CABPRO’s Agenda 21 speaker in GV: “Don’t be so nice. This is war.”

“Rosa Koire, a self-proclaimed liberal and author of ‘Behind the Green Mask: U.N. Agenda 21,’ told scores of people at the Grass Valley Veterans Hall Tuesday that development efforts billed as ‘sustainable’ or ‘smart growth’ are just the tip of an iceberg designed to strip rural communities of their property rights and turn them into dense urban centers,” The Union is reporting.

“Koire further told the crowd to become proactive, attend government meetings and speak out against Agenda 21-related matters during the open-topic comment portions of such public gatherings.

“Dominate your government meetings,” Koire said at the three-hour lecture put on by the California Association of Business, Property and Resource Owners, or CABPRO.

“You are going to go and talk to your elected officials and if they blow you off, you are going to target them for removal,” Koire told the crowd about voting uncooperative representatives out of office.

“If a nonprofit supports the kind of sustainability development or receives funding from Agenda 21-related organizations, cease supporting them, she said. Koire implicated the Sierra Business Council and Nevada City’s Sustainability Team as such organizations.

“She also requested that those who attended Tuesday’s meeting copy fliers she supplied and leave them on doorsteps.

“’Have compassion,’ Koire said. ‘People don’t get it right away … Have patience.’

“However, that statement was followed with the advice — ‘Don’t be so nice,” she said. “This is war.’

The rest of the article is here.

Author: jeffpelline

Jeff Pelline is a veteran editor and award-winning journalist - in print and online. He is publisher of Sierra FoodWineArt magazine and its website Jeff covered business and technology for The San Francisco Chronicle for 12 years, and he was a founding editor and Editor of CNET News for eight years, among other positions. Jeff has a bachelor's degree from UC Berkeley and a master's from Northwestern University. His hobbies include sailing, swimming, and trout fishing in the Sierra.

52 thoughts on “CABPRO’s Agenda 21 speaker in GV: “Don’t be so nice. This is war.””

  1. But it’s compassionate war.

    Would have loved to been able to ask the question: “tell me about your parents.” Cause these folks definitely need some therapy / analysis. If nothing else, those who speak against Agenda 21 are some of the greatest psychological case studies of our time.

    Looking forward to GV/NC becoming a dense urban center in the name of sustainability.

  2. Well over on the fascist blog of Rebane’s Ruminations it seems this post won’t stick, since I know they read Sierra Foothills Report daily I will post it here.

    A real conspiracy going on is the WTO having control over the policies and laws of sovereign nations. I will give one example here but over at RR I gave four.

    Excerpt from Grist article on ‘Bitter Seeds’
    “Why is Monsanto seen as responsible for these farmers’ desperation? The company began selling Bt cotton in India in 2004, after a U.S. challenge at the WTO forced India to adopt seed patenting, effectively allowing Monsanto to monopolize the market. Bt cotton seeds were — and still are — advertised heavily to illiterate Indian farmers, who have bought the company’s promises of high yields and the material wealth they bring. What the farmers didn’t know until it was too late is those seeds require an expensive regimen of pesticides, and must be fertilized and watered according to precise timetables.”

  3. These people have lost their marbles. The belong in the same space with the 9/11 conspiracy theories. We should basically ignore them as much as possible. As Tom said – they need therapy.

  4. And has anyone noticed that anti-Agenda 21 pieces are popping up in the Union more and more? Letter to the Editor here, an Other Voices there. Now this runs – essentially a puff piece – as the lead above-the-fold story. Not saying there’s a conspiracy on the part of The Union, just wondering if ultra-conservative was just too boring (and thoughtful) for their editorial staff…

  5. I have a copy of Agenda 21 if anyone would like to read it. It is about an innocuous a policy statement as you could imagine. Those that find a conspiracy in its text will undoubtedly believe that there are black helicopters sheltered in caves across the country ready to impose martial law upon us, chemtrails, the lunar landing were staged and Abraham Lincoln was primarily a vampire hunter.

