An overwhelming number of people who responded to the Argus-Courier’s online poll Oct. 21, 2010 feel that that the Board of Supervisors made the wrong decision on Oct. 12 when it voted to approve a proposed asphalt plant south of town.

More than 80 percent said it was a wrong decision and that the public did not have adequate time to review the 1,100 pages of documents describing the revised, reduced asphalt plant.

Here are some of the comments from those who responded to the poll. Read more comments at the pulse of Petaluma blog at www.petaluma360.com.

——

“I don’t feel like the majority of the supervisors are listening to the citizens of Petaluma. To allow an asphalt plant in this beautiful and vulnerable area does not make sense. This is not something that can be reconstructed if it gets destroyed. This is one of the few remaining wetlands of its kind, something that we need to save for future generations. It is part of the fabric of Petaluma.”

——

“I think the asphalt plant is in an ideal location on the west side of the river. Unfortunately, the park is across the river. The only place that I can think of that might be better would be by the Marin County dump.”

——

“I am offended and frustrated with this whole situation. Petaluma invested space and tax dollars to create a pleasant environment for wildlife and our citizens to enjoy, only to be compromised by the selfish interest of big business. Why would we want ugly forced upon our lives here in Petaluma? Would the people of Dutra want a view of their asphalt plant out their living room window?”

——

“The asphalt plant will be an important boost to our local economy. But it should also be located in a less environmentally sensitive area. The supervisors made a hasty decision and the public was not well served by their action.”

——

“A week to review 1,100 pages of documents? That’s crazy.”

——

“Bad location. Why isn’t Mike Kerns representing his constituents? Aren’t elected officials supposed to listen to the people?”

——

“Building the Dutra plant in this location is bad for Petaluma and Sonoma County. It

will not bring any jobs; it will spoil the environment and it will discourage tourists from coming and businesses to stay in Petaluma. Needless to say, people will avoid visiting Shollenberger park because of the close proximity to the plant. A new location away from established residential areas must be found for this plant.”

——

“I am so disappointed in the vote and most specifically in (Supervisor) Efren Carrillo! These elected officials didn’t do their job.”

——

“There should be a plant in the area, but the proposed site is not right.”

——

“This project has been properly documented and well reviewed by the decision makers. The obstructionists are grasping at their usual straws.”

——

“There has been a remarkable amount of work done to make this facility a positive contribution to our community. I’m glad for everyone’s input that has improved this project. It will be a shame if after all this work we don’t get the benefits that it will bring to Petaluma. I don’t want Petaluma to turn into a gated community that has no room for industry.”

——

“Dutra’s lack of integrity and honesty as a company precedes itself and I think this is just another example of big business money paying off people to approve something that will not benefit our community economically in a way that would offset the negative impact that will be created by allowing it.”

——

“1) not needed-other asphalt plants in Sonoma cty working under capacity 2) increase ghg’s contrary to climate goals of county 3) increase particulates–asthma irritants direct impact on children and low income-closest residents, and 4 schools within less than 1/2 mile as wind blows. 4) why have a general plan if it is changed willy nilly at whim of company, especially when the town does not want it-referring to unanimous Petaluma city council vote against Dutra.”

——

“Adequate time to review 1,100 pages in barely a week? Not allowing the public to review the documents is practically criminal. An overbearing use of their power.”

——

“All we need is just four words to explain why, without a doubt, this will not be allowed to happen, no matter how much Kerns wants to sell us down the river: River Montessori Charter School.”.

——

“An unbelievably stupid decision.”

——

“Anytime you can add to the work force, it must be done.”

——

“As a long time resident of the southwestern part of Petaluma for well over 25 years, I am totally opposed to the Dutra Asphalt Plant. My husband and I moved here to be away from pollution, from traffic and noise. I cannot think of anything worse than a plant of this sort near-by. We are dismayed at the thought. In addition, I have been a part of the petition drive to get Shollenberger Park going, and have been a frequent visitor and docent there. I also very much support the Ellis Creek Project and feel that it is completely worth the cost and work so that we can have water cleaned in a more natural way. In addition, I support the nearby marsh–all of which will be negatively impacted by Dutra. I am a life time environmentalist, who enjoys the wildlife and watching the thousands of wintering birds that come to Petaluma. An egret colony resides near-by across the river. These are treasures that Sonoma County should cherish and encourage. I am totally opposed to Dutra as is my husband. When a whole town is opposed to such an operation.”

