Letters to the Editor 7-23-15

Keep Cloverdale real
Editor: I am writing in response to your article “Equestrian resort idea proposed on Tyris property” and commentary that appeared in the July 16, 2015 edition of the Reveille. I would have gladly attended Jes Slavik’s Tuesday presentation regarding this proposed project if I had known about it. Mr Slavik is quoted in your article as stating, “We would like a quiet, peaceful place to build a resort.” Well, I would like to continue to have a quiet and peaceful town. That is the essence of Cloverdale. That’s why we live here. This town is a gem and I’d like to see it stay that way. I’m all for growth that fits with Cloverdale and I don’t feel that this proposed project is a good fit for our town, but I sense the vultures circling. I concur with the statement that Mayor Cox is quoted as making “… I don’t see it fitting into Cloverdale. “ Mr Slavik is also quoted as saying “We’re under contract with the property. If the community doesn’t want us, we can go away.” I say then, go. Let’s keep Cloverdale real.
Cyndi Kehrli
Cloverdale
Disappointed by cynicism
Editor: I am dismayed and somewhat confused by comments attributed to Mayor Bob Cox that were reported in the Reveille last week regarding the presentation for the proposed equestrian resort that Laulima Development provided for the citizens of Cloverdale. I am hoping that they were taken out of context. The idea that the mayor of Cloverdale would be insulting and immediately dismissive of this presentation is of great concern to me. The local economy has been tepid for years and the city has struggled to maintain the basic services required for a safe and secure city. When a viable development opportunity was presented that could benefit the city of Cloverdale and the surrounding area, the mayor was quick to discredit the idea and in turn expose his true feelings about Cloverdale. Wouldn’t fit in? I’m not sure what he means by that. I am also not sure why he thinks Kenwood or Santa Rosa are better locations for a destination resort than Cloverdale. A project of this scope would create many permanent jobs in a community where jobs are scarce. Jobs in hospitality, maintenance, operations, and personal services would be created. Increased tourism in Cloverdale would stimulate the fledgling businesses that are now taking root in town. Not to mention the direct benefit to the Cloverdale coffers through lodging and sales tax receipts. The developers project over $1 million in tax revenue per year that would go directly to the Cloverdale general fund. One does not have to look too far from Cloverdale to see how tourism can boost a local economy. The ripple effect of a major resort of this size and scope would benefit everyone who calls Cloverdale home. Our leaders need to do everything they can in order to attract economic development, not discourage it. I know many people in this community are working tirelessly to make Cloverdale a better place to live and investing their time and money to create new businesses and services. Our leaders should be hydrating these green shoots of economic development not choking them. Reasonable people can engage in a debate about the future of Cloverdale and all sides should be heard. It is disappointing that the mayor’s de facto position is one of cynicism. Maybe he’s not up to the challenges that face this community.
Joseph Voss
Cloverdale
Residents should decide about
airport, not developer
Editor: When Tyris proposed its golf resort, the airport was described as one of several community assets making the site ideal. Today a new developer says the opposite. It was wonderful to see all viewpoints represented in a packed room during the developer presentation. Still, it was clear many Cloverdalians turned out to see for themselves who would be ridiculous enough to enter into an agreement to purchase the property despite the “noisy, unsafe” airport located adjacent to their proposed resort and equestrian center, and then tell the community to shut it down. No single group or entity should ever be allowed to dictate our community identity. Most of us agree Cloverdale is a work in progress. We reside in a beautiful and peaceful wine country location with additional focus on art, music, family and outdoor activities. Throughout the developer presentation, it was suggested what types of stores we should have to support the resort, and how Cloverdale could accommodate well-to-do visitors. I never got the impression the resort would have any offerings of significance for us to enjoy. The $1 million in trabsient occupancy taxes he said would enrich “poor” Cloverdale might almost cover the impact of the resort on city services. As for telling us that we need to eliminate the airport to have a “better” community, my feeling is that our better may not be the same as his better. The developer had all sorts of ideas for how to redevelop airport land, but offered no financial contribution. He laid out all sorts of expensive ways Cloverdale could follow his lead to prosperity; “If we (the developer) succeed, Cloverdale succeeds.” Yes, there are problems with the airport that need to be worked out. There are also compelling reasons to have an airport and there are concessions made to have one. Citizens must be consistent in their efforts to get airport issues addressed. However, only local residents should decide if the airport is to go away, and they need to understand all the impacts, including the enormous cost to remediate that land. The developer says he will go away if we don’t close the airport. Harking back to his statement regarding success, I must point out it is not true that if you (developer) fail, Cloverdale fails. We will continue working on our airport issues and look forward to you or future developers proposing ideas that suit the identity Cloverdale wants.
