Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range

Comment Archives: Stories

Re: “D.A: No charges for Gelhaus

Deeply affected.* Smh.

Posted by Victoria Shamrock on 07/08/2014 at 10:21 AM

Re: “July 3: Ernest Ranglin at 19 Broadway

Why are you listing shows after they happen...? Not even a review..

Posted by TR on 07/08/2014 at 8:42 AM

Re: “Return of the NorBays!

where can i see who made it to the final voting round?

Posted by djplaybayhits on 07/07/2014 at 6:55 PM

Re: “Letters to the Editor: July 2, 2014

Lake Berryessa is not a National Monument!

Proponents of the Berryessa Snow Mountain National Conservation Area, knowing that Congressman Thompson’s highly unpopular bill will never pass Congress, have begun an anti-democratic strategy to bypass Congress and have the President declare Lake Berryessa a National Monument under the Antiquities Act - simply by a stroke of his pen!

Lake Berryessa does not meet the basic standards of an NCA. And it especially doesn’t meet any criteria to become a National Monument.

The main problem affecting Lake Berryessa in all this chaos is that it was included in the original silly Berryessa Snow Mountain NCA in the first place. Lake Berryessa is like the tail of a dog that can't seem to wag the rest of the dog's body. The lake is not even connected on the map to the rest of the proposed NCA/National Monument which stretches far into Northern California. Just look at the map yourself!

http://www.lakeberryessanews.com/2014/NCA%20Minus%20lake.jpg

At a minimum, Lake Berryessa should be removed from the boundaries of any proposed National Monument or NCA and the NCA should be renamed the Mendocino Snow Mountain NCA.

The Antiquities Act states that National Monuments should contain “historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest” and be “the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.” Lake Berryessa meets neither criteria and clearly falls into the “Rural Developed Setting” under the government’s own Water and Land Recreation Opportunity Spectrum Users' Handbook (WALROS) quoted below. This designation should immediately exclude it from National Monument or NCA consideration. And Lake Berryessa and the surrounding areas are already highly protected.

"A rural developed area is beyond a metropolitan area and the suburban ring of development. Rural developed areas may serve as "bedroom" communities for urban areas and may contain working farms, ranches, and towns. In this setting, primary road networks are common. Although development will be prevalent and common, the setting has a pastoral sense because of an interspersing of forests, water resources, hills, valleys, canyons, wetlands, open spaces, and agricultural lands. Naturally appearing shoreline edges are common, although various water controls or other structures are also common. Recreation management is prevalent and common but not as extensive as in an urban setting.”

Lake Berryessa is a man-made lake with no special historical or environmental significance, created by a minor dam and surrounded by bedroom communities and private land. It has historically been a major public recreation destination. Although I have been a long-standing critic of the Bureau of Reclamation in the past, its recent actions show that Reclamation is doing an excellent job in managing the future development process for the revitalization of the lake. Reclamation’s last Public Forum presentation in Winters of the status and results of the ongoing planning process for the lake’s redevelopment were extremely thorough and professional. It included drafts of detailed Market Assessment and Financial Analysis, Conceptual Site Plans, and Infrastructure Design Report. These are all available for review at their web site: http://www.usbr.gov/mp/ccao/berryessa/updates/index.html

How would a National Monument designation affect residents, property owners, and ranchers in the boundaries? How would the designation affect the NBRID, the Berryessa Highlands, and the potential Community Services District being planned for that region?

A National Monument is traditionally managed by the National Park Service, but the Bureau of Land Management has often been designated as the manager in the legislation. A National Monument designation would force out the Bureau of Reclamation - as would Thompson’s other bill in Congress. His management transfer bill, HR4166, does not enjoy popular support among the people affected and has never had any significant public input. What would be the cost of the transition and who would pay for it? How long would it delay the present process? What specifically can the BLM do better an faster than the BOR?

What happens to current Reclamation employees, some long-term, who care as much about the lake as do local residents? Their lives would be seriously affected, their jobs could be eliminated, their families could be uprooted for no good reason.

A National Monument designation could severely restrict public access to and future development at the lake - as could an NCA designation. The usual radical exclusionist suspects have already been floating the idea that some of the resorts should not be reopened at all, reopened with limited amenities, or reopened for day use only.

Posted by Pkilkus on 07/05/2014 at 1:09 PM

Re: “Debriefer: July 2, 2014

On Community Choice energy..

AB 2145 as amended still has exactly the same purpose; to entrench the corporate monopoly utilities and undermine competition from local community based clean energy programs.

Here's how:

1) Geographic Barriers: With its 3 county restriction, AB 2145 would prevent cities and counties from grouping together to serve larger numbers of customers in order to buy and generate energy at lower bulk rates and compete on electricity prices with the huge monopoly utilities. Under this draconian restriction, many small, rural, and lower income communities, would find it impossible to launch Community Choice programs, because they would be forced to do so on their own with a much smaller customer base. It is outrageously anti-competitive to limit the size and buying power of these programs when the monopoly utilities have no such restrictions at all.

Ability to grow is crucial. When Marin’s program expanded to bring in thousands of customers in the working class city of Richmond, rates for customers went down; and Marin’s planned inclusion of Napa County is projected to lower customer rates by 3%, while still delivering a greener energy mix than PG&E. If AB 2145 becomes law, cities and counties all over California will be blocked from repeating Marin’s successes.

2) Bureaucratic Interference: AB 2145 creates a minefield of bureaucratic restrictions to Community Choice programs designed to make it extremely difficult for them to survive. AB 2145’s requirement that Community Choice programs provide exact rates for customers for five years in advance (while the monopoly utilities would only be required to project rates for five years) would be an outrageous double standard, and impossible for any energy provider to meet. It would expose Community Choice programs to endless lawsuits over changing rates that could shut down every single one of them.

