Consider me hacked off…..

Written by Matt Rexroad on February 9th, 2012. Posted in General

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Beth Gabor, Manager of Public Affairs

February 9, 2012

(530) 666-8042 [w] ▪ (530) 219-8464 [c]

 

Yolo County Board of Supervisors Opposes Yolo Bypass Expansion

(Woodland, CA) – The Yolo County Board of Supervisors is opposed to a proposal to expand the Yolo Bypass and widen the Fremont Weir as included in the public draft of the Central Valley Flood Protection Plan.

“The Board is concerned that the proposal could place Yolo County communities, agriculture, and our local economy in jeopardy,” wrote Yolo County Board of Supervisors Chair Jim Provenza in a letter to the Central Valley Flood Protection Board and the California Department of Water Resources.  “We also fear that there could be an increased risk of local flooding and a threat to continued viability of the Vic Fazio Wildlife Area.”

Neither the Yolo County Board of Supervisors nor members of the public whose properties would be affected by an expansion of the Yolo Bypass were consulted about the proposal as the first draft of the plan was developed by the California Department of Water Resources.  In the letter Chair Provenza expressed the Board’s surprise and disappointment at the lack of public outreach regarding a project of such magnitude.  Yolo County Supervisor Matt Rexroad, who represents Elkhorn, a community that would likely be severely impacted by the bypass project, said, “I was shocked by the complete lack of outreach to the Board and my constituents whose homes and livelihoods are threatened by this proposal.”

According to the Department of Water Resources, the Central Valley Flood Protection Plan is a document to guide California’s participation and influence federal and local participation in managing flood risk along the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River systems.  The plan proposes a system-wide investment approach for flood management in areas currently protected by state flood control facilities.  The plan is scheduled to be adopted by the Central Valley Flood Protection Board by July 2012.  Following the initial adoption, the proposed projects will be further studied and defined before the plan is updated again in 2017.

In light of the short timeframe for adoption of the plan, Chair Provenza emphasized the importance of collaboration between state and local government.  “Yolo County is deeply concerned that the Department of Water Resources’ actions reflect an attitude that the state has the right to propose projects that profoundly affect local land use without the involvement of local elected officials and other stakeholders.”

###

Love’s Travel Center Staff Report

Written by Matt Rexroad on February 6th, 2012. Posted in General

This is going to be an issue for people in the rural parts of Yolo County.

Loves Travel Center PC Staff Report (pdf)

Water is for Fighting… or something like that.

Written by Matt Rexroad on February 4th, 2012. Posted in General

Phone lines are lighting up over this issue….. actually only one call.

Boating of Cache Creek

New Candidate for City Council

Written by Matt Rexroad on February 1st, 2012. Posted in General

This was on my doorstep tonight,

AB 109

Written by Matt Rexroad on January 24th, 2012. Posted in General

This AB 109 stuff is really important but so few people in Yolo County are really following it.  Thought you might like to see a Powerpoint that came to the Board of Supervisors today.

> Download AB 109 PowerPoint

What is this?

Written by Matt Rexroad on January 6th, 2012. Posted in General

This just arrived in my county office. Wow. All I can say is “Wow”.

Very convincing case.. to a guy from Woodland

Written by Matt Rexroad on December 9th, 2011. Posted in General

Dear Mr. Rexroad,

I have been away from Yolo County for several years.  When I returned this fall, I realized  ”Davis is so much better than I remembered- now that I know how backwards the rest of the world is, I realize how wonderful it is here.”  But then I drove to Woodland.  Instead of the small-town feel of Davis, there were instead huge sprawling malls with no continuity, roads that seemed to wind around forever through huge parking lots.  And a bleak and lonely feeling.  Who planned this future wasteland?

I’d been to Sacramento that week, and saw what a mess that was:  traffic snarls, disenfranchised people, poor, drug-infested neighborhoods.
It seems like Woodland thinks it can get the fast buck, but it doesn’t see what’s coming down the pike at it: a big problem.
Consider how this tower will continue the “downgrading” of Yolo County.  Don’t let Yolo County become a dumping ground for projects that other places would like to avoid, or quick money that is gotten at the cost of our future, our livability, our environment, and our reputation.
It would be so easy for Yolo County to just become a crappy place between Sacramento and San Francisco.
But right now you still have some semblance of a unique and almost mystical zone of beauty:  the pacific flyway at its most amazing.  As people pass over the Yolo Causeway, hurrying on their way to mundane appointments, business meetings, chores of daily life, and they gaze out at the immense expanse of birds and water, it sets an indelible stamp on their minds: “This is a place of beauty”.
And as they wander off the beaten track, looking for that certain address, they pass through the calming and wide expanses of fields, they gain respect for the place- a respect that cannot be found when the flash of strobes and the towering of metal scaffolding obstructs the peace.
Don’t uglify our county any further.  If anything, find ways to draw visitors to this lovely place by removing some of the eyesores that now exist, and restoring some of the areas that have already been “uglified” by so many poorly thought out quick-buck schemes.
We strongly oppose the Results Radio tower proposal, and we urge the Board of Supervisors to deny the extension of the permit to construct the tower.

We know that the Board of Supervisors has the discretionary power to deny the extension of the permit (Yolo County Code Sec. 8-2.3205).

Yolo County must consider the economic impact on the area before allowing features that negatively affect livability.

If the Davis Open Space Commission came out strongly against this tower, and recommended that you deny it, and if the Davis City Council unanimously asked you to deny the permit, it would seem there is good reason to rethink this permit, and it would also seem like a very divisive thing to go forward with.  People don’t want this tower.
And the tower is bad news for Yolo County