——

“As with the Roblar quarry, decisions are made by people and for people who do not have to live with the results.”

——

“A total travesty!”

——

“At the recent Community Health Forum sponsored by the Petaluma Health Care District, the public had the opportunity to learn from a UCSF pediatric environmental health specialist about the hazards posed to children by the proposed Dutra asphalt plant project. We learned that the proposed project would increase children’s risk of lifelong health problems caused by particulate matter 2.5 — a major component of diesel emissions — by substantially increasing diesel emissions and introducing a host of other toxic chemicals to our air. PM 2.5 penetrates to the lower airways, then into the blood and cells. Even more alarming is that toxic chemicals, such as carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), can attach to PM 2.5 for a free ride into the body. These toxins weaken the structure and function of childrens’ developing lungs. Further, because these materials penetrate to the cells, they also disrupt the normal development of the immune system. They change the way childrens’ DNA is read, making children more prone to asthma as well as respiratory and food allergies. DESPITE PUBLIC CONCERN, TO DATE THERE HAS BEEN NO ASSESSMENT OF THE DUTRA PROJECT FOR PM2.5! Compared with adults, children are disproportionally susceptible to lifelong problems from air pollution, because they inhale more air per minute, have less ability to clear toxins, and are more susceptible to genetic damage and resulting risk of cancer. Further, these types of developmental immunotoxins are NOT always assessed under current regulatory standards. Asthma is already a widespread and costly problem in our county. Currently 22% of our children between the ages of 5 and 17 have asthma. Ironically, the day after the hearing, a new study was published linking PM 2.5 to yet another major disease, diabetes: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/green/detail?entry_id=73586&tsp=1 Full article: http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/33/10/2196.full Don’t want Dutra? Vote for Torliatt, Glass, Barrett and Davies.”

——

“CAN’T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS. JOBS AND ENVIRONMENT THEY SAY BUT THE BIRDS AND PARK WERE ALREADY THERE. WRONG PLACE WRONG TIME. THE ARGUMENT THE RIVER IS ALREADY POLLUTED AND BEYOND REPAIR IS JUST WRONG. WAS THERE NOT SOMEWHERE ELSE TO BUILD OR IS THE EASY ROAD TO 101 JUST A LESS EXPENSIVE WAY OUT ?”

——

“Efren Carrillo’s argument for supporting Dutra was pathetic. Regardless of the need or lack of need for an asphalt plant, it is the wrong location. The citizens of Petaluma are are being ignored by the supervisors voting for Dutra. And, it sure seems that Kerns is in the pocket of Dutra.”

——

“Certainly the public has had more than enough time to form an opinion. I don’t know anyone who is interested enough to read every page of a 1,000+ page report!”

——

“Common sense has won out.”

——

“During these times when so many people are hurting for work and to keep their jobs we don’t need this industrial monstrosity setting roots at the County gateway and detracting visitors and tourists to Sonoma County and Petaluma. We rely on these tourists and day-trippers visiting our town and nationally acclaimed bird sanctuary for jobs and tax revenue. They spend money, we keep our jobs! It’s really that simple!”

——

“Dutra has had years to prepare for their multiple versions of this plan for an asphalt plant. The public had only 4 days to review their latest version. The public’s voice has been ignored through this entire process. We have said in many ways through polls and Measure D that Petaluma does not want this in our town next to one of our greatest jewel Shollenberger Park, near many schools, and residences. The Board of Supervisors recent vote was not for the people of Petaluma or for the future of Petaluma. It is disgraceful that Petalumans have had to even consider this asphalt plan for this location. Honestly, in this day and age, do we really want an asphalt factory next to a wildlief sanctuary, schools, and the gateway to our county? We can do better. The Board of Supervisors has a duty to protect us from these kinds of plans. They failed us on Oct. 12.”

——

“Dutra is fine where it is. Leave it. Shollenberger Park is too beautiful to ruin.”

——

“Efren Carrillo is quite possibly the most corrupt supervisor we have ever had in this county.”

