  |
Two future development projects on the edges of Healdsburg and Windsor have become fodder in the north county supervisorial contest between Debora Fudge and Mike McGuire.
Fudge is critical of McGuire’s vote as a Healdsburg City councilman to approve the Saggio Hills luxury hotel and residential project.
“It’s an intense development at the edge of the city,” she said of the controversial project on Healdsburg’s northern periphery.
“It isn’t the way I would develop a city,” she said at last week’s candidate debate.
Fudge said the environmental impact report was “thrown out of court” because the City Council didn’t listen to constituents who warned it was inadequate without a smaller project alternative.
Just because the developer said fewer homes would not generate enough profit was not sufficient reason to reject an alternative, she said.
McGuire shot back at Fudge. As a Windsor Council member, Fudge voted to put a large car dealership “on the edge of greenbelt and open space,” McGuire said, referring to the planned new home for Sanderson Ford.
The car dealership was wooed away from downtown Healdsburg several years ago to a future home north of Arata Lane, between Windsor and Healdsburg.
“If you’re to be criticizing, you can’t make the same move on the Windsor Town Council as in what you said Healdsburg did,” McGuire said.
Fudge acknowledged Saggio Hills has some positives, like the hotel bed taxes it would generate.
And while there is a 14-acre affordable housing site that is part of Saggio Hills, she questioned if there will be money available for building those dwellings.
McGuire did not respond directly as to whether the funds will be available for the affordable housing. But he touted the fact two-thirds of the 259-acre Saggio Hills property will remain in open space and there will be a new fire station along with the city’s largest park, at 58 acres.
He said the 130-room hotel and 70-home project was vetted over 24 meetings, adding that it was “nothing like the 2,500 homes built in Windsor over the last 16 years,” referring to the period Fudge has been on the Town Council.
“If you look at the greenhouse gases from that compared to Saggio, there’s no ballgame,” he said.
In previous interviews, Fudge said “I feel Mike catered to the developer” in not requiring a smaller Saggio Hills project be studied. She said it was easy to predict a judge would find the EIR flawed as a result.
McGuire said “anyone who was present knows I held the project up, to ensure the community and residents got what they deserved. They (developers) were put through the ringer.”
Healdsburg is currently involved in amending the Saggio Hills environmental study to address the inadequacies highlighted by the court.
— Clark Mason
The Press Democrat
Subscribe by Email
Follow us on Twitter
From this article, quoting Ms. Fudge….
““It isn’t the way I would develop a city,” she said at last week’s candidate debate.
If the ghost town of Windsor is a reliable measure of how she would ‘develop a city’, then it is clear that we should vote for McGuire.
Both of these candidates are machine-players. Same machine, different people. Both ‘green’ enough to pass. Ruthless, game players, beholden to the Noreen Evans political machine.
Who else is running?
Lily,
There certainly has been no lack of negativity on the Fudge side:
See Cynthia Boaz’s comment to the Fudge chat: http://bit.ly/atUeCl
Still haven’t seen either side agree to take up my call to action and go positive! (except for independent Tweeter AesopsSoapbox – you’re welcome)
Any takers?
From what I have seen, Deb, at least, has not run a negative campaign. None of her flyers have mentioned Mike, only her own record and accomplishments, which are far and away the more impressive of these two candidates. Deb has led the Smart Train initiative, Sonoma Solar, open space, etc. She has a proven environmental tract record and that’s what’s important to me — and also apparently to the Sierra Club, which just endorsed her and not Mike.
What about the budget and the county employee pensions? I want to know what the two of you plan on doing with that! Lets talk about something that matters!
I agree with Debora Fudge that there has been too much negative campaigning in this race. As a 4th District Voter, these candidates are both progressive environmentalists, and both worthy candidates.
Let’s hear them both (AND their campaigns!!) talk about their own accomplishments and plans, and let the voters decide who to choose. There’s only three weeks left – lets turn this into a positive campaign period!
Mike and Debora – How about it?
It’s really impressive how Bonnie Alicia Berkeley & Sonoma County Conservation Action can give Mcguire their highest award for all the work he did on Saggio Hills, and then base their entire campaign against him on all the work he did on Saggio Hills!
At least there is no veil on their hypocrisy! Gotta give them that.
Peace!
In Monday’s article regarding the issue of development in the supervisor’s race, Debora Fudge levels criticism at Mike McGuire’s record of development in Healdsburg, by making the following statement:
“This isn’t the way I would develop a city.”
No, Ms. Fudge would develop a city by creating an unsustainable downtown center – perhaps calling it “the Green” – and filling it with unsuccessful retail businesses, and unaffordable apartments. The result? A developmental failure caused by an economically devastating retail and residential vacancy rate.
To Bonnie -
If you are so concerned about these CEQA items why did YOU as a member of the SCCA Board vote to give McGuire an award for his environmental leadership after the EIR was before the Council. I suspect you are just campaigning and trying to slime a good candidate because he is running against your chosen candidate. It really is despicable that you would turn on McGuire so harshly after awarding him for his truly good work.
