Incumbents can’t convince some that NH 2020 is over |

Incumbents can’t convince some that NH 2020 is over

NH 2020, the empty box, is it dead, postponed, or is there something else going on?

Sometimes in politics perceived reality and reality turn out to be absolute opposites.

Election time is coming for two of our supervisors, Elizabeth Martin and Bruce Conklin. Both of these people are major supporters of NH 2020 and will most likely vote for a renamed initiative if they are reelected.

Ninety percent of NH 2020 is finished. SBC employees are working hard to complete the rest; CAC groups are still meeting and making recommendations. SBC still has a huge office expansion in the works. Also, Supervisor Martin has never said NH 2020 was stopped, only that it was given a deadline of July 31, 2002 to be finished. Rumors abound that large pieces of NH 2020 will be dropped into the general plan with no scientific peer review. So why all the press releases implying that NH 2020 is dead?

Why indeed: Moore Methods, a polling company who has done work for the Sierra Club, Sierra Business Council and Green Belt Alliance found that 73 percent of those polled think California has enough laws on the books to regulate and manage the state’s forest.

More importantly is that NH 2020 had an unfavorable score of 45 percent.

This is quite amazing considering the huge pile of urban environmental dollars that have been spent to sell NH 2020 to the masses. The poll numbers are mostly likely the primary reason for the postponement of NH 2020. The re-election of Conklin and Martin is paramount to the implantation of an NH 2020 type of regulatory bureaucracy.

Also, factor in that the board of four supervisors will be able to cancel the up or down vote on NH 2020, effectively circumventing us voters who petitioned for the chance to vote on this.

I don’t believe Bruce Conklin or Elizabeth Martin have changed their basic position on NH 2020 or the assault on rural property owners. I would like to remind them at this time that attempts at maintaining plausible deniability is not the same as being honest with us voters of Nevada County.

Jim Stiles


Support Local Journalism

Support Local Journalism

Readers around Grass Valley and Nevada County make The Union’s work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.

Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.

Your donation will help us continue to cover COVID-19 and our other vital local news.


Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.

User Legend: iconModerator iconTrusted User