NVR Logo
Keep land open and say ‘ahh’
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Save and Share Share
Dear editor, Reading about the public meeting on Nov. 5 regarding the possible development of the Ghisletta property — where do we stop?

When Napa City limits backs up to American Canyon? It reminds me of the San Jose area and all of the cities bordering it, making it one big concrete mass.
I moved to Napa 30 years ago in my early 20s. I’ve seen so many changes and so much growth. Enough is enough! I’m sure there are plenty of home developments currently in Napa where future possible homeowners can find something to buy. I moved to Napa to enjoy its rural beauty, small-town atmosphere and low crime rate. Before anyone judges me about “having mine,” and not wanting others to “get theirs,” I’m not a homeowner. Unfortunately, I’m still a renter, but a very happy renter still.

We watch bigger and bigger hotels being built, watch the tourist industry flourish and can’t seem to stop them. Can we save some rural area, keeping the “Gateway to the Napa Valley” in its natural beauty, something that makes all of us, including the tourists, say “Ahh ...” when entering our beautiful valley?
Vickie Schneider / Napa
4 comment(s)

Lane wrote on Dec 16, 2007 3:56 AM:

" Napans need to get together to pass a tax for parks and open space. We voted for a district, now it time to vote to fund it so that it can pursue grants and donations that will enable the acquisition of land. If we want to keep open space in the county, if we want greenbelts around the cities of Napa Valley, we need to get moving and buy that land. "

mikeb wrote on Dec 16, 2007 10:50 AM:

" Lane, stay away from my wallet! "We" don't need to "buy that land". All "we" have to do is not grant a change to that land's current zoning. If they want to develop within their current zoning that's absolutely fine (1 house per 10 acres). The entire problem is created by the attempt to change what is presently allowed. And Lane, what happened to the talk that measure I would not result in new taxes? Apparently all it's opponents were right from the beginning. "

napablogger wrote on Dec 16, 2007 11:22 AM:

" Lane, good idea, if you want the land pay for it. No one can object to that. "

JimClark wrote on Dec 16, 2007 12:27 PM:

" With the current threat of a tax increase for the massive deficit created by the State, I can't help but believe that the taxpayer is again going to be punished for the kind of people who get elected into office. It's a small gesture but, the legislators should vote to eliminate their current pay raises and null the legislation that allows them such despicable increases. In reality we, The People, should fire them every chance we get. "

Comment guidelines
All comments will be screened and may take several hours to be posted.
• Keep comments clear, concise and focused on the topic in the story.
• Comments exceeding 300 words will not be posted.
• Refrain from personal attacks, degrading comments or remarks that do not add to a constructive dialogue.
• Comments implying suspects in crime-related stories are guilty before they have been proven so in a court of law will be deleted.
• Do not post e-mail addresses or links except for pages on Napavalleyregister.com or government Web sites.
• Comments will not be edited - they will be approved or declined.
• Comments may be used in the print edition of the newspaper.
• If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact dross@napanews.com or bkennedy@napanews.com
For further information on the comment guidelines, click here.
Search:
Advanced searchWeb Search Powered By Yahoo! Search
Copyright © 2008 Napa Valley Publishing, a member of Lee Enterprises, Inc.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy