Letters to the Editor 9-3-15

Subsidizing wealthy
Editor: I had to chuckle at the letter from the 12 members of the Cloverdale Pilots Association. While I am sure this is a very dedicated and legitimate group, I have never seen 12 planes at the airport if you subtract the commercial skydiving planes. Further, I am not convinced that the FAA has the power to mandate that we spend $50,000 a year to subsidize the defunct airport. What if we just did not have those funds available?
I think that if a dog park was substituted for an airport, instead of just a few residents using the airport, you could expect anywhere from 20 to 40 Cloverdale residents to use it; every day. Many now drive to Windsor to use their fine dog park, or take their dogs to Kings Castle and pay the freight. So, for a cost effective use of $50,000 in taxpayer dollars, I say do whatever we have to do to attract a tax paying business and build a dog park. That would be a win-win solution for the city and its tax paying residents. Right now, we are all just subsidizing an out of town commercial operation and a very limited number of residents wealthy enough to own a plane.
Wayne Diggs
Cloverdale
Use common sense
Editor: Deciding between closing the airport and approving the new resort is a very simple one if people use their common sense. On one hand you have a city that is subsidizing 21 aviation hobbyists to the tune of $30,000 to $50,000 a year with no benefit to the general public. Talk about the tail wagging the dog.
On the other hand you can have new tax dollars up to a million for the city and new jobs up to 200. Every election we hear that Cloverdale needs jobs, new businesses and more tax dollars. Well it is here, looking right at you. Cloverdale was known for being anti-business for years. Let’s use some common sense and approve this project.
Steve and Dianne Oliver
Cloverdale
Locals keep Cloverdale alive, not the airport
Editor: Let’s stop this mini-western some people are spinning … the Hill People against the Airporters. The words ring like the dialogue in a terrible spaghetti Western: “Well hell, look there, there’s one of those strangers in town!” The fact is, those of us in the hills surrounding Cloverdale are what’s helping keep Cloverdale alive – not the airport that is defended on narrow self-interest and emotion, ignoring the hard facts. There are so many reasons to close the airport, but I’ll focus on the math.
First, the airport doesn’t give what it gets. Not by a long shot. Cloverdale taxpayers prop up the airport by $30,000 to $50,000 a year. Measure O guaranteed it. And yet, the city doesn’t keep records of what the airport gives back in spending and tax proceeds. It’s a pittance. The airport hasn’t been revenue-neutral in 40 years.
The fact is, compared to the airport, we in the hills are a powerful economic engine for Cloverdale. We may not live in the city limits, but we spend money there. Lots of it. The 400-plus households along the eastern and western ridges, north and south of town, along with our visiting families and guests, spend our money in Cloverdale 365 days a year.
It’s a matter of practicality. We shop and dine here because we’re downtown in 14 minutes. Healdsburg is 38 minutes away. The reality: Compared to us, the airport’s weekend skydivers and its dozen pilots spend a relative drop in the bucket.
So to dismiss us in the hills as outsiders is foolish, mean-spirited and divisive. It’s easier to point fingers and stereotype than to stare at the raw facts. This brand of non-thinking has kept Cloverdale an economic backwater despite a roaring economy elsewhere. Still, we “outsiders” support Cloverdale because it’s home for us. We depend on its success. Let’s make that happen. Let’s close the airport, bring in the sports park, and watch Cloverdale come to life.
Ron Thal
Cloverdale
Where will it come from and where will it go?
Editor: For the past few months I have read with great interest the back and forth over the proposed Cloverdale resort development. Now it could be just me, as I do have a sporadic attention span, but I’ve yet to see any discussion related to utility infrastructure.
Perhaps before folks get too uptight over airports and equestrian facilities a quick look at both the Cloverdale water and wastewater master plans should take place. There to be found are clear recommendations for needed improvements, the cost of these improvements could and perhaps should be borne in full or in part by the developers.
Water production, treatment, storage and delivery systems need attention to meet the 2025 population prediction of 12,000, just a meager 3,300 more folks above the 2013 census of 8,738. Wastewater infrastructure suffers as well. Plus the wastewater plant will someday (likely sooner rather than later) have to have advanced treatment upgrades to meet water quality standards as zero river discharge will (and should) someday be mandated.
These sorts of subjects tend to shake potential developers to the depth of their bank accounts. But the fact remains, these improvements and repairs must be made and thus paid for by someone. If not clearly defined and on the table for discussion at the front end of a project they will be ignored and the cost pasted to the taxpayer.
Leonard Von Hoogenstyn
Cloverdale
No to trade agreement
Editor: After years of exporting jobs to foreign countries (thanks to disastrous trade agreements such as NAFTA, and preferred trading status with China), the middle class in the US has been decimated. Meanwhile, the robber barons who sold this bill of goods to our gullible leaders have made out, literally, like bandits.
A new agreement called the Trans Pacific Partnership is being sold to our elected representatives as the next great thing. Not satisfied just taking our jobs, this ultimate corporate power grab seeks to destroy our sovereign rights as a nation. This undermines protections across a wide spectrum – environmental, job safety, food safety and labelling, product safety and much more. If America tries to regulate these things, a corporate tribunal will decide the outcome. If we do not comply with the rulings of the tribunal, they can sue the U.S. for lost profits.
Protect yourselves, protect your children – say no to the TPP.
Gerald McBride
Cloverdale