By GEORGE BACHICH
Many people are still confused by the debate over the stream setback ordinance (Measure P on the March 2 ballot). Partisan voters, especially, are having a hard time understanding this issue in terms of their usual left versus right frame of reference. And the "Yes on P" folks are merely adding to the confusion by trying to characterize this as a partisan debate in a baseless and futile attempt to position themselves in "the middle" in the minds of voters.
The plain truth is, this is simply not a partisan issue, and cannot be properly understood in that framework. Measure P does not serve the interests of either the right or the left, and violates important principles held by both factions. There are many good reasons to oppose Measure P regardless of which party or ideology you prefer.
Liberals lament that Measure P is just another example of big money special interests manipulating politicians and the political process for their own gain at the expense of the little guy. Conservatives complain that Measure P is just more big government intrusion and an unnecessary restriction on the use and enjoyment of private property in exchange for no real environmental gain. Fiscal watchdogs on both sides argue that Measure P fails a cost/benefit analysis by incurring huge costs and diverting valuable resources away from other programs, while producing no measurable benefit.
Voters all across the political spectrum can see that restricting ordinary property owners while exempting powerful special interests is simply unfair, and that restricting activity near dry washes and gullies while exempting most of the Napa River and other Valley floor streams makes no environmental sense at all.
The bottom line is that Measure P is simply wrong, and there are far better and more honorable ways to protect and enhance the health and quality of our watershed.
The sad truth is that despite everyone's hopes, this long process went seriously astray. Allowing political objectives to overshadow environmental concerns resulted in an ordinance that fails to address any of the really important watershed issues.
The tragedy is that so much time, effort and money was squandered on developing a stream setback ordinance as a political strategy against the Malan Initiative (Measure O), when those same resources could have been more productively deployed toward really understanding the watershed, identifying specific problems and designing and implementing real solutions.
Now voters have to clean up this mess by voting NO on Measure P. That is the only way to clear the decks for a new effort, this time directed toward real watershed issues, not political strategy. Vote NO on Measure P.
back