Is Deer Creek challenge all part of a political dance?

The fact that Friedman's re-entry to Petaluma has been delayed, perhaps even stopped, has been widely reported. Just when we thought the City Council was ready to make a decision on the Deer Creek Village shopping center, opponents launched an 11th-hour gambit that has once again sent the proposal back for more study and analysis.

The impetus for delay was a pair of challenges to the Environmental Impact Report pushed by two former members of the council, former mayor Pamela Torliatt and former council member Janice Cader-Thompson.

Torliatt's challenge was a five-page letter with a huge stack of supporting documents, sent at 11:57 .a.m. on February 27, the day of the Council review. This, of course, did not allow enough time for staff to review the documents.

Cader-Thompson's challenge was in the form of a document submitted by an attorney. More about this later.

The gist of Torliatt's attack on the EIR is that she claims that it doesn't acknowledge that Rainier, the cross-town connector that would give Petalumans another way to get from east to west and vice versa, will never be built.

What Torliatt doesn't acknowledge is that if it isn't built, it would be due largely to the efforts of Torliatt and Cader-Thompson and the small group who call themselves "progressives."

This group has been relentless in opposing shopping center development and building Rainier, the cost for which would be underwritten partially by development. That opposition was largely responsible for Cader-Thompson's defeat when she ran for reelection, and Torliatt's loss at the polls in her bid to be a County Supervisor. Both retail development and the cross-town connector at Rainier are high priorities east of the freeway, and it was no surprise that the east side vote was decisive in both of their defeats.

Cader-Thompson has always been in-your-face blunt about her opposition to Rainier — she does after all live near Rainier Avenue. Torliatt, on the other hand, has always danced around the issue, often speaking one way, voting the other. So, it was surprising for a politician who has been giving every indication of wanting to get back into the electoral maelstrom to choose a position that appears to be supported by a fairly restricted minority in this town.

Her thesis is that if Rainier isn't going to be built, the EIR is not valid, and if the EIR is not valid, the shopping center should not be built (and Friedman's then would probably not make its ballyhooed return).

Analysis of her claims, and rebuttals, will come from other sources. What is of interest in today's writing is the fact that it does seem to be a concerted political effort to derail both the shopping center and Rainier.

© The Press Democrat |  Terms of Service |  Privacy Policy |  Jobs With Us |  RSS |  Advertising |  Sonoma Media Investments |  Place an Ad
Switch to our Mobile View