someone proposes it to the BOS. It is worth talking about because it gives any interested party an idea of what the pulse of the community is on the subject.
You never know, the developer might learn something before he/she/it gets in too deep.
So what’s The Union waiting for? For the project’s proponents and public officials to give them the “go ahead”? In this case, though, the cat’s out of the bag. There’s a 24-page document floating around, detailing the proposal. Po-dunk.
Without your reporting on it, Jeff, the vast majority of people in this community would not know about it. Anything that is being circulated among people in government (elected and/or hired) is something that the community has a right to know about. Even more so when taxpayers will in any way be expected to subsidize the proposal. That makes it news in my opinion.
If the idea was to fly this under the radar and get “deals” in place without public scrutiny, I’m glad that can no longer happen. There was a reason the founding fathers had a high regard for freedom of the press and wanted it constitutionally protected. When the “old school” press of a print newspaper abdicates its responsibility, then I’m glad that the press as embodied in this blog steps up. While not all blogs are equal, this one is run by a journalist and has come to serve as an important part of The Press in this community.
As to blogs, did anyone notice that HuffPo won a Pulitzer? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/16/huffington-post-pulitzer-prize-2012_n_1429169.html