Yes on Trinitas
The following is an open letter to the Calaveras County Board of Supervisors:
As we understand, the negative vote taken on the Trinitas Project was preliminary and you will be making the the final decision at a later date.
We appreciate that the Trinitas issue has been extremely divisive and a heavy burden for public officials to endure. Perhaps we should be thankful that we are not owners of the property and had to endure their struggle and losses dealing with our land use planning process over many years.
If the purpose of government is to protect human rights and not to oppress them, then it is apparent that the California Environmental Quality Act needs to reformed to protect those rights. However, until that day comes, the main protection the property owner has comes from the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors.
While the courts are the last resort, the expense can be extensive and destructive to the owner and the taxpayer. If you are concerned about litigation, it would be better for the county to be defending the property owner and not the oppressive acts of government or malicious attacks from a few neighbors.
The evidence seems to suggest that the applicants are not harming their neighbors or the public, have followed the rules, and therefore, should not be prevented from completing their project. The promise of prosperity created by their development is important, but pales in comparison to regulatory oppression of their human rights to liberty and property.
We thank those supervisors who voted for the project and encourage the others to do so on the second vote.
Albert J. Segalla, president
Who has the people’s and the county’s best interest at heart? Teri Murrison. Her letter on the Stanislaus National Forest’s off-highway transportation plan stated facts. Congress mandates that the Forest Service work with local governments behind the scenes, not just at public meetings.
Supervisor Paolo Maffei was very critical, however. He seemed to have a lack of knowledge as to what was going on, based on his usual soapbox antics. Maybe he was too busy during these meetings trying to impress everyone with his European boredom. In any case he dropped the ball here.
Just who does Maffei think he is? He has made remarks about people on SSI, welfare, that are beyond rude, then to be so crass to accuse or infer that Mrs. Murrison was part of a right-leaning group.
What was he thinking? Voters might want to rethink the coming election.
Supervisor Liz Bass missed the point. The point was that there needed to be a hearing that included everyone, so that all voices could be heard. Duh!
Supervisor Murrison is very respected for the work she has done and continues to do for everyone in her district and Tuolumne County as a whole. As a Native Daughter of the State of California, her interest is to protect her state and the people she serves.
Jean Waltjen-De Mattos
Re: Michael Herman’s letter about the recall of the Big Oak Flat-Groveland School Board (May 1).
Did the board receive all the credit when Tioga was a distinguished school? No, of course not. The principal and the teachers took that.
Why then does the school board receive all the blame when the school no longer has that status? Schools are individually run by their administrators. Distinguished school status would be achieved by the collaborative effort of those on campus doing the work of educating. If the board had accomplished that, wouldn’t all three district schools have been distinguished schools? Please become educated voters and vote NO on the Recall.