Slippery John Pedrozo and other misconceptions about the Riverside Motorsparts Pork votes

One of the amusements of the recent series of town hall meetings, the last held in the Merced County Supervisors' chambers, was listening to people stumble over the ugly name of the project, Riverside Motorsports Park.

The preferred mispronunciation was "Riverside Motorsparts Pork," although many people, realizing they has erred on the "sparts" tried desperately to avoid the "pork," which is the right name for the project, however mumbled.

Of course, however many times the people reiterated "Riverside Motorsparts Pork," it didn't help their case, because the public comment period on the project's final environmental impact report closed on Dec. 5. Although what the public said after Dec. 5 meant something politically, it didn't mean anything legally. It didn't mean enough politically.

The issue that mattered at the Dec. 12 evening meeting of the board of supervisors was the vote to override the Castle airport noise/safety zone to restrict its diameter sufficiently to put the motorsparts pork grandstand outside of its restrictions.

The Dec. 12 meeting was rigged to a fare-thee-well. People (it did not originate here) are calling the supervisors the "Merced County Board of Developers" now. The geniuses we employ in the administration building busy trying to avoid the public perception of graft and corruption on the board held yet another town hall meeting for several hours allowing 57 people to blow off more legally ineffectual steam on the motorsparts pork EIR.

Enter Slippery John, as bogus a hero of agriculture and public health and safety as we have on the board. Pedrozo voted against certifying the EIR in the 3-2 vote that approved it. He was also on the losing side in a 3-2 vote to allow traffic and noise from the motorsparts pork to exceed current county standards, to remove the land from the Williamson Act Agricultural Preserve (corrupted beyond recognition in Merced County), and some other things in an omnibus motion to make everything nice and legal by gutting County public health and safety standards.

So, Slippery John is down 2-0 going into midnight, right? But, he still looks like he's on the side of the angels.

Then comes the vote on the Castle airport override. As Board of Developer Chairman Mike Nelson mumbled at the very last minute before the vote was taken, this one required at least four votes to pass. If the override didn't get those four votes, the motorsparts pork was stopped.

Slippery John was the fourth vote.

He was also the fourth vote on the motion for RMP to indemnify the County against all costs arising from the Board of Developers' decision and for two other motions for RMP to pay various consultants' fees.

In fact, the Merced Sun-Star was correct when it published that Slippery John voted for the project. With his vote on the airport override he guaranteed the project would go forward. Without his vote, the project was have been stopped. The paper's editorial board supported the motorsparts pork, so it ate faux crow and corrected itself, saying, "He (Pedrozo) voted to deny the project," drawing attention away from the airport vote, which was the serious business of the County board of developers' thoroughly rigged show.

This "correction" is a ration of the well-known substance. However, the paper has apparently unearthed a previously, consistently, and at times vehemently denied fact: the Riverside Motorsparts Pork is connected with NASCAR. This, it seems to us, could only mean that this operation has been involved with NASCAR all along and the CEO and his flacks have been doling out another ration of the well-known substance on this issue. But, you have to ask: between the motorsparts pork and the paper, who are you gonna believe?

If that choice doesn't please you, a better one would be to believe what Supervisor Deidre Kelsey said in her half-hour statement on why she would be the one consistent vote against the whole project.

Bill Hatch
----------------------

Notes:

12-14-06
Merced Sun-Star

How the supervisors voted...
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/local/v-print/story/13111734p-13760584c.html
Wednesday morning's approval of the Riverside Motorsports Park was compromised of a series of separate motions
• Approve the environmental reviews of the raceway....3 - 2 vote
• Allow traffic and noise from the raceway to exceed current county standards, remove land for the project from the Williamson Act Agricultural Preserve, approve a mitigation program to lessen the raceway's environmental impacts, and other conditions for the project's approval...3 -2 vote
• Overrule a finding by the Airport Land Use Commission that the racetrack's site is too close to Castle Airport's runway...4 - 1 vote
• Enter an agreement with raceway developers that the county will not be responsible for the costs of potential legal challenges to the project...4 - 1 vote
• Enter an agreement that RMP will pay for consultant reviews of environmental studies on the raceway and for county staff time devoted to reviewing raceway plans...4 - 1 vote
• Enter an agreement with outside consultants to conduct extra review of the raceway's environmental impact report...4 - 1 vote

12-15-06
Merced Sun-Star
Correction

http://www.mercedsunstar.com/local/story/13115338p-13763609c.html
• In some editions of Thursday's paper, a graphic on the front page stated that Merced County Supervisor John Pedrozo voted to approve plans for the Riverside Motorsports Park. He voted to deny the project.

12-14-06
Merced Sun-Star
Correction

http://www.mercedsunstar.com/local/story/13111720p-13760583c.html
A story on A1 of Wednesday's Sun-Star about the Board of Supervisors' vote on the Riverside Motorsports Park should have read: "Park plans include some NASCAR events such as Busch Series, Craftsman Truck Series, Grand National Stock Car Series and the Whelen Grand American Series."