    1. Back in the real world, does anyone know if there’s a short book or article that examines what motivates their way of thinking specifically around agenda 21? There are probably lots of PhD dissertations on the topic. I know that’s a pretty broad area of research, but, from a social studies / psychology point of view it’s really pretty fascinating. I wonder if the other side has any analagous studies of the rest of us, i.e. ‘what motivates someone to NOT be scared of Agenda 21?’

  6. As usual, the carrying capacity and the quality of life on the planet, the really big questions, are bypassed altogether.

  7. Forget about attracting “big box” stores. Grass Valley may not be able to hold onto the two it has.

    Kmart has been in a downward spiral for several years and reported a 4.6 percent drop in sales for the first quarter. It’s controlled by a hedge-fund operator who is more interested in sucking cash out of the company than trying to rebuild it.

    Meanwhile, JC Penney has mortgaged everything it has to stay afloat while it tries to reverse last year’s 25 percent drop in sales. Some Wall Street sharks think it’s a better real estate play than a retail investment.

    I doubt the “drug culture” is discouraging high tech types from coming here–drugs are easy enough to get in the Bay Area if you’re so inclined, and there’s plenty of crime attached to the business.

    No, the twenty-somethings who seem to be driving tech these days prefer the San Francisco values you find in the Bay Area. We’re way too untight and conservative for their tastes.

    1. George – your comments about Kmart and JC Penny’s are right on. Both companies are on the ropes, but Kmart has been on the ropes for at least a decade. From my perspective, the closure of either or both stores would represent an opportunity to attract newer and higher valued retailers without expanding commercial space. In this case, I think there is a huge upside to the potential closures.

  8. Conservatives keep sending conflicting signals about the United Nations.

    They has argued for decades that we need a strong military in part because the UN is incapable of policing the world’s bad guys. But another UN file-and-forget report is going to end life as we know it.

    Make up your minds, folks.

    1. The problem with most conspiracy theories is that they overestimate the capacity of people to do three things: align interests, organize and keep a secret.

  9. My problem with Agenda is that it isn’t going very well and I don’t foresee it going well ever.

    I see two reasons for this. One is that it is a creation of the UN and it don’t have a very good track record for accomplishing much. The other is that it is directed at change without building the foundation of commitment to support that change.

    It is too easy to come up with a blueprint for the future and ignore the real work that needs to be done to bring that about. Floating Agenda 21 now has been a complete distraction as evidenced by all of the controversy it has generated.

    I will have nothing to do with it. Where I put my time and energies is into building the educational systems that globally gives people the skills to work together for a solution like Agenda 21 envisions.

      1. Parody of whom?

        Sustainability problems aren’t going to be solved at the ” same level of thinking that created them.”

        The conspiracy theorists have a point. The UN is run by elite heads of states and their use of the word “voluntary” in Agenda 21 doesn’t hide its design as a global bureaucracy.

        Sustainability is the most pressing problem of our time and resolution will only come about from a change into viewing ourselves as members of a huge and vulnerable ecosystem, and that we must act thoughtfully in unison in order for it, and us, to survive.

      2. None of us working on this issue are either led by, nor even very cognizant of the UN Agenda 21 guidance on sustainable development.

        I never even read Agenda 21 until I had already been working in this field for years.

        If your point is that action to redesign our systems to include natural and social values needs to occur on the local level, led by the people affected, and implemented in a million ways sans a global bureaucracy, you are entirely correct.

        But you seem to be implying that the effort to create a more sustainable society is a creation of the UN. If so, you are entirely incorrect, and I ask that you dispel my misunderstanding.

        People at the local level advocate for more sustainable systems because they affect their quality of life. They want walkability, bike lanes, trails, transit, affordable housing, clean water and air, healthier food, jobs closer to home, etc. They advocate for them because they see the benefits in their lives, whether the UN exposes them or not. We created zoning long before there was a UN, because we saw the benefit of controlling land uses to reduce risk and exposure to toxins and inconvenience. We created public transit long before the UN because it was cheaper and required less infrastructure than everyone having their horse shit in the street. We started to plan at the regional level because it reduced chaos and costs to align regional infrastructure.