——

“Enough of the NIMBY attitude. We keep talking about keeping it local, but only the ‘nice’ things. Some like to forget that to really build and keep a village, one needs to be independent of the other villages. Sustainability?”

——

“First reopening the potentially leaky dump w/o fixing it, then the Dutra approval and now a new quarry gets approved. Great way to make Petaluma the dumping ground of the County. Nicely done!”

——

“Five years is too long a process.”

——

“Haystack Landing is the wrong place for an asphalt plant!”

——

“Here are the reasons why I believe the Board of Supervisors should NOT approve the Dutra asphalt plant: 1. Pollution is a very serious issue that scientist and doctors across the world warn us about. It may be hard to measure the lifetime affects but the precautionary principle must be adopted in the face of uncertainty. I have never been in a car accident but I still put on my seatbelt and I certainly strap my child into a car seat every time I drive. We should take the same care when it comes to the hazardous chemicals that surround us. If you have not yet watched the “Ten Americans” video, please take a few minutes to do so. You will be shocked and amazed and it will forever change the way you view the world. http://www.ewg.org/kidsafe 2. The proposal alone of an asphalt plant at Haystack Landing has driven potential homeowners away. I have heard several times now from families who were considering buying homes in that area who have put there plans on hold until after the final vote. And what of all of the commercial real estate directly across the river? It would be hard to imagine that this plant would not have a negative impact on this real estate. 3. We have worked very hard and spent lots of money to build a welcoming habitat for wildlife and create an inviting and peaceful place for people. To turn around and change the General Plan to allow an industry that will disrupt this park is a big step backwards. The General Plan had it right the first time. There is a good reason why this is not zoned for this type of use.”

——

“Honestly, I wish that there were a better location for the plant, but Petaluma needs the revenue. I’m frustrated with Petaluma government.”

——

“Horrible Idea. PLEASE DON’T BUILD THIS PLANT.”

——

“I’m all for new business to Petaluma. I can’t wait for Target and Friedman Bros. to move in. BUT I think the asphalt plant is a HORRIBLE idea and in the WRONG place. Shollenberger Park is a jewel and the Dutra plant will wreck it. I totally oppose it and will work to vote anyone out of office who voted to approve it. Thank you for listening.”

——

““I’m disgusted that the board approved this plant. It makes me wonder whose interest they’re looking out for.”

——

“I am more than disappointed about this passing of a plant in my community. Petaluma is no longer the city I moved to 35 years ago. Living here is not getting better. as a community we should grow and develop for the better, for its citizens, it’s environment, and it’s community; not be driven by $$ but by services and opportunities that serve all of the people.”

——

“I do not want this plant here in Petaluma. The Dutra company has a shady and untrustworthy history of not adhering to regulations, destroying the environment in other locations and not making amends in past violations. Why should they be any different here? Petaluma will be seriously affected by the pollution and I am appalled that any Board would approve of such a thing!”

——

“I do not want to live in a city with an asphalt plant so close to our schools, parks, and businesses, and especially at the entrance to Sonoma County. I strongly feel it is the wrong place for an asphalt plant, and wish Dutra would stop lying, bullying, and manipulating their way. I’m tired of supervisors in office who don’t seem to listen to what the people who live here are saying. All they hear is the cha-ching of money. It’s very discouraging. There is a better way, and a better place.”

——

“If Dutra is allowed to build their plant across from Shollenberger, then I will move out of Petaluma for good. I will not live in a town that favors high corporate funding, over the funding of environmentally-based tourism.”

——

“I feel that Supervisor Kerns has once again sold out the majority wishes in his district to support development interests. While I am skeptical that the Board is totally corrupt, I have no doubt that the majority gives a rat’s ass about the environment. I cannot fathom why a progressive region consistently elects leaders who are stuck in the 1950s. The Dutra supporters are quick to point out that their opposition is a bunch of NIMBYists. I’d more accurately say we are NIABYists: Not in Anyone’s Back Yard.”

——

“I find it hard to believe that the supervisors had adequate time to review so many pages in so short a time. Supervisor Carrillo’s explanation for his change in vote is mind boggling. This project does not belong across from a public park used by children. It is incompatible with the birds and other wildlife and all other breathing creatures.”

