So, the new General Plan has been approved by the City Council with nary a wimper from the neighbors to the north. For those of you who follow such things, here's a bit of history:

In 2000, Rohnert Park was doing an update of its General Plan. The City Council, in a magnanimous mood, invited Rohnert Park's neighbors in, to hear from all stakeholders. The people from Penngrove saw their opportunity, and rushed in with complaints about traffic. Not just future traffic from future growth in Rohnert Park, but also present traffic, which they blamed entirely on the "rampant growth" in Rohnert Park.

The General Plan committee spent a lot of time responding to these comments, and learned that the traffic problems the Penngrovians complained of were not just as a result of Rohnert Park, but also Santa Rosa, Petaluma.... the entire county.

When the traffic complaints were refuted, the Penngrovians switched tactics and started complaining about groundwater. They blamed every failing well south of Rohnert Park on the City's municipal wells. John King was very proud of his "pin map" where he mapped the location of every private well around Rohnert Park that had reported a problem. Never mind that his unscientific survey did not discriminate between shallow wells that had never had any maintenance, or wells impacted by a new well next door - if you reported a problem, you went on the map.

As a part of the stakeholders meetings, Pam Torliatt showed up to represent Petaluma's interests. This was also during the time that she was considering a run for County Supervisor. When she saw that she could get some traction among the Penngrovians by taking up their cause, she became an outspoken advocate for traffic mitigation and groundwater monitoring. I remember sitting in a meeting in Penngrove, when the County was coming to get input on the early stages of the County's General Plan update, and hearing Pam join the Penngrovians in blaming all of their ills on Rohnert Park.

The result was that the Rohnert Park General Plan has a few paragraphs that address the Penngrove traffic situation. Recognizing that Rohnert Park is not solely responsible for coming up with a solution, the General plan calls for a fee structure where new development in Rohnert Park would contribute a proportionate share to a solution in Penngrove. The solution also required the cooperation of Santa Rosa, Petaluma, the County Transportation Committee - everybody would pay a share. The groundwater issue was resolved when the 108-acre parcel south of Valley House Drive was dropped from the General Plan in last-minute negotiations between the City Attorney and the Penngrovian's attorney, Suzan Brantt-Hawley. Never mind that the wells in Penngrove were in a different drainage basin, and, hence, a different groundwater basin - a sacrifice had to be made and, since the property owners were not a part of the negotiation, they got the shaft. That story's not over yet.

All that is background to the current Petaluma General Plan. Mayor Torliatt has now completely turned her back on the Penngrovians in the new General Plan. According to the traffic impacts map in the plan, the world stops at Corona and Adobe. No impacts are studied outside of that area. The groundwater is seen as a tappable resource in times of drought, with no thought at all to how it may affect the neighbors to the north.

Where's the parity? Where's the cooperation? Where's the outrage from O.W.L and the rest of the Penngrovians? Could it be that their anger was focused solely on Rohnert Park, and the Petaluma General Plan did not elicit any response at all? Or, did Petaluma exclude the surrounding stakeholders in order to avoid the complications that Rohnert Park opened itself up to?