        The conspiracy theory is not that UN Agenda 21 exists or not, it clearly does. The conspiracy theory is that every action at the local level that is similar to goals stated in A21 are part of that effort, they are not. Those goals predated A21; A21 merely articulated them in a single place, unwittingly creating a convenient central place where xenophobic Americans could attack them.

        When opponents of A21 attack the goals as they are implemented by their neighbors through planning processes they are in essence attacking not the UN, they are attacking the legitimate will of a majority of the people who are stating clearly that they want to redesign these systems to be more efficient, more convenient, less costly and to improve quality of life.

        Our work to improve society has nothing to do with A21, we work on energy efficiency because it saves money and improves the environment, on greenhouse gas reduction because climate change is a risk to our future and we know we must mitigate the risk, on forest restoration because the ecosystem function restored provides countless co-benefits.

        No one I know has “floated Agenda 21 now”, nor are they advocating a global bureaucracy to manage their work, they believe it needs to be done locally. We disdain A21 because it is a distraction from our work to create the very change you are advocating. We did not float it; climate deniers, xenophobes, and people who believe in exploiting our resources at the expense of people and the environment elevated its visibility to use as a cudgel to keep the change you seek at bay.

      3. Hey Steve, It’s always interesting to get your “take” on something I write. So much of what readers “hear” is often unsaid, and I need anticipate those cases and be more explicit in order to make the point I want to make.

        My point is the former of the two you mentioned, not the latter; change must come from the bottom and the UN is on the very tip top. I never meant to imply that Agenda 21 has any corner on original ideas, other than to have the UN be the clearinghouse for them.

        I’m not so certain, if the Agenda 21 detractors ever could get past the idea of the UN intruding on their freedoms, that they would disagree with many of the actions Agenda 21 proposes.

  10. Thanks Greg, I agree that language is sometimes one of our greatest barriers. My key point is yours, bottoms up direct action to redesign our systems is the way to go. A21 is an irrelevancy, a non-entity as far as I am concerned. I am sure A21 detractors would be the first ones to support zoning if their next door neighbor applied for a permit to convert their residence into a pot dispensary, half way house or hog farm.

    1. And that’s not to say that they shouldn’t support orderly zoning. The challenge is to expand and enrich the boundaries of who we each think we are so that when we hear of a violation against nature, like pollution and extermination, or anything else A21 purports to “protect”, we all see it as a personal violation, and act concertedly together to bring about a solution.

  11. For those of you not following the farce over at another blog here is a copy of the e-mail exchange I has with Ms. Rosa Koire over the weekend offering to publicly debate “A21”:

    Sent by me to Ms. Koire at 10:30 am May 25th:

    Dear Ms. Koire:

    My name is Steve Frisch. I’m the President of the Sierra Business Council, based in Truckee California. We have exchanged comments via social media in the past but never met.

    I would be interested in meeting and having a discussion re: our understandings of A21 and how it is (or is not) embedded in our planning processes and culture. I would be happy to spring for lunch when I am in the Bay area sometime in the next few weeks.

    A friend told [me] that you referenced our organization as an implementer of Agenda 21 at your recent presentation hosted by CABPRO in Grass Valley. I regret that I was unable to attend however I’m getting a copy of the tape so I can see the specific context of the comments.

    I’m wondering if you might be interested in a direct public discussion of the issue in a more formal debate format? Something like the Chomsky/Buckley or the Leary/Liddy debates, perhaps hosted by the local public radio station KVMR.

    You are raising some interesting issues and I believe that if we held a discussion publicly we might help shed some light on these issues.

    Thanks for your time and consideration.

    Steve Frisch

    Response from Ms. Koire at 9:30 PM May 25th

    Hi Steve,
    It’s too bad that you weren’t able to attend my very well-advertised speech or call in to either of the local radio call-in shows that I did in advance. You could have had your public exchange at that time. I have moved on to another state now and am fully booked into 2014. Unfortunately, there isn’t enough time for me to return to towns and cities that I’ve covered.