——

“If we had a county supervisor that represented the constituents instead of his friends at Dutra, this would not even be an issue. Talk about democracy not a work. In an informal poll over 80% of the respondents were against Dutra. Mr Kerns has not represented Petaluma for the past twelve years and we don’t want David Rabbit to continue in Kern’s footstep. Whitman=ARNOLD and Kern=Rabbit.”

——

“Interesting that Mr. Rabbit has refused to be involved with anything but the most passive, equivocating opposition to this blight! Hmmm. Who’s playing politics with our health at stake?”

——

“I really do not want the plant approved.”

——

“I seriously wonder about the supervisors who totally ignore the wishes of the majority their constituents. Dutra is NOT a good company. Kerns and Carrillo know all about Dutra’s poor environmental record and lack of integrity and yet they persist in saying this is good for Petaluma! I don’t get it!”

——

“I suspect Mr. Kerns has been promised a future post with the Dutra folks.”

——

“It’s in the WRONG place. This is next to a park where hundreds of people walk for recreation, health and birdwatching every single day. The city has put so much money into this park. Why should it all be forsaken so one corporation can make even more money. Put it somewhere else where citizens and city resources will not be so impacted. Sheesh!”

——

“It’s obvious that the supervisors are influenced more by personal gain and financial incentives than public duty.”

——

“It’s ridiculous to allow the public a mere 6 days to peruse the documents before the BOS voted. What is the rush after a 1 1/2 hear of delays by Dutra?”

——

“It appears that this vote was is an example of a total disconnect with the people and the council of Petaluma.”

——

“I think having an asphalt plant so close to a highly used park and wildlife area is ridiculous. Not to mention close to housing, schools etc. Even with their so called state of the art systems to control hazardous fumes… you just never know. Time and time again companies say disaster will never happens and it does. Look at the recent oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. Yes we need jobs and asphalt… that is not the issue here. Find a different location more suited to this type of plant.”

——

“I think it is funny how people say that south Petaluma is the gateway to Sonoma County. If that’s the case, then why not clean it up. That Petaluma sign is a joke. Clean it up.”

——

“I think it would be absurd to build an asphalt plant on the lovely Shollenberger park where many of us who grew up in Petaluma go for regular walks. As a bird sanctuary and protected wetland area for other natural species, we would be losing far more than we could possibly gain from Dutra. There isn’t another habitat like this in Petaluma and we would be crushed if it were destroyed. Many people go there to walk their dogs, watch the sunset over the river, or go for walks with family and friends. The plant would erase one of the main things that makes Petaluma a picturesque town and not a suburban, industrial one. The Petaluma river itself and the Petaluma Marina are the historical bases of the town itself, and it would be a horrible shame to pollute the surrounding wetlands with concrete and tractors. That is also one of the first things tourists driving through Petaluma on their way to wine country will see. Please consider carefully before giving Dutra the go-ahead on such a senseless project.”

——

“I think we need more environmental preservation and protection and less asphalt production.”

——

“It is clear that the Petaluma community does not want this plant at Shollenberger Park.”

——

“It is interesting that when requested Dutra has been allowed months to delay a hearing. However, when the public made a reasonable request for delay they were ignored. The decision made by the Board of Supervisors is wrong because it doesn’t represent the overwhelming majority will of those people they represent. Over and over these polls are taken and for anyone who has even a modest knowledge of basic statistics could see from the results that it is a mandate of the public in Sonoma county that this project be denied.”

——

“It’s about time the Board moved forward and made a decision, and the right one too!”

——

“I understand we need plants, but not as the gateway to Sonoma County and not near our precious public parks.”

——

“I was shocked to see the hasty approval of the asphalt plant, and am highly disappointed with the supervisors. They also approved the Roblar Road quarry so I’m wondering what they are smoking up there. A lot of times supes make (poor) decisions based on “we’ll get sued by the developer if we don’t approve”. I’d rather they err on the side of the constituents who put them in office rather than the threat of suit. Constituents can sue too.”

——

“I will be seriously considering if this is where I want to raise my family should Dutra’s plant be built at the proposed location. This decision does not reflect the values of our community at large, least of all those that would be most impacted by it. I feel as though someone else’s agenda is being imposed upon us and it disturbs me greatly.”

