Petaluma’s
new General Plan has been a long time in the making. As we head down the home
stretch, with only a few more hearings on the Plan (and its Environmental
Impact Report) before Council approval, now is the time for persistence.
In my last
column, I mentioned the Petaluma Ring Trail, the Petaluma Green Lane proposal
for a continuous path around the City (see www.bruce-hagen.com/ringtrail.htm for all the details.) I
introduced the idea in a column three years ago, and later brought it up to favorable
comment at the Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee and Parks Commission.
But, unfortunately, I didn’t ask for a roll call vote on a written resolution
of support. So when I recommended to staff that the GP be modified to
specifically call for a “Petaluma Ring Trial” (versus “a connected system of
multi-use trails in the Urban Separator”), with language stipulating a continuous and unbroken path around the
City (versus a more vague description), my suggestions were initially dismissed.
Persistence. I wrote a memo to the two groups and City staff, further explaining the
merits of my proposal. I attended the next PBAC and Parks Commission meetings,
emphasizing that 1) absolute clarity of language will make it easier to
complete the trail, and 2) giving it a short descriptive name will help market
it to tourists and sources of funding. After the meeting, I sent a follow-up
email to everyone, responding to their comments and making a few final
refinements to the proposal. Now I’m asking for your help. If you’d like to
make the “trail around town” a reality, write to the City Council members
expressing support (find the Council email addresses at http://cityofpetaluma.net/cclerk/council.html or write c/o citymgr@ci.petaluma.ca.us).
And here’s a big thank you in advance to the Recreation, Music, and Parks
Commission, the PBAC, the Planning Commission and the City Council, for
supporting what I’m very hopeful will become one of Petaluma’s many treasures.
In the GP’s
early days, a strong majority of the City Council understood that business as
usual was a strategy for ecological and economic failure. Those council members
were willing to expend some effort preparing the city for the huge local
implications of global warming and peak oil (the relatively rapid decline in
supply and increase in cost of cheap fossil energy.) They directed the GP staff and consultants to
make eco sustainability a foundation principle in the new plan. Regrettably,
the change in makeup of the Council shifted attention from sustaining our life
support systems to sustaining our ability to drive everywhere as fast as
possible.
We are
fortunate that both our mayoral candidates, Pam Torliatt
and Mike Healy, were a part of the Council that launched this General Plan
process. Both are experienced Council Members whose values reflect those of the
great majority of Petalumans. Pam offers unequalled
understanding and support for the cause of sustainability, the challenges and
opportunities it poses. Mike Healy is a thoughtful innovator, with a proven
ability to create consensus among all Council members. His diplomacy has secured
passage of socially and environmentally progressive measures, including the
green building ordinance and public art ordinance. Those are valuable assets to
have in the Mayor’s office.
Here’s something
Pam’s supporters need to know: If Pam wins, Healy is off the Council, and
that’s bad for Petaluma. If Healy wins, however, Pam still has two more years
of her current term. A vote for Mike keeps them both on the Council.
A final
note on sustainability and the General Plan: candidates who support “Rainier”
should be clear about which Rainier
they favor. Do they favor the original general plan’s simple crosstown connector? Or, do they support the bloated Rainier
freeway interchange, the one conceived on behalf of flood plain real estate
speculators in a 1989 GP update, the one designed to support development of the
Petaluma River flood plain (development which would increase flooding and eventually
negate Rainier’s traffic relief benefit?) In the face of rising gasoline prices
and rising ocean levels, how sustainable is that?