    There is nothing to debate. The truth and the proof is in the paper trail that includes not only the United Nations reports and conferences, but also the legislative history of our country and the well-documented activities of the UN organizations, Non-Governmental Organizations and associations and councils such as your own.

    Rosa Koire, ASA
    Executive Director
    Post Sustainability Institute

    Response from me at 9:30 this morning:

    Dear Ms. Koire:

    I regret that you decided to decline my offer. I truly think that a rational, sourced, fact based debate would be in the public interest, and could shed some light on a topic that you have contributed to elevating nationally.

    I also regret that I couldn’t attend the CABPRO event, which was only ‘well advertised’ in a small area in a like minded crowd within two weeks of the event. My schedule is not as busy as yours, with apparently every day for the next year booked, but I had a previous engagement. Although, as I said, I understand my organization was specifically mentioned in detail, which means you clearly did research in advance, thus if you had sought a rational discussion you could have simply called and invited me.

    If you are ever interested in a real debate, with sources, facts, and impartial moderation, the offer is open and heartfelt. I am sure mutually agreeable terms could be reached. Our local public radio station (KVMR) stands ready to broadcast over a broad region of northern California, from the Sac metro region to Lake Tahoe and points north to Redding.

    In the mean time I wish you luck and prosperity on your clearly busy speaking schedule to similar groups.


    Steve Frisch

    1. Great email exchange Steve! Maybe you should try to get on her 2015 schedule if she hasn’t become bored and moved on to some other conspiracy topic by then. In all seriousness – she is obviously not interested in a dialogue of thoughtful exchange and rational, fact based debate.

      1. Yes, she does not appear to do anything but friendly audiences or very carefully selected and controlled interviews.

      2. Ah but Greg, are’nt we all on a payroll of one form or another? Whether money, or ego, or ‘mission’, or love, every person is a slave to human weaknesses and possesor of strengths. I was merely pointing out where Ms. Koire’s strengths and weaknesses lie. Appearantly her strength is her charisma and public speaking prowess and her weakness is her ability to actually support her ideas with verifiable facts.

        To be clear, I am on a payroll so to speak, and my challenge was a professional test of strength and weakness, with low risk.

        I really knew she would decline.

      3. Right. I often wonder how much many people would actually believe what they promoted if there wasn’t an ulterior reason to motivate them.

  12. I have not spoken to Chuck (we have purchased chickens and eggs from his ranch), but the word on the street is that Chuck and CABPRO lost a lot of “brownie points” with most people on this one, shattering efforts for a nonpartisan “Food Freedom” alliance with the local left and right, among other things. People did not appreciate this stranger coming to town on a paid speaking tour who launched into personal attacks of people (Reinette Senum and Steve Frisch, for example) whom she’d never even met. The talk is that it is back to the CABPRO of old NH 2020 times. Too bad because the politics are shifting. Each election tells us this; and the resurgence in real estate means more “middle of the roaders” will come here for the wonderful life (but not extreme politics). The Union also has once again found itself being “co-opted” rather than being neutral. The good news: Time to drop politics for summer vacations.

    1. You nailed it Jeff. Let the summer begin.

      Meanwhile, out here in the banana belt (at the end of Old Downieville Highway), we have some new neighbors who bought the house next door. They have a KKUP bumper sticker on one of their cars.

      The times, they be a changin’.

      Purple is as purple does.

  13. I have to wonder why CABPRO hasn’t said anything about the current mess in Alta Sierra?

    Can they support a 60% raise in dues, and then making these dues manditory for all residents?

    How can the leadership of this group justify spending 25% of their budget to try to sneak a HOA past the residents while cutting services?

  14. If one can watch 2.5 hours of bat shit crazy stringing together of unrelated things to weave a conspiracy here is the CABPRO event with Rosa Koire. I am a little surprised that after calling me and my organization out specifically she declined an offer to debate head to head on KVMR.

