Comment Log Display
Below is the comment you selected to display.
Comment 65 for Land Use Comments for the GHG Scoping Plan (sp-landuse-ws) - 1st Workshop.
First Name: Sandra
Last Name: Skolnik
Email Address: skolniks@pacbell.net
Affiliation:
Subject: Local Land Use and General - Not Far Enough
Comment:
Local municipalities should submit environmental impact reports for major programs affecting other communities. For instance, the City of Sunnyvale's land use deliberations on the use of Moffett Field property should not be left up to a few people in city government. In general (we were referred to a general comments area, but there is none, so I am including my general comnments here): When is enough enough? Business comes first and the heck with people? While each sector of our society has its own self interests in mind, the issue is the well being and health of all of its citizens as well as the environment we live in. The climate issues and global repercussions are serious and have been confirmed by experts in the fields, as well as manifested in our environment - it is not up to business persons to claim whether there is or is not global warming, and it is not up to the state to constantly appease business. It would seem that we need to be more aggressive in the steps and timetable it will take to reduce human affects on the environhment. While we are projecting out 12-42 years, the environment continues to deteriorate - compounding the problem. The environment waits for noone - government, lawyers or business. The plan needs to be strengthened and expanded. Polluters should pay - it is not a 'right' to do business in California - it should be considered a privilege. Businesses that practice good social and environmental practices should be rewarded and those that don't should be penalized. I agree that California workers should be trained in new technologies. Polluting companies that use the argument that they will create new jobs to justify continue unneeded development and tax breaks is a manipulative trick - who are new jobs being created for? Californianans? Or will it create the need to import more workers, develop more precious land and create continuing overpopulation which will compound the problems we already have? Maximum tax credits should be given to energy efficient research and consumer purchases, including cars, appliances. The oil industry should not receive public welfare, while alternative energy research goes begging for money. Finally, I do not see provisions for preservation and protection of natural resources and wildlife that depends on them. How will this plan address the need for financial support of our parks and natural resources? The State may be assuming leadership in this type of plan, but if it doesn't have any teeth, than we will be forced to eat spoiled applesauce. Thank you.
Attachment:
Original File Name:
Date and Time Comment Was Submitted: 2008-08-10 14:38:33
If you have any questions or comments please contact Office of the Ombudsman at (916) 327-1266.