12-13-06
Merced Sun-Star
RMP gets a green light
...Corinne Reilly...Mercedsunstar.com
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/local/story/13108206p-13757468c.html
Riverside Motorsports Park moved from plan to reality early Wednesday morning when the Merced County Board of Supervisors approved the raceway complex in a series of votes that spanned eight and half hours. With Supervisors Deidre Kelsey and John Pedrozo dissenting on two key votes, plans for the 1,200-acre racing venue earned just enough support to move forward. The board's 2:30 a.m. decision followed hours of emotional public testimony from raceway supporters and opponents...300 people filled the board chambers and nearby overflow rooms at the meeting's 6 p.m. start...the final vote was cast just before 2:30 a.m. the crowd had thinned to a weary three dozen. Kelsey voiced the strongest opposition to the raceway -- at one point reading a 35-minute statement condemning the project as a disaster for taxpayers and an attack on farmers and ranchers near the raceway's future northern Merced County site. Kelsey slammed environmental reviews of the project as inadequate and rushed, urging the board to delay its vote until more studies on the project's impacts could be completed. She said approving of the project would damage the public trust and disgrace the supervisors. "As this project sits in front of me today, it's terrible," said Kelsey. "...The credibility of our board is on the line with this." Pedrozo cast the only other votes against the project. "I know what it is to be a farmer and I know what it is to have cars coming down your country roads," said Pedrozo. "I can't support the (environmental impact report), not until I am totally confident that all the people that live out there are taken care of." The board voted on six motions that collectively allowed the project to move forward. By the end of the meeting, the board had voted to approve the project's environmental reviews, to allow traffic and noise from the raceway to exceed current county standards, and to overrule a finding by the Airport Land Use Commission that the racetrack's site is too close to Castle Airport's runway.

12-16-06
Merced Sun-Star
Riverside has too many unanswered questions
...Steve Cameron, sports editor of the Sun-Star
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/sports/story/13119426p-13766961c.html
It feels like the hollering and arguing have been raging forever...Board of Supervisors perhaps put an end to the debate this week, approving all the key provisions which give the green light to Riverside Motorsports Park -- a $240 million development that would change the face of Merced County...perhaps...almost everyone expects this battle to be settled in court. Yes, the board is almost certain to put a final OK on Riverside's environmental impact report on Tuesday, thus starting the clock on a 30-day appeal period. Expect opponents of the project to line up from here to Firebaugh... Eventually, a judge will bang a gavel somewhere and the Riverside crew at last will turn a spade of dirt. Frankly, the wait doesn't bother me at all...not sure whether this monstrous project will work or not...doggone curious who's putting up this $240 million...worried about the fate of the Merced County Fairgrounds if Riverside is built -- and I haven't heard nearly enough concrete information to guess whether this mega-complex will be a long-term success. What's more, I'm peeved at the county board for not asking a whole lot more questions of Riverside trail boss John Condren...what do we really know about this thing except what Condren's told us? There are all sorts of puzzles here, and the supervisors apparently had little interest in solving them. Let's start with the investors...source of all that cash is one of several subjects that Condren has declared off limits. Let me mention here that there are three types of questions in Condren's world -- the kind he likes and answers happily, the kind he says are none of your business, and the kind which prompt him to suggest you're "ignorant" for even asking. What about the county?...nobody on the board seems to care where Condren has stumbled across a quarter-billion dollars for the largest private investment in Merced County history. Condren insists the board never inquired about his investors. It's astonishing what the county board doesn't know and didn't ask about the Riverside Motorsports Park -- despite a request to change the general plan regarding land use for that property and obvious opposition from a significant segment of the population. The local business community...supported Riverside while dreaming of the millions which could be pumped into our economy (Condren's figures, naturally..), has little clue how the project really might work. To borrow an old line, you could fill the Grand Canyon with what we don't know about the Riverside project. Or about Condren, for that matter. Maybe Riverside Motorsports Park could be the greatest thing to hit the Central Valley since cows. And maybe it's a dead fish. Amazing that after four years, we're still guessing

12-17-06
Contra Costa Times
Automakers want federal judge to toss global warming lawsuit
...Laura Kurtzman, AP
http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/living/science/16260662.htm?...
The six largest automakers are asking a federal judge to toss out a lawsuit by California that accuses them of harming human health and the environment by producing vehicles that contribute to global warming. The American and Japanese auto companies filed a motion in U.S. District Court in Oakland on Friday to dismiss the complaint filed in September by Attorney General Bill Lockyer. The lawsuit contends the state is already dealing with the deleterious effects of global warming caused by rising emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases. Vehicles are the state's largest single source of greenhouse gas emissions...complaint cites reports from state agencies. The current suit comes as automakers are wrangling with California over a 2002 law requiring them to cut emissions. That law has since been copied by 10 other states. Under the law, the California Air Resources Board has adopted standards designed to cut carbon dioxide emissions from cars and light trucks by 25 percent and from sport utility vehicles by 18 percent starting in 2009. The auto industry is challenging those regulations, arguing that such reductions can only come from stricter fuel-economy standards, which are the province of the federal government. The state argues that emission reductions can be achieved in other ways. That case is expected to go to trial on Jan. 30.