  15. Steve, you have mistakenly applied an expectation of reasonable behavior to this Buzz Windrip wannabe.

    She’s either a psychopath or a fascist, and maybe even both. She’s also probably harmless, but her fanaticism deserves close scrutiny.

  16. I wouldn’t call her bat shit crazy because she believes in something passionately. What I found was the more she talked on her KVMR interview the more I liked her version of Agenda 21. I am baffled at how conservatives can be against sustainability or conservation.

  17. Ben,I am not calling her bat shit crazy because she believes in something passionately.

    I am calling her bat shit crazy because she is assigning UN motivations to a wide range of people’s desires for community improvement [everything from Euclidian zoning to code compliance tp safely walking to school to saving energy]; because she fails to understand that those desires and ideas long predated the very existence of the UN; because she is labeling those people as alternately communistic, socialistic, fascistic and anti-American and seeks to defame and harm them with her rhetoric; because she is demonstrably wrong about many of the points she makes and does not back them up with any sourced facts; and because she is assuming a level of both coordination and intent between widely disparate people and communities that simply does not exist.

    The ‘conspiracy theory’ in this discussion is not the idea that Agenda 21 exists, no one has ever claimed it does not exist as a UN document; the conspiracy theory is the claim that peoples actions are coordinated and planned to implement Agenda 21 as a United Nations mandate [which it is not].

    Ms. Koire seeks to shut down respectful and meaningful public involvement in planning processes and harm civil governance in this country. Her book is a training manual on how to shut down governance and impose a tyranny of the minority.

  18. Steve,
    I respect your opinion a great deal and know you wouldn’t throw the term ‘bat shit crazy’ lightly but personally being a person who pays attention to the big picture patterns I like to give people the benefit of the doubt. The conspiracy she claims is taking place would have to be massive and it seems to unbelievable to me that it is taking place. Much like 9/11 was an inside job. There are many many unanswered questions but to think it was a false flag operation by our government seems a bit unrealistic to me.

    1. Watch the two hour and tell me what “benefit of the doubt” her position still warrants. Of particular interest was her response to the gentleman who asked her, “how do you tell the difference between a community that just wants a bike lane because they like biking and want to be safe and Agenda 21?” Ms. Koire’s response is, “look at the motivations of who is supporting the bike lane.”

      Really? So we are to make policy based on a third party interpretation of individuals and organizations motivation?

      Policy is based on law, crafted in a democratic republic through representative bodies and the courts. Policy should be based on facts and a rational investigation of the facts, through both deliberative bodies and the maximum amount of public participation possible.

      Have you watched the videos of Ms. Koire and her allies shouting down meeting presenters and other members of the public at the One Bay Area Sustainable Community Strategy meetings? Is that democracy?

      CABPRO is organizing its forces to intervene in the Nevada County
      General Plan process and use these same tactics to impose the will of a vocal minority of the community on the majority. They are poised to use the same tactics that they have been using to maintain some semblance of power in our county for years: creating a ‘straw man’; whipping up irrational fear about that straw man and framing all opponents of their preferred policies as organs of the straw man; demonizing their opponents by naming them as fascists/communists/corporatists/; packing the room with people trained to appear more representative than they really are; shouting down those with a different point of view thus discouraging their continued participation; bullying and intimidating those who do speak up; and finally, threatening recall, referendum and initiative as a punitive action against elected officials and jurisdictions should they support policies that they oppose. All of the tactics mentioned are clearly within any individual or organizations constitutional rights and are protected as free speech, assembly, and under California’s political system; but the aggregate effect of these actions is to obstruct and subvert legitimate planning processes and democratic processes.

      As long as people of good will and with a sense of civility allow the forces of incivility to reign, they will have a disproportionate representation in our County.

      1. I salute you, Steve, for taking a position on this, albeit with the limited audience found here in this blog. Koire has woven a remarkable tale casting anyone who is not with her as the enemy. One day she and her followers will consume their own.

        It is unfortunate that there is so much material out there for her to construct her premise out of. I don’t know what to do about this other than to form a more reasonable group for better government. That is what democracy is supposed to be all about anyway.

