Governor Endorses Trestles Road

surfhorn · Post by **surfhorn** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 8:43 am

Not good:

GOVERNOR SCHWARZENEGGER THROWS TRESTLES AND SAN ONOFRE UNDER THE BUS

Surfersvillage Global Surf News, 16 January, 2008 : - - San Clemente, Ca – Yesterday, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger issued a letter in support of the proposed 241 toll road extension in South Orange County. The letter was issued just two weeks before a critical vote by the California Coastal Commission to determine if the proposed extension violates the California Coastal Act. A staff report prepared by the CCC concludes that it does.

“We are absolutely taken aback by this,” said Surfrider Foundation CEO Jim Moriarty. “For the Governor to take this unprecedented step of interfering with the workings of an independent and non-political commission, an entity which was established by California voters and whose sole responsibility is to decide the future of California’s coasts and beaches based on law and fact, is entirely inappropriate.”

The disappointing announcement comes just six days after the California Governor unveiled his plans to close forty-eight California State Parks, allow for the early release of prisoners from state correctional facilities, and raise Department of Motor Vehicle fees.

“We had hoped that Governor Schwarzenegger was insincere in his threat to close state parks and beaches,” says Moriarty. “It now appears that he is absolutely intent on sacrificing our state park system and natural resources for his political objectives.”

The California State Parks Department has maintained that they may be forced to abandon nearly sixty percent of San Onofre State Beach Park, including the popular San Mateo Creek Campground, should the proposed extension to the 241 toll road be completed,

Governor Schwarzenegger’s failure to support San Onofre State Beach Park by endorsing the 241 toll road extension is in direct contrast to the efforts of his Republican predecessors, President Richard M. Nixon and then-Governor Ronald Reagan, both of whom worked to establish San Onofre State Beach as a part of their legacy; hoping that it would exist as a resource to be used and enjoyed by future generations.

The Surfrider Foundation activists and other opponents to the planned toll road will be gathering in Oceanside, California on February 6th for a planned rally outside the California Coastal Commission hearing. All members of the public are invited to attend. Please go to savetrestles.org for more information.

About the Surfrider Foundation
The Surfrider Foundation is a non-profit grassroots organization dedicated to the protection and enjoyment of our world’s oceans, waves and beaches. Founded in 1984 by a handful of visionary surfers in Malibu, California, the Surfrider Foundation now maintains over 50,000 members and 80 chapters worldwide.

www.surfrider.org
www.savetrestles.org

Beeline2.0 · Post by **Beeline2.0** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:17 am

Mike Fernandez · Post by **Mike Fernandez** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:20 am

In the grand scheme of things, doesn't something like this seem insane? Being retorical, how does one come to control natures beaches in a way that restricts peoples access? Being in a society, restricting development seems like a good idea, but not access. I long for the old days of dirt roads and dirt parking lots.

Fact 1: Did you know most of the Chesapeake Bay is private access only! Kinda sucks when your trying to rig your windsurfer along the shoreline, and the only way you can do it is to pay a fee to enter the state park.

Fact2: Here in PA. the state closed mountain biking on state gamelands. There is no hunting on Sunday's, so one day a week goes wasted on usage. Mountain biking is allowed in some parks, but they want to charge user fees to make the places more "user friendly." You know, building huge 20 stall bathrooms from concrete out in the woods, asphalt parking lots, etc... Kinda like some of the surfing locations in Cali.
I don't mountain bike anymore anyway.

I wish I knew what to do. I don't trust Surfrider. Too many of their bogus signs in the National Parks.

WaterLogged · Post by **WaterLogged** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:04 am

Mike Fernandez wrote:In the grand scheme of things, doesn't something like this seem insane? Being retorical, how does one come to control natures beaches in a way that restricts peoples access? Being in a society, restricting development seems like a good idea, but not access. I long for the old days of dirt roads and dirt parking lots.

Fact 1: Did you know most of the Chesapeake Bay is private access only! Kinda sucks when your trying to rig your windsurfer along the shoreline, and the only way you can do it is to pay a fee to enter the state park.

Fact2: Here in PA. the state closed mountain biking on state gamelands. There is no hunting on Sunday's, so one day a week goes wasted on usage. Mountain biking is allowed in some parks, but they want to charge user fees to make the places more "user friendly." You know, building huge 20 stall bathrooms from concrete out in the woods, asphalt parking lots, etc... Kinda like some of the surfing locations in Cali.
I don't mountain bike anymore anyway.

I wish I knew what to do. I don't trust Surfrider. Too many of their bogus signs in the National Parks.

It's all about revenue, revenue, revenue because state and local government waste so much on giving themselves raises.

Oh, did I say that? I was an RN in a county medical center. The medical center was going to sh!t on a shingle and the clinics were closing down, but the county bigwigs were all getting new government cars and getting driven to doctor's appointments in limos with local government money. They make up for the "deficit" (mistakes) by hitting where they can make the most back - parking tickets and county/state park & beach fees. At least in New York, that is. But California is bearing a striking resemblance.

Last Spring and Summer, state and county government doubled the fees to enter parks and beaches. I'm sure it will double again this year.

Out in Eastern Suffolk County, where I board my horse, they are plowing down considerable acreage of open property to build McMansions and roads despite the complaints and concerns of environmental groups and citizens.

Beaches, parks and open acres are BAD. Roads, McMansions and strip malls are good. Money, money, money, money.

It makes me sick.

surfhorn · Post by **surfhorn** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:06 am

We started Surfrider to combat our government and industry from trashing our waves, beaches, watersheds and near-shore waters. The only thing that politicians - the ones who ultimately make the decisions on the fate of our coastal resources - understand is numbers. If every surfer joined Surfrider then we would have a lobbying body that could really get things done.