Paula Wrenn
Cloverdale
Do we have a vision?
Editor: Ray Holley’s commentary, “Hard Choices” asking what does Cloverdale want for its future, leaves me wondering what really is Cloverdale’s vision? Before the planners of this town get strong armed by big corporate developers who dangle carrot sticks with bags of money in front of them, suggesting that a controversial airport be pushed out, the impacts of such moves hopefully would be considered from all angles. “The most successful towns, large or small, are those with a clear vision of what they want to be,” – quoted from an article by Thomas Morano called “Staying Small by Thinking Big” – easily found through Google and worth a read. Would Cloverdale be prepared to handle the stress on infrastructure and public facilities from a resort of this sort? Consider impacts on environment, water, sewer, traffic and housing? Speaking of housing, affordable housing essentially needs to be in place before a resort of this sort is finished or there will be a staffing problem. What of the airport? People attracted to the resort may want to fly in … to me it would enhance the resort to keep the airport and grow it. There are still a lot of empty buildings in town; some businesses don’t last long – is vision lacking? I know I want to see wisdom in growth for Cloverdale. As Morano says, growth management rests on four footings: a vision, a development plan, regulations and processes. If Cloverdale doesn’t have these in place, it will not manage its growth well.
Maria Doglio
Cloverdale
Concerned about noise
Editor: I live in the Del Webb Community. My backyard runs parallel to South Cloverdale Blvd. With all this discussion now about developing Cloverdale, i.e., Dollar General and a possible housing development on east side of highway, I have not heard any plans on protecting homeowners such as myself from the additional road noise these developments will bring. What is the plan to improve the sound quality from the already busy South Cloverdale Blvd. traffic activity? Can someone tell me?
Theresa Mahoney
Cloverdale
What’s right for Cloverdale?
Editor: Your July 16 issue of the Cloverdale Reveille generated quite a bit of discussion among family and friends in Cloverdale. The front page featured articles on the proposed resort and the approved Dollar General. Regrettably, I was not able to attend the July 14 informational meeting at the Clover Theater regarding the resort. The Reveille article stated that some participants felt bullied or steamrolled, while others were appreciative of the proposal. From my vantage point, I am strongly encouraged to have a developer engage with our community and attempt to understand how their vision for a resort squares with where we want to take Cloverdale. Perhaps closing the airport is too difficult or too unpalatable. Let’s study that and see. Perhaps an equestrian center is not as beneficial as a golf course or similar attraction. Let’s talk about it in the follow-up meetings that Jes Slavic and Laulima Development have committed to offer. As Cloverdalians, we have been wringing our hands about how we can shore up our finances and develop job opportunities here in our community. A $200 million project with ongoing tax revenues would be the centerpiece of the kind of development we could have in our future as we carry out our vision of being a great place to live, work and play. Contrast this collaborative process to the approval to have a Dollar General built and operational by Christmas 2015. I believe I pay a little more attention to developments in Cloverdale than the average citizen, but this is the first I have heard of Dollar General coming to Cloverdale. I agree that the existing site is an eye-sore, and that a new commercial building is an improvement. But is a Dollar General the best choice for the site? Do the resort critics think the Dollar General should also provide living wage jobs, or is that not expected of a “small-box” discount retailer? Does the Dollar General align with our emphasis on shopping locally? Are the goods there made locally, or even made in the United States? I doubt I will ever shop at Dollar General. But as a resident of Cloverdale who does not ride horses, I don’t expect I would ever stay at the proposed resort either. Regardless, the resort would provide significant financial resources to our community which we could direct towards The Boys & Girls Club, city park improvements, sporting facilities, road paving and more. I support continued dialog with Laulima Development and urge all Cloverdalians to play an active role in determining the future of our great town. Change is inevitable, and we can shape that change if we get engaged. What do you think is right for Cloverdale?