——

“Keep the asphalt plant out of my home town!”

——

“Kerns, Kelly and (Mr. one-term) Carrillo should be ashamed of themselves. They don’t represent the people here. They don’t even care that the only thing complete about the EIR is how much of a mess it is.”

——

“Let’s put an asphalt plant in each of their back yards. Breathe deeply, you sellouts.”

——

“Like the 2 other aggregate decisions (Dutra, Roblar Road Quarry, Syar mining the gravels in the Russian River aquifer), these decisions show a Board of Supervisors still controlled by the old boy, extraction industrial complex of the North Coast. Mine it, cut it, ship it out: sand, gravel, rock, timber, water. This well funded network of team players, including the land developers, heavy construction unions and Sonoma County Alliance, don’t care about our environment, water quality, salmon, agriculture, recreation and tourism economies. If you look at their massive campaign contributions to Efren Carrillo and now to David Rabbitt, you can see their attempted path to success. That’s not the way to run Sonoma County. It’s time to turn them out to pasture.”

——

“Mike Kerns, in his tenure as County Supervisor, never once stood up for and represented the citizens in his district. It was all about serving the landed rich (Pete Pfendler and Lafferty Ranch, anyone?) Kerns’ shameful vote to approve the Dutra asphalt plant was business as usual for Mike, a you-get-what-you-pay-for win for Dutra, and terrible blow for all of us in the South County.”

——

“No asphalt plant in Petaluma!”

——

“Nobody will ever remember Mike Kerns for ANYTHING in his time on the Board of Supervisors besides forcing this monstrosity on us. We all know that there will be lawsuits filed and a huge amount of private money and resources will be spent to stop this cancer from happening. What a waste. You are a waste yourself, Mike Kerns.”

——

“No to DUTRA and NO TO the ROBLAR ROCK QUARRY TOO!”

——

“Not the right place to put an asphalt plant – what are they thinking???? (Oh yes, we know what they are thinking: $$$$$)

——

“Oh, come on. This asphalt plant location is ridiculous. what incentive does any city have to create open space or wildlife preserves if the county can just come along and change the use plan to suit a business? Alternative Petaluma sites have to be just as acceptable. This stinks! The plan, and the asphalt.”

——

“Once it is there, it is too late to change it, remove it or, even, regulate it without great cost. We do not trust the Dutra people. Don’t be “bought” by the promise of jobs. They are temporary at best. Please save the County money as this approval is sure to be challenged in court. No Asphalt Plant at Shollenberger!”

——

“Our local supervisor sold us out yet again. This plan is rife with unresolved problems and I’m supposed to get excited about it because of 4 low-wage jobs? Don’t think so. Very much hoping Pam Torliatt is elected our next supervisor so we have someone looking out for us rather than big business.”

——

“Our River Basin is a key part of our ecosystem. By adding an asphalt plant we threaten to severely disrupt the protection of the wildlife in our area, the health of our citizens and the beauty of our county. I do not support the Dutra asphalt plant and I believe that our Board made the wrong decision.”

——

“Petaluma residents will have standing in a LAWSUIT against Dutra and the appropriate board members if this plant is built and operates anywhere near capacity. It is a shame that most people in Petaluma are to lazy and apathetic to let this happen – full stop.”

——

“Please, please do not put an asphalt plant in the proposed location.”

——

“Please do not vote yes again. The people of Sonoma County do not want this plant here. I know many people that would move or consider moving out of the area if you ok this vote.”

——

“PLEASE REVERSE YOUR DECISION.”

——

“Right plant, so-so place, wrong operator. Need to keep an eye on them.”

——

“Shollenberger is a beautiful place that I go to with my parents. It’s important place for families to enjoy nature in Petaluma. And, isn’t water treated right next door?”

——

“Somehow, Dutra seems to continue to get whatever they want. There is no justice.”

——

“Terrible for Petaluma!”

——

“The Board’s decision is a travesty. That plant should be nowhere near Shollenberger Park. It is a blight on the landscape and is doing irreparable harm to the wetlands and its inhabitants.”