AB 2145 also takes customer relations oversight away from local accountable elected officials and staff, and places it in the vast state level bureaucracy of the CPUC. No other local public water or power systems are placed under such a heavy handed, distant, state agency governing process. These two provisions are nothing but flagrantly purposeful bureaucratic barriers meant to hamstring fair competition from Community Choice programs.

To take action to stop this fossil fuel monopoly power grab, go to http://no2145.org

Posted by Eric Brooks on 07/04/2014 at 2:38 PM

Re: “Gorilla Warfare

Funny to think of Charles "NRA" Heston being an unwitting revolutionary. Not the first time he played straight man without being aware of the joke (clueless gay crush object in Ben Hur). I don't disagree with the analysis here, but it should be said that none of the original sequels were exactly good movies. Tim Burton's Planet is destined for the shelf of "never watch again" next to Ang Lee's Hulk movie. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me to hear that Tim Roth is buying up all the copies because he gets a muscle spasm any time someone sees it. Despite any firehose references, the new Rise wholeheartedly replaced genuine political content with CGI. I'll probably go see Dawn but my expectations are low.

Posted by Nortally on 07/03/2014 at 4:19 PM

Re: “Family Talk

Just - Wow! I arrived in Sierra Leone in 1999 - we thought we had secured the peace through the LOME agreement, however, war was still raging up country and Freetown saw it's series of killing in the Streets. Bravo and Conrgatulations! Cannot wait to see the film and interview the filmmaker.

Sheila Dallas

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Sheila Dallas on 07/03/2014 at 6:00 AM

Re: “Gorilla Warfare

What a bunch of pretentious crap.

0 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Ben Ghazi on 07/02/2014 at 4:48 AM

Re: “The Telltale Text

Good job T. Google and the Bohemian for exposing these cronies. "I blended in" as a gang member, wow. I'm disgusted. Wouldn't it be nice if we could trust them?

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Lloyd on 07/01/2014 at 5:52 PM

Re: “Under the Radar

Just to clarify some more, Ben Stephens and Gabriel Smith created Live Musicians Co-Op eight years ago, as they saw there was a great need for it. Nathan Prowse came along much later.

Posted by csmith on 07/01/2014 at 4:44 PM

Re: “DFW Skeptical of Record Coho Salmon Migration

It sounds like Mr. Neillands hasn't evaluated the data and yet he's telling the public to doubt the results. Is he acting as a spokesperson for the Department, or offering his own opinion? The article doesn't say. I like seeing the Bohemian report on a scientific debate but not if it's just speculation by a scientist not involved in the research.

Posted by SpeckledDace on 06/30/2014 at 11:05 AM

Re: “I Like Obamacare

Did you stop to think about who is paying for your healthcare? If you can't pay for yours, then someone else not only pays for theirs, but for yours also. Maybe someday you can make enough money to be forced to buy healthcare for others.

3 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by b on 06/27/2014 at 2:51 PM

Re: “Under the Radar

Jus to clarify a few misunderstandings, Ben Stephens was the founder of the live musicians co-op and nathan prowse got on board to expand the place.

1 like, 2 dislikes
Posted by Nathan Prowse on 06/26/2014 at 12:12 PM

Re: “So You Wanna Hunt Mushrooms?

Charles Swanson, married, 2 sons??!! Wow.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Ana M. on 06/26/2014 at 6:34 AM

Re: “Cabaret Buffet

For the record, I have never been "the" producer of Good Hip Hop Monthly, I joined the ongoing monthly event in its 5th year in 2013 as a resident DJ and a promoter of the event. *** Much thanks for the interview and for a great article!

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Shey Roth on 06/25/2014 at 6:39 PM

Re: “Climate Change

Three cheers for the Climate Protection Campaign and Sonoma Clean Power! It's so nice to know that we're leading this historic movement. Dear Ann, more POWER to you!

Philip Beard
Sonoma County Go Local Cooperative

Posted by Philip Beard, Go Local Coop on 06/25/2014 at 5:46 PM

Re: “July 25: Ghosts of the Phoenix Theater at the Phoenix Theater

I've been there, I slept inside the building overnight...and it is in fact haunted.

Posted by Sarah Willyard on 06/25/2014 at 12:00 PM

Re: “Under the Radar

The July 2nd show sounds rad! I'm glad LMC is helping bring back a decent music scene to Santa Rosa since there are already so many great bands, there just needs to be more great venues.

11 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Neal Mckenzie on 06/25/2014 at 8:05 AM

Re: “Hydrodynamic

.....never heard of him. Must hang with the LB Crew

0 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Davis Lawson on 06/24/2014 at 11:44 PM

Re: “Union Vote at Graton Casino Wrapping Up

To respond to the above comment, the 650 number only includes workers directly employed by the casino, and only those casino worker's who are able to be in the union. This may not be 100% correct but I believe all management, admin positions, card dealers, security and others are excluded. A conservative estimate of this group is 350, it could be up to 600. There are also at least 200 if not 300 workers at the non-casino restaurants who are also not included. Conservatively that puts the total number of jobs at 1200. Additionally, there will be a hotel made in the future and those will be 200-300 jobs easily. So while 1500 jobs is perhaps a better estimate than 2000, it is NOT 650. You need to stop spreading biased information to promote your cause. Also you need to blame the evil company Stations because they laid off HUNDREDS of workers in December. Had they not done that, the 2000 figure may still be accurate. Please do some unbiased research, your activism (which I support) will be more powerful with accurate data.

Posted by George K on 06/23/2014 at 5:07 PM

Facebook Activity

This Week's Issue

July 9-15, 2014

Copyright © 2014 Metro Newspapers. All rights reserved.

Website powered by Foundation