Debora –
I still don’t see how a car dealership on the side of town and an additional winery is better than the 150+ plus acres McGuire preserved in there natural state through the Saggio hills project. One of our biggest threats to the environment is over use of land. We don’t have the water or other resources to support the continuing development Windsor has had over the last 10 plus years (Santa Rosa is worse, but that doesn’t let Windsor off the hook).We need preservation, not conversion to wineries and car dealerships on the outskirts of town.
Wow there need to be some corrections to these comments:
1) I did not sling mud on Saggio Hills. It was brought up as a question in a debate and I answered the question.
2) Windsor did not woo Sanderson Ford away from Healdsburg. He actually came to *us* in 1996 and asked to be added to our urban growth boundary. We resisted initially.
3) When we added the 7 acres to accomodated Sanderson Ford, the citizen driven compromise was to REMOVE 300 acres north of town on the east side of 101 and that land, designated for 800 sprawl homes, is now a vineyard. I’d say that decision weighed most favorably for the environment.
4) Wrong assumptions made about me on many fronts. I do not live in a new house in Windsor – I bought and restored a 1934 era farmhouse and have plans to solarize it next year when I buy an electric car.
5) I also ride a scooter as far as Santa Rosa and back instead of taking my car out (when the weather cooperates). Scooter gets 75 mpg.
6) For those of you not involved in campaigns, read these posts with a grain of salt. Those who work for campaigns tend to do most of the negative postings about the other candidates.
Debora
If Deb Fudge wants to take credit for “her” development, then all the facts should be looked at. Deb did not do her homework and now the folks in Windsor are left with this mess. The mixed use in our downtown was not well thought out and does not work. We have tried to find an achor store but all the stores are too small. Wheres the movie theater (you sent that to airport blvd.) and the draw to the downtown? Deb has plans to build this style of storefronts all over Windsor. How much retail space do we need? Talk to anyone that has tried to build in Windsor and what they go through to get permits. We can not afford this type of leadership at the county level.Nothing will ever get done and the building industry will grind to a halt.
Will the TRAIN TO NOWHERE stop at Saggio Hills so the residents up there can go NOWHERE to?
Perhaps the train can put bite on those residents, the Boys and Girls scouts, Catholic Charities, Ladies of Hadassah, Red Cross etc as there is no money to build this fabled waste of money and it surely wont support itself if ever built!
Mike’s Saggio planning was unintelligent. Leap frogging to fill open space, cut down 2,000 oaks and ruin beautiful habitat for an addition to the city of McMansions that will change the whole feeling of our community with 2nd homes and transient visitors. thanks but no thanks Plus he did not have the knowledge of what an EIR requires…Calif. law says an alternative project should be considered. Why did he not see that…and instead wasted time and money on the developer and citizens side, negotiating when he should have made it right in the first darn place. Whether you are for or against the project, that was a failure of education and experience. The Judge agreed.
Dear Ew:
Welcome to Democracy.
Until both of these candidates tear down their own houses in favor of their “green” anti-development positions, and until they both turn in their driver’s licenses to demonstrate true commitment to “green” transportation, they are both just typical Sonoma County/Bay Area political hypocrits — saying to everyone: “I’ve got mine (Sonoma County home/lifestyle/etc.), but you can’t have yours (or maybe you can have what I deem appropriate for you to have).
To Ms. Fudge and Mr. McGuire, I say, if you want open, unused land, then YOU buy acreage somewhere you can afford, and do whatever you want. But don’t tell me I have to live in a city that fits your liking: “It isn’t the way I would develop a city.” That statement is frightening.
“It isn’t the way I would develop a city,” she said at last week’s candidate debate.
No, you’ll just pretend to create an old time downtown where none existed before….and you see how well that’s going.
A resort in Healdsburg and a car dealership in Windsor hardly constitute out-of-control development. Most areas of this country would welcome either of these businesses. Too bad job creation has taken such a back seat to other agendas.
Listen carefully to the substance of what these two people have to say. Mike McGuire knows his stuff, and takes the time to get the details right. There isn’t anyone who has the command of the issues or the depth of understanding of the implications of various choices before him as Mike.
It was HE who pushed and pushed on the process with Saggio Hills resulting in the developer having to return to the table time and time again in the interests of the citizens of Healdsburg. No one worked harder to get that situation and decision right.
Look closely at who is supporting Fudge — you will find the group who filed the lawsuit in the first place and who are clearly now attempting to make that issue a significant one in this election. Who’s catering to special interests????
they arent going to do any better, everyone talks about things but never accopmlish them,. THEY JUST WANT TO GET ELECTED
Clutching for straws… If this is the best mud Fudge can dig up, it really was over 3 months ago…. She actually ended up agreeing with what she started out critizing. At least she has shown she is a true politician. She can vote for things before she votes against them and make everyone happy.
Saggio Hills was designed to protect the creek and provide an enormous Open Space area. McGuire ensured that if the project moves forward, it will benefit the community. Fudge wanted a car dealership to pad Windsor’s overblown reserves which do nothing to provide services for the community.