——

“The Board of Supervisors completely ignored the desires of the residents of Petaluma when they voted yes on this proposal. Our community has made it very clear that we do not want an asphalt plant at this location. These officials should be ashamed of themselves! They are supposed to represent the public and obviously they are not listening or paying close attention to what the majority of Petaluma residents want! The fact that they pushed forward with this meeting without giving the community ample time to review 1100 pages of revised documents is another clue that the Board of Supervisors were not interested in what the citizens of Petaluma had to say. Shameful!”

——

“The Board of Supervisors is arrogant and we need a change. That is why I support and will vote for Pamela Torliatt for Supervisor.”

——

“The Board of Supervisors straw vote, NOT final vote, split 3-2, and reversed their last straw vote against the project. Efren Carrillo’s swing vote, swung towards Dutra. Supervisors Zane and Brown rejected the Dutra factory for detrimental health and visual impacts. The irrefutable medical information that additional diesel exhaust will damage developing lungs in babies and children through age 20 can be viewed on PCA or You Tube: See Petaluma Health Care District’s Community Forum on Dutra. According to Sup. Carrilllo, the solution to pollution is to spread it around and direct it to the South County. Bad idea. I support preventing pollution from contaminating Shollenberger Park and getting Carrillo to put some effort into cleaning up the pollution from existing asphalt plants.”

——

“The BOS and applicants are trying to rush this through before the public can respond and the next Board takes office in January. Classic sleazy politics from Kerns and those Supes who are paid by the outside industrialists.”

——

“The BOS is rushing every environmentally sensitive project through before the election. Not everyone wants rampant growth that makes a few rich and culturally bankrupts our community.”

——

“The BoS voting on the plant a) without allowing appropriate time for the public to view the report and b) so shortly before an election smacks of rushing to shove an ill-conceived plan down the City of Petaluma’s throat without careful consideration. The facts are: the plant will result in few jobs, none of them living wage and benefited jobs (which is what the economy needs), there is already a plentiful asphalt supply, and the plant, even if needed, could easily be relocated to a less environmentally and visually damaging place.”

——

“The continuing support for this disastrous project by the Press Democrat and Argus-Courier makes me want to cancel my subscriptions. I vote NO!”

——

“The disconnect between the Board of Supervisors and the community it serves is both surprising and disturbing.”

——

“The industrial stench will put us in the company of Richmond and its refineries. Dutra can expand their facility in San Rafael or build it in Vallejo which has plenty of industrial space away from housing and parkland. After all the money and time spent to rehabilitate Shollenberger Park, why allow it to be spoiled like this? The birds will die and those that survive will depart.”

——

“Their plant can stay where they already are. Petaluma should stick with agriculture and tourism.”

——

“The lame ducks are going to give away as much of Sonoma County as they can before they go. Pity.”

——

“The process by which Dutra’s proposed asphalt plant was advanced was instructive for revealing the difficulty of shifting our paradigm to one that is awake to our sacred duty to respect the web of life. Currently, county staff is unable to vet crucial information, arguments are made with fragmentary evidence (if not platitudes), and listening is done through different filters. Surely, our need is to work together to eliminate unhealthy risks for all. Instead, we find ourselves directed to accept our share of the misery. What kind of future might this promise, other than (perhaps) cheaper asphalt for the near term? Time is running short: we need leaders willing to help reshape human endeavors to become mutually beneficial to all of life.”

——

“The proposed asphalt plant should NOT be approved or constructed!”

——

“The public has spoken, the experts have spoken, and the supes are not listening. We don’t want the plant here.”

——

“There is no need to place the asphalt plant in this location where it can adversely affect wildlife and the environment. Come on, we are supposed to be more enlightened here in California. Find another location for it.”

——

“The same rush tactics and withholding of information has been practiced by PRMD on the Roblar Quarry project.”

——

“The Supervisors made a terrible mistake and they will forever be remembered for their hand in the demise of the area and the ruin of the health and well being of the people, animals, and plants in Petaluma, not to mention the tourism that we have spent millions of dollars to grow. They have completely ignored the will of the people for the few extra dollars in their greedy pockets. Their names will forever be asterisked because of this decision and their lives will forever be tainted. Everywhere they go, people will haunt them for this. This will come back to choke them one day. They don’t live here and clearly they don’t care about the area or the people they supposedly ‘represent.’”