      2. Thanks, Greg. I hope I am not merely taking a stand here on this blog. The energy efficiency program SBC is implementing has done more than 1000 building retrofits in the Sierra Nevada in the last 3 years, saving more than 17 mkw of electricity per year now and more than $2 million per year in energy costs for local businesses, non-profits and municipal facilities [we don’t do residential, others do].

        But you are right, ultimately the only antidote to irrational uncivil public behavior is to show up in numbers and be both rational and civil. As Woody Allen said, “the world is run by those who show up”. No one is suggesting that the irrational should not be able to show up, merely that they must be countered by smiling faces.

      3. Greg,
        This blog is promoted at, which has the largest readership of any news source in Northern California, outside of the San Francisco Chronicle.

      4. Steve,
        As you probably know I don’t allow people to push me around to much without pushing back. I just don’t know or care enough to dive into the issue of Agenda 21, something I have never heard of until the last year. CABPRO is an extreme right wing group I would feel comfortable calling a fascist or corporatist group. A increasingly geriatric good ol’ boys remembering when they could cut down every tree without anybody raising an eyebrow. But as Edward Abbey said “Growth for the sake of growth is a cancerous madness” and those who sit at CABPRO are inflicted with this cancerous disease of unfettered capitalism.

  19. It’s all about obsession. Jesus told his followers “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

    Now, for me, giving everything to the poor is a bit obsessive and a lot more than I am willing to give up to be a Christian. I am not alone in this regard. Likewise, giving up my bit of rural Nevada County to live in the city, a recommendation from the United Nation’s Agenda 21, is more than I am willing to give up in the name of the environment. I am not alone in this regard.

    Trouble is, in this overpopulated planet, one man’s pursuit of happiness is often an intrusion on another’s. We have to get over these obsessive notions that we can all pursue happiness independently, or, just as bad, we may not pursue *anything* that intrudes on another’s. Compromise in the pursuit of happiness is no vice.

    I would like to see a lot more effort given to the ultimate cause of our environmental problems, overpopulation, than a single minded, relentless pursuit of mitigation. Better to remove the stone in my shoe than take an aspirin to relieve the pain.

    It is not the United Nations I fear but those who are exploiting Agenda 21, as they did earlier with NH 2020, to achieve a political agenda. Agenda 21 is the new boogieman and has become the new challenge to “Nevada County’s sovereignty.” Now that is “bat shit crazy.” Sovereignty is the right to behave without restraint. Is there any sense in which that is possible in Nevada County?

    Well maybe. The most recent overreaction to the restraints implicit in Agenda 21 is the move to abandon code enforcement in the county. Now that is sovereignty pursued at the individual level, and is better known by its rightful name of anarchy.

    The rest of the world is obsessed with sex and violence. What is it with Nevada County’s obsession with Agenda 21? Can’t we all just get back to basics?

    1. First Jim, kudos on your paraphrase of Barry Goldwater, it had me chuckling through my peanut butter.

      Second, lets not even inadvertently perpetuate the notion that Agenda 21 is anything but a policy document with absolutely no enforcement mechanism…there are thousands of UN policy documents, with no enforcement mechanism. The idea that state and local government does things because the UN suggests it, rather than running ideas through their own governance processes, is ludicrous. The idea that because some of the things local governments do is similar to recommendations of Agenda 21 does not mean that they were done BECAUSE of Agenda 21.

      Third, no one is suggesting that you are going to need to give up God’s five acres, nor that future generations will be “forced into urban centers” and “cleansed from the rural landscape” as Ms. Koire said.

      Directly from the Agenda 21 document [with the caveat that there is no ‘enforcement mechanism];

      “All countries, especially developing ones, should, as appropriate, formulate and implement programmes to reduce the impact of the phenomenon of rural to urban drift by improving rural living conditions;..”

      “All countries should support and develop environmentally compatible shelter strategies at national, state/provincial, and municipal levels for through partnerships among the private, public, and community sectors and with the support of community-based organizations;…”

      What Agenda 21 goes on to discuss is different methods through which people can assess and analyze the costs associated with different types of development. I think most people would agree that if one type of development has higher costs than another, the owner of that private property and the user of that resource, should pay for their fair share.