Presently, there are approx. 50,000 paid members with 80 chapters around the world. Those chapters are the frontline in saving our surf and are run totally by volunteers.

If you don't trust SF, then join your local chapter and make it an organization that you can trust. If you have the time and fortitude, work your way up and contribute at the national level. Our board and advisors are all volunteers and always welcome fresh ideas and energy.

WaterLogged · Post by **WaterLogged** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:25 am

surfhorn wrote:We started Surfrider to combat our government and industry from trashing our waves, beaches, watersheds and near-shore waters. The only thing that politicians - the ones who ultimately make the decisions on the fate of our coastal resources - understand is numbers. If every surfer joined Surfrider then we would have a lobbying body that could really get things done.

Presently, there are approx. 50,000 paid members with 80 chapters around the world. Those chapters are the frontline in saving our surf and are run totally by volunteers.

If you don't trust SF, then join your local chapter and make it an organization that you can trust. If you have the time and fortitude, work your way up and contribute at the national level. Our board and advisors are all volunteers and always welcome fresh ideas and energy.

Yeah, Surfrider definitely is probably the only large organized group of surfers out there. Our local chapters got some good things done around here. Montauk police were giving out surfing tickets in the off season last year - and they got that reversed. And they also convinced the ACOE to not build a cement wall around the Montauk lighthouse. That was a huge, huge, huge decision. It was basically Surfrider vs. The Montauk Historical Society. That wall would have destroyed the break, and would have limited access for Montauk fishermen.

Right now they are taking on a natural gas facility that wants to build an offshore processing island right by my home!! The natural gas company is telling citizens that the island would have little effect on the surf or the biosystem, but how can that be when they would be dumping 165 acres of concrete into the ocean to build it?

There's definitely some bickering and gossiping and the usual bullsh!t that goes on with any organization, but right now, it's what we have - and we've gotten results.

I don't know about Surfrider vs. The Governator, though.

DarcyM · Post by **DarcyM** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 2:08 pm

Very disappointed with Arnold's decision on this. The budget crises in CA isn't going away soon, and I'd guess he sees this development as a way to generate revenue. It's not just about access, it's about the sensitive riverbed which is one of the few naturally remaining watersheds in southern California. The toll road will cross right through that valley, and it will desrupt the eco-system despite how "environmentally friendly" the developers say it will be.

Personally, I don't trust developers. They've lied to the public way too often about promised parks and protection of sensitive lands. But once they make their dollar they're gone.

It is all about the over development of southern Orange County. More houses and cars than the existing infrastructure can support, crowding out agriculture and wildlands in favor of park ways, mini mansions crammed together, and more malls.

Meanwhile Arnold has some other ideas for our budget, but it is invariably costing the poor more than the rich. Take some off the top, certainly they can afford it more than most of us. No need to go around jeopardizing the livelihood and simple recreations for thousands of hard working folks.

randiego · Post by **randiego** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 5:00 pm

Hey whaddya know - Arnold turns out to be a Republican after all.

RW · Post by RW » Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:31 pm

nope........

.....he's a DEMO-KRUAT.....

.......which is a much more dangerous and pogromatic creature in disguise if ever there was one.

SFKneelo · Post by **SFKneelo** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 8:26 pm

RW wrote:nope........

.....he's a DEMO-KRUAT.....

.......which is a much more dangerous and pogromatic creature in disguise if ever there was one.

I don't get it... is it this?

"AMPHOE BAN KRUAT

Ancient Quarry
is the site where the ancient Khmer people used to obtain rocks to build sanctuaries in the lower Northeast. It is near Khao Kloi and Khao Krachiao, adjacent to the Thai - Cambodian border, 7 km. from Amphoe Ban Kruat on the Ban Kruat-Lahan Sai Road, and 3 km. from the main road. An asphalt road leads to the quarry, making travel most convenient. It is believed that rocks from this quarry were used to build Phanom Rung and other sanctuaries in Buri Ram. There are rock hills on both sides. A stream flows through this lovely area.The ancient Quarry is far from Phanom Rung Historical Park about 45 kms."

Doesn't sound like Arnie to me. I believe he came from closer to the area of my German Jewish forefathers, where it's noted that:

"His many accomplishments have earned him the praise of numerous organizations, including the Simon Wiesenthal Center's "National Leadership Award" for his support of the organization's Holocaust studies."

I do NOT support this move, but, then again, I do NOT support bagging on Kruats or Krauts.

Sorry, policing 'my own.' Take that s*&^ elsewhere.

DarcyM · Post by **DarcyM** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:40 pm

Arnold has always been a Republican, which has been cause for much consternation in the family considering wife Maria Shriver is related to a very well known clan of rich New England Democrats (Kennedy).

His party ties have blurred in office. He didn't turn out to be the leader we wanted, and hence it seems more of the same. Bickering in congress and fat cats bending his ear every which way. Did Gray Davis really do such a bad job? Hindsight is 20/20.

DYdamo · Post by **DYdamo** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 11:31 pm

Hey Darcy,
It's always the same,It does'nt matter who's in power
We'll always bitch about them

DarcyM · Post by **DarcyM** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 pm

damo --

ain't it the truth.

Greg Little · Post by **Greg Little** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 10:52 am

You all should be ashamed of yourselfs!!!
Arnold has done wonders for the state of California.
He has raped and pilaged the poor and gives it to the rich. He has made our state a better place for big business to legally extort monies from you me and anyone who doesn't have a vested interest in the exploitation of the human race...
Remember, we are not US citizens anymore... We are US consumers...This is how big business and our corrupt government views us. So if your not consuming your not a patriot...

Mike Fernandez · Post by **Mike Fernandez** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:57 am

Well Greg, not being in Cali, I'm not intimate with Arnolds dealings, but on the consumer part, you nailed that sucker square on the head!