Jim Kluesener
Cloverdale
Time to speak up
Editor: The proposal to build a resort hotel-equestrian center, luxury homes and supporting businesses at the south end of town begs consideration by both the residents and the elected officials of Cloverdale. Cloverdale has lagged behind most other cities and towns in Sonoma County. We are smaller than most, have less to offer, and are the farthest north. All around us is mostly agriculture and not so much in tourist attractions. What we do have is an airport that is probably used by less than 50 residents a month. It is supported by our taxes, to the tune of around $50,000 a year – if we remember to collect all the rent. True, it brings in a few thousand out-of-towners for the one viable business housed there. These few thousand most likely spend a bit of money in town; meals, hotels and a tank of gas.  Do we need it for security, firefighting, air-ambulance or for arriving dignitaries? Probably not. I think that it is just a 10-minute drive to the Healdsburg airport, which is larger and better equipped. Do we need it for the pride of having it? Well, if you have been out there lately, I think you would agree that one could replace all of the infrastructure for less than the annual subsidy required to keep it open. It ain’t much to brag about; life would go on without it. So, while our mayor has seemingly already taken a negative stance, perhaps if he hears from the citizens, and considers the fact that Cloverdale is perpetually broke, he will rethink his lack of enthusiasm. This could be a once in a lifetime opportunity for Cloverdale to become more than just a bedroom community and a retirement oasis. One  million dollars a year in new revenue isn’t something to dismiss with the wave of a hand. And for those who will say we don’t want to become another Healdsburg or Sonoma, we are not nearly big enough, nor are we correctly situated, to ever do that. What we will have is a first class facility, that generates income for the city, and is far enough out of town that we won’t hardly know it is there. Isn’t that a win-win situation? Hopefully, those who want to see Cloverdale prosper will speak up and let our elected officials know what direction we want the city to take.
Wayne Diggs
Cloverdale
Something wrong?
Editor: Recently an Assistant Administrator/Human Resource position was advertised in the Press Democrat for the City of Cloverdale. Requirements were two years of college studies plus three years of experience administering others (five years total). Hours were unspecified, but the salary would range from $30-$36 per hour. Assuming a 40-hour week at $30 per hour, it would total $1,200 per week or for 50 weeks, $60,000 per year. It should be noted that a beginning teacher with a college Bachelor’s degree plus a teaching credential (taking at least five years) would receive approximately $40,000 a year in Cloverdale. Is there something wrong with this picture?
Joanne Argyres, retired teacher and school board member
Cloverdale
Crude comment
Editor: An Open Letter to Mayor Cox: The lead article in the July 16, 2015, edition of the Cloverdale Reveille entitled “Equestrian resort idea proposed on Tyris property” quotes you as saying about developer Jes Slavik, “I’d like to hire him [Slavik] as a car salesman or a time share salesman.” That comment is tantamount to calling him a used car salesman, a term that is understood by the average person to mean that he is slick, dishonest and generally of unsavory character. Your characterization of Mr. Slavik, which appears to have been made solely because you oppose the development he proposes, is highly offensive. It is an embarrassment to the town of Cloverdale to have a mayor who makes such a crude comment, particularly to the press with the knowledge that it will be published. People who hold public office have a special obligation to be respectful of everyone. This is especially true in a small town such as ours, where people are personally acquainted with one another. You have utterly failed to fulfill that basic civic responsibility. Cloverdale cannot afford to discourage, without careful consideration, any business interested in locating in our community. Your disrespectful attitude signals an anti-business climate in City Hall. Why would a person or business even consider investing time and money in a project in Cloverdale when there is such a hostile environment? We may never know of the lost opportunities as a result of comments such as yours. Whether the proposed resort and equestrian center is good or bad for Cloverdale, or whether the money-losing airport should or should not be closed, are issues that should be carefully studied. Cloverdale Reveille Managing Editor Ray Holley, in a commentary that appeared in the same edition as the story reporting your comments, sets out a number of questions about the resort and the airport, and advocates a thoughtful public discussion of those “hard questions.” You, as the mayor, should be leading the discussion rather than insulting Mr. Slavik and rejecting the proposed project out of hand. And you, as the mayor, owe Mr. Slavik and the citizens of Cloverdale a public and unqualified apology.
Ann M. Elston
Cloverdale