Editorial: Time for county to include public in creek process

At the one public meeting on this issue two things were very striking: first was the degree of anger over this proposal from a community with an impecable enviromental and very liberal voting record .Barack Obama got 75 percent of the votes in the San Geronimo Valley but most of the Valley residents are outraged by the sweeping intrusive overreach of this plan.Over 500 signed a petition to that effect.That alone should tell the supervisors something. Second was the casual arrogance of our public officials. Supervisor Kinsey told us that that the "science" was "settled " and there was to be no debate over the reports
conclusions.That was followed by a representative from state Game and Fish telling the concerned citizens that it didn't much matter what they thought ,the state would do what the state felt like doing and our job was to shut up go home and pay our taxes. Your editorial was right : the officialdom has a long way to go to regain the public trust.The first meeting was not much of a step.

\

Kinsy's opening comment at the first public meeting after two years of clandestine County and Spawn dealings was "we can't argue with the science of the Salmond Enhancement Plan", this comment is arrogant and uneducated, the very nature of science is to test and argue hypothesis over decades or longer to arrive at what is hopefully a genuine conclusion. We have only just begun this debate and the SEP plan falls woefully and embarassinly short in addressing the many factors effecting the decline of the Salmond in our stream and rivers.

Was it not Steve Kinsey that pushed the French Ranch Development through the board of supes, I believe this runs along San Geronimo creek. I ask, who does Kinsey represent?