Letters to the Editor 11-26-15

More drugs, more money
EDITOR: So let me get this strait, this whole argument is about the 439 wineries operating in Sonoma County (439 wineries!) wanting the right to grow, process and sell a drug that ruins an untold amount of lives, cause immeasurable amounts of financial and physical harm to familiars and communities worldwide and kills over 50,000 people every year in American alone? And their justification for wanting to be allowed to create this unneeded “product” is that selling this drug brings money into the economy and provides jobs for the local community?
So now, to be allowed to grow and produce this unneeded drug in our communities, they will need to change our communities to a place where they can be allowed to throw large lavish parties that attracts more drug users to our neighborhoods and terribly maintained rural roadways resulting in more traffic and an increased risk of potential drunk drivers.
This is all so that they can sell more drugs and make more money? They also want to suck up all the ground and river water unregulated as well?
This kind of reminds me of Columbia and how the Columbian drug cartels operate. Wine workers, cocaine workers, same-same. They both have the blood on their hands of the countless ruined lives and untold amounts of human suffering caused by the drugs they helped manufacture and sell.
Sometimes it’s not all about money. Sometimes it’s about necessity. And in this argument there is no necessity but corporate greed. If they were growing food or something useful, that would be one thing, but that’s not the case here. Take me back to the days when Sonoma County grew apples and walnuts, products that contributed to the good in society, not the bad.
William Blaze
Sebastopol
5th generation
Sonoma County Resident
NIMBY-ism, xenophobia and the Board of Supervisors
EDITOR: On Nov. 10, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 against a project presented before them for the expansion of a six-bed residential care facility for the elderly into a 12-bed residential community. This vote was a big surprise based on the needs of this county.
Twenty percent of Sonoma County’s 500,000 citizens are 65 and older. This number will become 25 percent (125,000) within the next 15 years. Today, we only have roughly 4,700 beds available in Sonoma County for seniors, counting skilled nursing facilities and residential care facilities.
The project denied by the supervisors met all county regulations and codes in terms of height, size, safety, traffic, parking, noise, water, etc. The project was approved unanimously in June 2015 by county staff and received a favorable five out of five vote at the Sonoma County Planning Commission. The commissioners concluded that there were no valid objections presented, that a “not in my backyard” attitude was not a valid objection and that neighbors needed to realize they can no longer live in a bubble when the rest of the county is in crisis.
After all of this and even stating, “we understand the needs …” the supervisors voted against the project, listening to the incredible resistance of the neighborhood to accept compassionate senior housing in their community.
Perhaps some neighborhoods are exempt from our countywide problems, perhaps some privileged areas in the county would not like to be bothered, and would prefer not to see our problems in their neighborhood.
Has our collective xenophobia now come to include aging? How can care homes for seniors be cast as incompatible with our neighborhoods? I suppose the care of all these seniors could instead be paid for through the county general fund, the same general fund that can’t even pay county-employed in-home caregivers a living wage?
Yes, let’s create more unfunded mandates. Let’s ship all of our seniors over to the county-run facility so we don’t have a business in the neighborhood. Running a private senior care facility is no more a business than PG&E or Comcast supplying electricity or phone service to the community. It is no more a business than a paving company hired to replace the roads, or a landscape company, or a fence builder, or an appliance repair person, or a house painter.
These services all require that money change hands because there are costs involved, salaries to be paid, and an owner who also needs to make a living. For that matter, is renting an extra room in your house a business? What about renting the whole house out? How about a vacation rental?
At the hearing, Supervisors Rabbitt and Carillo dozed off during the applicant’s comments and then stated they had a “real dilemma” and “trouble making up their minds,” but had to vote against the expansion, while Board members Gorin and Gore stated that the project was “good planning and great looking building,” but found it incompatible with the neighborhood. Only Supervisor Zane supported the project and was outraged at her colleagues’ votes. This particular neighborhood has oversized homes on large parcels, some bigger and taller than the proposed project. Incompatibility? What’s incompatible is that seniors needing a care home must live in a warehouse facility with no human amenities in an institutional environment. That is incompatible with life.
We need facilities in neighborhoods, not only in institutions. As Marianne McBride, president and CEO of the nonprofit Council on Aging said: “The goal is total cultural changes around aging and this change needs to happen in every neighborhood and on every block.”
Alain Serkissian, Administrator
Mirabel Lodge,
Premiere Assisted Living Community
Forestville