Invasive species--wine grapes--on the coast?

[Shepherd]

Following are 3 first-person accounts of yesterday's public hearing at Timber Cove on the future of our beloved SoCo coast. Richard Charter and Ernie Carpenter are also preparing reports and intend to send them out. Laura Morgan took a video, which I will dispatch when I have a link.

Long Live Bill Kortum's protection of our fragile coastal environment from industrial colonization!
Shepherd

From Reuben Weinzveg, Sebastopol, Preserve Rural Sonoma County:

Attended by well over 100 people. 99% supportive of more protections for the Coastal Region.

Main points delivered by the public attendees to the PRMD staff:

Coast is a special and fragile place and should be protected and not lumped into the lack of protections in the General Plan2020, as proposed by the PRMD staff.

Vineyards and Wineries should be separated from Agriculture language in the LCP, they are very different and have very different impacts on environment.

Classify Wineries as Industrial, not agriculture.

PRMD admitted that it had not presented any of the Ag elements to the previous three community meetings. They actually revised their power point presentation for this meeting in response to letters from the public in the last month.

PRMD staff keeps harping on the fact that they are just trying to integrate the General Plan 2020 into the LCP and are somewhat resistant to understanding that the Coast needs to have its own protections and should not be lumped together with the inland areas. They asked for folks to write for specific changes that they would suggest to PRMD draft and what is delivered to the Planning Commission.

Takeaway: We need to keep up the pressure and write lots of comments to be forwarded to Supervisors, PRMD and California Coastal Commission. We did staff attention to the dissatisfaction with the Draft LCP - Ag element, but they need to be pressured to write our recommendations into the draft LCP and into their inclusion of public comments that are forwarded to the Planning Commission.

WHAT YOU CAN DO NOW BEFORE PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSES ON 9/30:

Write (email) to the following (cc all of them) and protest the Draft LCP - Ag element's use of language from the General Plan 2020 which ignores the special and fragile Coastal Region of Sonoma County. Ask them to forbid more wineries and event centers in the Coastal Region and to eliminate the language that encourages promotion and visitor accommodations for existing wineries and vineyard properties. The LCP-ag element (with our objections highlighted) is on our website under the Coastal tab. All the email addresses except the Coastal Commission are listed there also. Here is the Coastal Commission contact [email protected]


Visit our website at - https://www.preserveruralsonomacounty.org
Like us on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/preserveruralsonomacounty

Ken Sund, Jenner, Wine and Water Watch, www.winewaterwatch.org

Although the meeting at the packed, "standing room only", Timber Cove Fire station was supposed to be about the whole Local Coastal Plan update, the focus and reason most of the attendees were there had to do with the growing (percieved or real) encroachment of the wine industry upon our coast.

Jenner was represented by 4 longtime members of our community. The ladies presenting and representing the county PRMD (why are they usually ladies?) had experience with contentious crowds and were ready for this one. They were challenged by many knowlegeable citizens in the audience, including the most forceful former supervisor Ernie Carpenter who, as a supervisor, had been at ground zero of drafting the last coastal plan and had exact institutional memory of it's evolution and language.

I had developed some questions and comments but had to compete with 1/2 of the room to get them heard. If I had been from the New York stock exchange I would have had a better chance of getting called while my arm was raised. The presenters called over and over many of the people they already knew by name. It seemed like the New York stock exchange in that so many people were raising their hands at the same time and fighting for audience and attention. And the hard challenges to the presentation although civil and on the edge of respectful, put the county officials on the defensive.

Basically- and in part due to the news articles & flyers discussing the "Our Coast is Threatened", the people who showed up are opposed to the allowed development and expension of the wine industry in our coastal hills. Although the presenters said the language of the original coastal plan has not been changed to facilitate the permitting of ag conversion to grapes then tasting rooms and wineries, it exists all over the language I read in the Land Use Element section which is the only section I've read so far. Not having read this stuff before it gave me a headache.

The local residents are right in telling the county that the coast is not appropriate for the big money investment schemes that potentially can move in. The Coastal Hills Rural Preservation organization fought the development of Lester Swartz' Fort Ross Winery and are currently challenging the industrial Rana Ling publishing facility and housing expansion. I didn't see much love for the Fort Ross winery in that room. I see wineries as industrial processing plants, not the warm and fuzzy agricultural tourism the county allows to take hold on the scenic nooks and crannys of our county, disrupting the quality of life of longtime residents.

The narrow rural roads, limited emergency services, potential for catastrophic fire and scenic beauty are being impacted now by bicycle tourism and if the county allows the expansion wineries, tasting rooms, event centers under the so called "agricultural tourism" being promoted in their coastal plan, it will negatively alter the quality of life for coastal residents and wildlife. The water grab for grapes was discussed. There is limited water in those hills and pumping it onto grapes will further deplete the aquifer or local creeks and the Gualala watershed.

I think the message the presenters will take back to their bosses, the supervisors, will be clear coming out of this meeting: The coastal hills and surrounding area locals are going to fight to take out any language that makes it easier for the wine industry to get permits to expand into their area. A proposal was made to separate viticulture from agriculture and make it play by a different set of rules.

It was clear to me that there is an articulate, experienced and committed group that is ready to fiercely oppose winery expansion into our coast. I'm ready to work with them and encourage my Jenner and larger community to stay informed and do the same.

Preserve Rural Sonoma County had placed informational flyers on the seats with suggestions for on "What You Can Do" and website links. This was useful.
MIssing at the meeting were the corresponding county representative of this area, Supervisor Carrillo and his appointee to the planning dept., Tom Lynch.

Laura Morgan, Graton

Sandi and Jennifer from PRMD opened with a power-point to explain the mandated and up-dated LCP language. General Plan 2020 language, which has never been overseen by the Coastal Commission and existed as "appendix E" at the end of the prior LCP, was substituted for the current language. I'm still not sure who crafted it, but therein lies the problem with the future of the coast. Richard Charter was all over that. If you do not have Preserve Rural Sonoma County's red-lined text, you should be on their mailing list. I can also send it to you.

Ernie gave an impassioned and succinct summary of the problem, which I captured on my i-pad. He sees an open door for the establishment of multi-faceted event centers (ie, expanded lodging, restaurant, tour, commerce, etc) to "promote SoCo agricultural products", which is approved under the proposed and previous LCP provisions that were written before the county was graped.

Most everyone got a chance to express their various perspectives, from local emblematic issues like Ratna Ling and the Fort Ross winery to broader coastal concerns such as no water, lack of adequate fire prevention or response, ecologic fragility, lack of adequate or safe roadways, etc.

Near the end, a delightful man from Timber Cove made a personal appeal to the presenters, asking how best we could work with them to craft a document that would be most likely to win approval. They revealed that they are already being mentored by someone on the Coastal commission in what they have written so far. They denied having any closed meetings with wine or farm folks. They said that if invited to speak at a gathering, say, of the Board of Realtors, some in-put would inevitably be of influence, just as ours was.

Comments were written down on a chart pad, attendees' e-mail addresses were taken and we were promised that we would be informed of all future processes in this regard.

[Barry]

Following are 3 first-person accounts of yesterday's public hearing at Timber Cove on the future of our beloved SoCo coast. Richard Charter and Ernie Carpenter are also preparing reports and intend to send them out. Laura Morgan took a video, which I will dispatch when I have a link.

Long Live Bill Kortum's protection of our fragile coastal environment from industrial colonization!
Shepherd

Shepherd was kind enough to post the notes from the recent Timber Cove (Coast) hearing. They are well worth reading but were omitted from the digest yesterday due to their length. You can see the full notes on our website here.