      The move to cities has much less to do with urban planning policy than it does the natural concentration of both wealth and intellectual capital in cities….that dynamic has been present since the birth of agriculture.

      Finally, I could not agree with you more when you point out that the idea that we can solve these problems individually is romantic hubris, that mitigation of the impacts of population growth is a sufficient approach, or that opposition to Agenda 21 is anything but a calculated political strategy to advance policies like the elimination of code enforcement that are designed to benefit the few at the risk of the safety of the many.

      1. Oops I garbled this sentence: “The idea that because some of the things local governments do is similar to recommendations of Agenda 21 does not mean that they were done BECAUSE of Agenda 21.”

        It should read, “The idea that because some of the things local governments do is similar to recommendations of Agenda 21 means that they were done BECAUSE of Agenda 21 is ludicrous.”

      2. Wow, totally garbled that entire response….I should check before I post:)

      3. Thanks Steve. Actually, I haven’t read the UN’s Agenda 21, but I would assume that clustering would be a more environmentally friendly form of development. I recall some years back, a member of the Sacramento Chapter of the Sierra Club, chiding us in our local chapter. We should all leave the rural areas to the plants and animals and cluster in Sacramento.

        I confess to taking offense. I’m sure they are right, but, as I said, there is so much I am willing to sacrifice.

        The bees and paper wasps have set the pattern for us. Their hexagonal nests are wonders of architecture, structurally sound and economical of space and material use. They might have used a much simpler form, a square, another space filling form, but a square cross-sectional cell of equal volume with the hexagonal cross-sectional form, requires, if you do the math, 7% more paper. A circular cross section would be even more economical of material, but it is not space-filling. There was no “fateful hand or eye that designed that [utilitarian] symmetry.” It was naturally selected.

      4. Well it just goes to show you that the response to the need for planning for housing can be equally ridiculous from one member of the Sierra Club as it is from Ms. Koire. Once again, no one is saying that there should not be rural development….just that a mix of housing needs to be provided for.

      5. Steve, I should say, in defense of the Sacramento Sierra Clubber, that he was not so much advocating we all cluster in Sacramento, as pointing out that we are making an environmental compromise when we spread out as we do. The thing that irritated me about his remark was that I hadn’t really acknowledged that I was making a compromise. But, again I would suggest that we in Nevada County get with the rest of the world and redirect our obsessions from Agenda 21 to sex and violence.

  20. I always thought it would be better to build in the foothills than on prime ag land. I get a kick out of names like Orange County, Citrus Heights, and subdivision tracts called, the “Orchard District”, etc. Places where orchards once stood, now characterized by concrete and asphalt.

    1. The late Ernie Bierwagon said the same thing about where development should go in our last conversation, Brad. And as for the regional wastewater proposal, the last time it was floated around ten years ago it was the left that went bonkers, believing it was a plot by the CABPRO wing to promote more development in the county.

      1. rl,
        Your memory has not faded. There was some lively discussion about a super sewer in 2003 +/-. The housing boom was picking up steam quickly, and several Supes touted the super sewer as the solution to our waste water problems. The city of GV was not too keen to the idea due to the fact they had spent several million expanding their plant, and they had ample capacity they would like to use/sell. The housing boom hit it’s peak in 2007, and blew up in 2008. GV’s plant has capacity for another 10-15 years, or more. I think there are approximately 350 housing units approved and not built in GV. It may be time for a general plan update!

    2. One of the interesting things I am discovering Brad is just how quickly prime Ag land in the Valley is shrinking. It is primarily due to two causes: urban development as you pointed out, and second, a combination water related causes such as of soil salinity from years or irrigation, subsidence and oversubscription of California’s water supply. The only way to really address these issues is large landscape level advanced planning, exactly what the anti-A21 people are against.

  21. Here’s a good quote to go along with this discussion:

    Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies. -Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche, philosopher (1844-1900)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: