Pirate 4x4 banner

March Roc Meeting....

949 views 13 replies 8 participants last post by  Simple Man 
#1 ·
Was hoping someone would have posted up by now:(

Just wanted to know how it went, and if elements 8 & 9 were brought up for discussion?

Who was there??? We need a report:beer:
 
#2 ·
Unfortunately, I was halfway down Chili Bar when I passed my electrician. I had to turn around to meet him. Then when I finally got to the library, the door was locked!!

My understanding is 8 and 9 will stand as written by the consultant. I am wondering how the agreement for Loon went.

Scott
 
#3 · (Edited)
I missed the 8 and 9 discussion, was late. I got a librarian to let me in. I view the locked door thing as a problem and plan to email Dan Bolster about preventing it in the future. Actually, it is a violation of the Brown Act, and the County could be fined for it (noticed meeting, door has to be open).

The loon discussion was heated, and no agreement was reached. The county basically decided to put the sign up as it was over objectons from many stakeholders, said the signage and language would be addressed in the final RTMP, and said that in the absence of a complete RTMP by next season they would try and agree to some language wth FOTR before next year.
 
#5 ·
First off the Brown law does not appy to the ROC yet. The ROC is only an unofficial ad-hoc committee.

The voted on FOTR wording for the sign was presented. Rich Platt, Monty (ski Patrol), Tom Celio and Karen S were all in favor of an ordinance that would parallel the winter use area within the forest. Basically closing the road from November to May.

Dan proposed adding our first line to the existing sign. It didn't get much acceptance.

The long story short, there isn't enough time left in the season to change the sign. I said that FOTR might ask to have our name removed from the sign because the wordage is something we never agreed to support. I'll e-mail that to the list later today.

The solution for next year will probably be found in the RTMP. Please send in your suggestions during the 30 day window.

For the record the county has closed other roads during the winter. So, closing the Loon road would not be anything new for the county.


To stir the pot a little, it was suggested that the ordinance would probably allow property owners to use the Loon to access their property.

It was further suggested that if an ordinance was written that it should state the the Wentworth Springs Road is the official County supported (and repaired) access for winter recreation along the Rubicon Trail.


Doug
 
#6 ·
Good point about the ROC not being an official meeting. Brown Act might still apply, but that's a question for the lawyers.

I did notice that only one of the two property owners present was vocal about access as part of the discussed ordinance.

I made the point that any ordinance should have wording about designating Wentworth as the "official" motorized access during the winter, and I think that is where we will have to make our stand in order to keep from losing winter access.

Good summary, Doug.
 
#7 · (Edited)
passing the seasonal closure as an ordinance really worries me. I do agree that if it happens the wording needs to include Wentworth as the Winter access, but IMO, it seems like it then becomes that much easier to close it for other reasons as well. what happens when another spider lake closure happens(if it does), and the powers that be decide"if there's a gate at Loon Lake we can close, maybe we should have one at Wentworth to close the trail and get clean-up done faster?"

I know it sounds like conspiracy theory stuff, but gates are easy to put up, and hard to take down, and with a mandatory seasonal closure, I see a gate.


I also agreed with Dennis at the meeting that it's ludicrous that ONE incident(but a big one)happens, and we're talking forced seasonal closure so that another user group gets exclusive use of the trailhead.
 
#8 ·
Simple Man said:
...The voted on FOTR wording for the sign was presented. Rich Platt, Monty (ski Patrol), Tom Celio and Karen S were all in favor of an ordinance that would parallel the winter use area within the forest. Basically closing the road from November to May.



Doug
These people are idiots. If there is a seasonal closure you would have a wave of eager users hit the trail as soon as the closure lifted in may wich is arguably the worst time of year to have excessive traffic on the snowmelt saturated soil. Closures elsewhere in the eldorado don't necessarily mean they are a good idea and are successful in resource preservation.:shaking:
 
#9 ·
Closures, Restrictions and Compromise

Concerning the winter use restriction that we (FOTR) offered up for the rest of this season, it's a shame that those involved couldn't just accept the offer and get the new sign up. Gee, it took only hours to make professional signs, find stacks of carsonite, and post the entire perimeter of Spider Lake when it closed in 2004.

And for the last two years at the Loon entrance, USFS personnel made signs over night and replaced them several times during the season. No questions asked. In fact it was pointed out several times how easy it is to make a poster sign, slap some laminate on it, and get it posted daily if needed. Now we can't get a new sign up with accepted wording because we have only a month or so left of the season? Makes no sense to me???

Be that as it may, speaking for myself and NOT as the Trail Boss for FOTR, I see no sense in thinking that we can ever find peaceful agreements with people who do not like what we do. In fact, I remind you of a line from one of my recent articles: *you can't compromise with exclusionary elitists.*

Most all bureaucrats, especially in County government, are forced to look for compromise. It's just the way it goes. And in federal government, it's the law. But for us, it's a choice. Yes, sometimes we need friends from other areas to help us with issues. So we compromise with them in order to get that friendship later on. Well, later on has come and gone. We got nothing back on this trail for the work, time, sweat, and compromises that we have given. All we get are slaps and more closures.

Each of us has to make a choice. Do we try to be friends with our government and non-motorized partners in hopes that we can make headway in the future, maintain our recreation, and still have places to play. Or do we flat say NO.??? Do we start getting less-friendly and hold our lines in the sand?

These are not easy choices to make. If we go bad-guy, hard line, then we need a LOT more money, lawyers and better organizational infrastructure to back our play. Otherwise, we're just quacking.

If we go nice guy, be friendly, let's all try to get along, then we need more of us doing that, understanding the system, playing the game, and getting more involved. We certainly need less of the eat our young syndrome that sometimes kicks in when we know only part of the picture. :)

Go to my web site sometime, under Articles, and read some of the land use and access stuff like the piece on choices we make....or the one on the vicious green circle....or the one on dealing with bureaucrats. You'll see the dilemma fairly clearly. Maybe you can find some help in making your choice.
Del
 
#10 ·
Del, I understand you are a busy man, and you are working on other areas as well as the rubicon, but I really think you need to be there and hear firsthand what is going on at these meetings. Rich Platt said he has an understanding that you yourself helped the wording of the sign posted at loon this year in a meeting in aug 2003. Your name is listed among the attendees on that meeting date.

When people make accusations like this, and we don't have anyone to respond to it other than steve and dennis who say "I did not agree to that sign", where are you? Publicly on these boards and your site you make statements to encourage us, but it doesn't mean much when you're not there.

Unfortunately, the underlying message I get from your post and some other recent ones is that we need to stand up to them more. Well, from what I have seen, if we stand up to them more than we do now, we will be rebelling against something that hasn't even been established yet(rtmp), and causing more problems than we solve.

Is this the message you are putting across?
 
#11 · (Edited by Moderator)
makya said:
Unfortunately, the underlying message I get from your post and some other recent ones is that we need to stand up to them more. Well, from what I have seen, if we stand up to them more than we do now, we will be rebelling against something that hasn't even been established yet(rtmp), and causing more problems than we solve.

Is this the message you are putting across?
First off, I'd love to be at all the meetings we have for all the trails we treasure, like the Rubicon. But no can do. It's just not possible. My BlueRibbon job covers all states, including Alaska. So yes, I'm busy and spread out pretty thin. That's why we need more folks like you, Cruzila, Simple Man, Twin44's, UGetit, and others getting more intimately involved more than in the past. More guys gotta step up on the take the reins and help the few full timers (like me) that we have in this country.....about as many as you can count on two hands.

As to rebelling....well, I counsel a couple things when it comes to this.
1. You can't compromise with exclusionary elitists and expect to get anything back, is what I say....but that doesn't mean we won't compromise. It just means we aren't going to see any shining light heroes emerge from the other side to help us in our cause. It just means that when we do compromise, you can still expect to see the knife coming at your back. We just have to learn to deal with it and avoid the actual getting stuck part. :)

2. We need to build our unity and our membership before we can rebel much. WE don't have the money to do much in the way of lawsuits, unless it really hits home. So there's no use pretending and throwing a fit in the street or wearing costumes and protesting this and that. It might get some press, but even that's iffy. The time we do need to rebel is when it definitely butts up against our basic principles.

So for now we get more guys to these meetings, get more opinions on the table, and more hands in the pot to help solve the problems and bring other guys on board to this same understanding...so we have more of us on the same sheet of music and seeing the picture like you are starting to see it. Thanks...
Del
 
#12 ·
Kind of sucks that everyone there was getting paid to be there accept for Doug, Dennis, Merlin, myself, three private citizens and Montgomery. Very convenient for our opposition that they get paid to beat on us. We on the other hand have to give up time and money to try and protect our trail. I am not going to be able to get away very much for the rest of this year to make meetings due to school, and that bumms me out to no end. I kind of feel like I am betraying the cause by not being there. Even though this was my first time I was awakened to the fact that there is strength in numbers and unfortunately we just don't have the numbers to put up a good fight at that particular table.
 
#13 ·
Rocknutz reinforces a really good point...there need to be folks willing to get to the meetings when they can make it. There is strength in numbers and power in disseminating information.

Nest ROC meeting...April 13th. I will be there, hope some other folks will make it as well.
 
#14 ·
Show your support by showing up on the work weekends.

By being able to go back to the ROC and say we had "XXX" number of volunteers on the trail working the project, we gain power.

We need to continue to show that we are willing and able to work to keep the trail open and healthy. The ROC has been doing a lot of talking and not much action. They are the ones who need to step up and show they can offer something positive for the trail.


Doug
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top