The overwhelming majority of people responding to this week’s Argus-Courier poll said that the City of Petaluma should continue to spend money to join a coalition of nonprofits and individuals who are legally fighting the proposed asphalt plant across the Petaluma River from Shollenberger Park. About 69 percent of people said the city should continue, while about 28 percent said it should not and 2 percent weren’t sure.
Here are some of the comments.
——
“Please, please let’s not put an asphalt plant in that area. Shollenberger is necessary on so many levels; it’s important for the wildlife and for the souls of those of us who spend time there. It’s vital that human beings have areas of undisturbed nature to go to. Those who have forgotten this must not be allowed to ruin it for those who haven’t.”
——
“If the city continues to sue them maybe they will give up and go away! One can only hope!”
——
“This question is very misleading. Little of the money and resources for challenging this project are coming directly from the City of Petaluma.”
——
“The taxpayers have invested over $4 million dollars in restoring the Petaluma wetlands, improving Shollenberger Park, and creating a tourism magnet and successful business park. The city would be crazy not to protect this asset from the negative impacts of a noxious industrial factory at it’s Gateway. By joining the appeal the city stands to get back its legal fees and court costs form the original lawsuit and the appeal.”
——
“Come on, what person in their right mind would really want an asphalt plant in our town, let alone right next to one of our only two parks?”
——
“Friends of Shollenberger and Moms for Clean Air are paying half the city’s cost. Of course, with this help and the support of all the people (and animals!) who are depending on not having an asphalt plant right across from a wetlands treasure, the city must continue to fight this stinker of a plant. After Petaluma spent so much money, so wisely may I add, to make such an amazing place including Ellis Creek, why on earth would they want to spoil it for the city’s residents and tourists?”
——
“I walk with my students every day in Shollenberger Park, and I like to run there by myself in the afternoon when school gets out… I enjoy the multitude of birds and other wildlife that call Shollenberger their home. Dutra will take this away. Shollenberger is an amazing park that will be ruined and gone forever. It is in the best interest of the citizens of Petaluma and its visitors to preserve the park. Please, save the park!”
——
“Leave Dutra alone and focus your energy and money on road repair (not road screw-ups like the road diet) and cracking down on cars that don’t stop for pedestrians.”
——
“Yes absolutely! It will ruin not only the beautiful nature walk at Shollenberger, but they have already taken down trees and this town cannot afford to change drastically.”
——
“Of course. We don’t want this unnecessary blight at Shollenberger Park and our River. Unless the city stays in the Appeals Court case, they cannot recover their legal expenses to date when Dutra loses. Friends of Petaluma and Moms for Clean Air have paid $10,000 to the city to help cover legal costs. The plaintiffs have raised the many many thousands of dollars in town to carry the bulk of the entire case, so the city’s share has been only a small part of the costs towards victory.”
——
“I for one hope Dutra finally wins this. These special interest groups have on control of both our elected officials and our tax money.”
——
“It’s a shame we have to spend city dollars to fight something shoved on us by county supervisors that don’t live anywhere near this atrocity.”
——
“Why would we allow the plant to be built where it is currently proposed?! What’s in it for us? 15 jobs isn’t reason enough.”
——