——

“The supervisors should have focused first on the areas of agreement across all five of them which are we need roads so we need asphalt plants, that a bird sanctuary is not anyone’s ideal location for an industrial plant, and that Dutra has a poor track record in this area around safeguarding the environment. Given this as a starting point that all 5 supervisors could agree on, the Board of Supervisors should have turned down this project but at that same time turned to Dutra and made a commitment to work with them to find an alternative, more suitable location in the County for their business. The answers given by Efren for his vote showed narrow-minded thinking when he stated things like “Petaluma needs its share of asphalt plants” and “I grew up near a plant and that was fine for me”. Of course Petaluma needs its share of asphalt plants but not next to its bird sanctuary. And just because people have had to grow up near plants does not mean future residents should have to suffer the same consequences. That is progressive thinking. I believe in the County Supervisors as competent people and believe they and our County can do better than the current plan. We should challenge them to do better and expect better of them.”

——

“THE SUPERVISORS WHO APPROVED THE ASPHALT PLANT SOLD OUT. (WELL, I’VE COME TO EXPECT MIKE KERNS OF SELLING OUT, SO THAT WAS NOTHING SURPRISING.) THEY SOLD OUT THE PEOPLE’S INTERESTS AND THE ENVIRONMENT TO THE INTERESTS OF A BUSINESS. AND THIS BUSINESS HAS A TERRIBLE RECORD IN MARIN COUNTY. WHY WOULD THEY CONDUCT BUSINESS ANY DIFFERENTLY HERE? SHAME!”

——

“The supervisors who voted for Dutra have lost my vote and I will never support them again. This is a huge mistake on their part. Petaluma derives much of it’s income from tourists – many of them from boats. Will these yacht tourists want to endure the delays, noise, odors, and inevitable ‘accidents’ from spillage etc.? Do we want to endure the odors, NOISE, and inevitable ‘accidents’ from spillage, etc., along with the fumes from 100 (at least) additional trucks in the area. What will this do to our air? What will this do to our quality of life? Do the supervisors care? I do. What a terrible image a commercial asphalt plant will present to those driving into Petaluma.. Currently we are known as an adventure destination; a good place to find fine dining and excellent music and entertainment. Let’s continue with that beneficial and harmless image; not one of commercial industry and pollution. NO ON DUTRA!”

——

“The supes who voted for this are being penny wise and pound foolish. They are counting the measly Dutra dollars while watching the beginning of the end for our tourism of the world famous Sonoma County Wine Country. Now we’ll be the polluted Bakersfield of the North Bay, with an Asphalt Plant greeting all who dare to enter.”

——

“They either got paid off by Dutra, in which case they’re a bunch of conniving crooks, or they just don’t give a rat’s behind for whatever happens to Petaluma. Maybe there’s some of both in their decision. Even if I’d been able to stop work long enough to read 1100 pages, there’s absolutely NO incentive for me to want an asphalt plant in my hometown. NONE. Do I want a job there? NO. Do I want the air, water, noise, and light pollution? NO. Do I want more big trucks around, making it even more unsafe for bicyclists? NO. In fact, I have not seen any reason given by anybody why anyone would want Dutra’s plant here except for Ms. Dutra.”

——

“This asphalt plant could have future ramifications for our community. Air quality is somewhat risky now with all the pesticides used in the grape industry. Will Dutra be willing to meet the challenges of health and safety implications if there is an accident at their site? These are issues that need to be addressed.”

——

“This asphalt plant is an outrage and the community needs more time to respond.”

——

“This is a terrible blow to open space and to the environment of Sonoma County.”

——

“This is a very bad decision for those of us who enjoy our community; the decision should be put off until the pending election.”

——

“This struck me as a ‘hurry up’ decision done ahead of the election of an outgoing supervisor (Kerns). The logic for the decision quoted in the paper was anything but. I firmly believe the County has no business overriding the will of the City Council and a majority of the citizens of Petaluma. We should continue to fight this until it is appropriately heard and decided by the citizens most impacted.”

——

“This was a sudden decision at best; even those who were watching this issue were caught off guard. That seems suspicious to this reader. Upon learning that Efren Carrillo was heavily funded by gravel and extraction industry money – it starts to make sense that he moved his vote. But those of us who have been in the county long enough understand that business interests trump environmental causes – witness the campaign to remove Bill Kortum from the Supervisor’s post in the 70’s. Bill Kortum, who helped save our Coast, lost to Phil Joerger in a recall driven by monied interests. A month ago, I was almost neutral on the Dutra plant. Not now. This manipulation was offensive and unwarranted.”

——

“This was a terrible decision and all politically motivated.”

——

“This was a tragedy. Obviously the citizens of Petaluma don’t matter to the county. There was never a need for this ever established. How about fixing the current Dutra plants in Marin and Santa Rosa instead of building another one in Petaluma. Dutra hasn’t got a great history of quality and has been cited many times for not complying with use permits and environmental concerns. 250 trucks coming in and 250 trucks coming out onto Lakeville Hwy with no mitigation for traffic impact. Wonderful asphalt smells over 2 of our parks, the river and communities.”

——

“Those in opposition had PLENTY of time to read the 1,100 pages and respond. After all, they became EXPERTS in asphalt plants overnight.”

——

“Very disappointed with our Supervisor Efren Carrillo! As a Latino resident of Petaluma, I was expecting support from our first time elected Latino public figure, but I was wrong! What a big lesson to learn. Next time, I will pay more attention who should I vote for!”

——

“Very sad. Welcome to Petaluma, see our pretty smoke stacks!”

——

“We need jobs and industries in the county. They have the zoning, the river and the train tracks and the wind blows away from Petaluma.”

——

“What are the positions of the current candidates on Dutra? Do they agree with the BOS decision?”

——

“What are these people thinking? This could have been put somewhere else besides by one of the best walking parks with birds and natural habitat around. Is this property owned by one of the supervisors? WHY there?”

——

“What good will this poll do? The supervisors DO NOT CARE WHAT WE WANT. They make their decisions based on what is best for their political careers. End of story. We’re getting this damn asphalt plant and tough luck if it poisons the air with toxic emissions, dust or noise and too bad for the wetlands and the birds. Petaluma is now UGLY at both ends…south end with Dutra, and north end with the Quarry. The whole place will be a dump but the corporations will be raking in the dough. Thanks a lot to our ‘leaders,’ especially Kerns.”

——

“When things were going badly for Dutra, the BOS granted Dutra’s requests for multiple hearing postponements. When voters asked for adequate time to review 1,100 pages of new information, the BOS said ‘NO, we must take a vote NOW.’ BOS bias? You betcha!”

——

“Why are they doing this right before the election?”

——

“Why does this rogue board continually conduct its business in opposition of the voters?”

——

“Why is Mike Kerns doing this to his own district? Shouldn’t he be protecting us? It’s like a bad dream!”

——

“Wrong plant, wrong place.”

——

“Wrong plant, wrong place, wrong time!”

——

“Wrong plant, wrong place, as the saying goes. The supervisors voting for the plant showed a complete disregard for the environment and public health. We’ve got to start looking out for the environment and ourselves and not looking out for the interests of big business, and this would be a great place to start. And judging from its previous record, Dutra simply cannot be trusted. They’ll promise anything to get the plant built then will violate the agreement with an “Oh, well, we’ll just pay the fine” attitude. I fully support the proposed lawsuit to block this insane plan.’

——

“Wrong project. Wrong place. Having an asphalt plant built by the landfill would be fine. Putting an asphalt plant directly across from Shollenberger Park, a protected wetlands area accessed by hundreds of people per week who enjoy the serene surroundings, would be a mistake. 80% of the people in Petaluma do not want this plant at this location. The County Supervisors should be listening to their constituents and voting according to the constituents wishes not pursuing their own personal agendas. They are supposed to represent US!”

——

“Yes, we need an asphalt plant. BUT do we need to put it on the banks of one of the most beautiful natural resources we have in Petaluma? Where that river walk that was promised to Petaluma 20 years ago? Placing that on the banks of what could potentially be Petaluma’s best tourist attractions is killing jobs not to mention the environmental impact.”

——

“You know Congress was able to read and understand the 2100 pages in the Health Care Bill in less than a week. All in Constitutional legalism.”