MJimenez6 comment-18502 2009-12-01T17:30:52Z 2009-12-01T17:30:52Z Go Michael!!! I completely agree with your point of view!! I think $400,000 can be put to better use than a useless fence - we had trouble keeping the pool open this summer - this money can be put to better use. AND is it just me, or is this RPNA getting out of control with some issues... MJimenez6 2009-12-01T17:30:52Z Michael Stavros comment-18019 2009-11-20T09:08:17Z 2009-11-20T09:08:17Z UPDATE: We stopped the proposed levee fence! We overwhelmed them with our mass presence and petition signatures. Actually, River Park Neighborhood Association Board president, Jeff Harris started the meeting with an announcement. Apparently he had received a call just a few hours earlier, informing him that the proposed Levee fence did not and could not meet the requirements of the American Disabilities Act, so the proposal is dead. The River Park Neighborhood Association clearly didn't do their homework. They missed the ADA requirements, the Flood Control regulations, the CA State Land Commission rules and most importantly, they totally miscalculated the will of the neighborhood. Tonight we demonstrated our strong opposition to the plan. For the many of us that showed up, the sweet taste of victory came with a cost. They stole our thunder - we were prepared to make a solid case against the levee fence proposal. I am thankful to all who participated in this brief, but successful, grass roots movement. Hopefully, the experience has made us all pay attention just a little bit more. This is what democracy looks like. Michael Stavros 2009-11-20T09:08:17Z Marion Millin comment-17862 2009-11-17T06:24:24Z 2009-11-17T06:24:24Z Good comment. And perhaps the vigilant RP neighborhood watch folks can help monitor the specific problematic behavior. Marion Millin 2009-11-17T06:24:24Z Dale Kooyman comment-17859 2009-11-17T06:11:30Z 2009-11-17T06:11:30Z Those problems listed by fence advocates sound like what central city folks experience regularly from inebriates leaving the bars (maybe some from River Park?) and street people roaming the streets. Have you been told "that's what you get for living along the river parkway and levee"? Central city folks are told, "that's what you get for living in the central city." RP, you have been fortunate to be isolated for so long, now welcome to today's real world. Dale Kooyman 2009-11-17T06:11:30Z rezlab comment-17846 2009-11-17T04:30:47Z 2009-11-17T04:30:47Z I am a River Park resident and a Landscape Architect and agree that this fence would not only visually intrude upon the beauty of the American River Parkway, it really will do little to solve the problems identified. Enforcement of existing laws, rather than spending precious resources upon a visual eyesore is the answer here. Homes in River Park are distinguished by not having bars on their windows. Please don't put bars on the American River Parkway. rezlab 2009-11-17T04:30:47Z Steven Bourasa comment-17841 2009-11-17T01:10:15Z 2009-11-17T01:10:15Z An Ugly Fence is a rotten idea! Steven Bourasa 2009-11-17T01:10:15Z Marion Millin comment-17816 2009-11-16T19:16:08Z 2009-11-16T19:16:08Z The solutions you propose to the notion of a hideous gate on the levee all involve staff funding that the city and county do not have. The park and river access are already technically closed from dusk to dawn. A fence is not the answer. Sacramento needs perpetual funding for maintenance of the American River Parkway. Marion Millin 2009-11-16T19:16:08Z Michael Stavros comment-8718 2009-06-02T23:53:19Z 2009-06-02T23:53:19Z Thanks for all your comments. It appears that many of you agree that this is a bad precedent to set. As I outlined in the article, I think the crime problems (and they are few and minor) can be addressed in a less extreme, reactive way. Steve Cohn is planning to hold a public meeting in response to the growing opposition to the fence proposal. As soon as he sets a date and location, I will post it here. Michael Stavros 2009-06-02T23:53:19Z Jeff Harris comment-8552 2009-05-30T00:27:34Z 2009-05-30T00:27:34Z The writing is good but the factual content is not accurate. The writer is passionate about his position, and that comes across well. There are pros and cons to this proposed project. Get the facts and respond to those! Read this- http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/8525/River_Park_Levee_Fence_Facts Jeff Harris 2009-05-30T00:27:34Z beerzie comment-7885 2009-05-19T22:59:44Z 2009-05-19T22:59:44Z I'm not sure it's fair to assume all the residents of the "parks" - River, McKinley, Land and Curtis -- are snobs just because they are unhappy with the problems in their neighborhoods and are seeking solutions that are, as this fence is, wrongheaded. No matter what neighborhood you live in, you have a right to expect civilized behavior and to have a voice in shaping the solutions that mitigate against bad behavior. Personal attacks do not build consensus, the build, uh, fences. beerzie 2009-05-19T22:59:44Z thsas comment-7804 2009-05-18T21:26:08Z 2009-05-18T21:26:08Z Do we know how the proposed fence is to be funded? thsas 2009-05-18T21:26:08Z waldorfandstatler comment-7801 2009-05-18T19:42:28Z 2009-05-18T19:42:28Z As former teens, we think this idea is ridiculous. A fence getting in the way of a good time? Unless it's covered in barbed wire - no dice! We can jump over it under cover of darkness and let the good times roll. This situation is where NIMBYism and good intentions collide, knocking common sense out of the mix. waldorfandstatler 2009-05-18T19:42:28Z SacFixyBikerHipsterMetroGuy comment-7796 2009-05-18T19:02:32Z 2009-05-18T19:02:32Z Oracle you are right. Just because one lives next a park or river, does not mean they own it and can limit access. The land is public, proximity has nothing to do with it. It is elitist. Regardless, access is not the issue. Current laws need to be enforced. Last time I checked, teen drinking was illegal everywhere. SacFixyBikerHipsterMetroGuy 2009-05-18T19:02:32Z Seth Sandronsky comment-7795 2009-05-18T18:48:50Z 2009-05-18T18:48:50Z Let us be clear about what to call the fencing proposal in MS’s report. The word for taking a public resource and making it private is privatization. It is that simple, folks. Seth Sandronsky 2009-05-18T18:48:50Z Oracle comment-7792 2009-05-18T17:36:52Z 2009-05-18T17:36:52Z Interesting story. Those who live in the "parks" - River, McKinley, Land and Curtis - seem to think they run things in Sacramento and can do whatever they please. Insufferable snobs IMHO. Nice work on this story! Oracle 2009-05-18T17:36:52Z Adam Jeske comment-7788 2009-05-18T14:51:22Z 2009-05-18T14:51:22Z You are so right about this. You cant punish all people for this. And honestly the people who party down at the beach on the weekend is no different than any ocean beach town. People just want to enjoy what is rightfully theres. Just because you own some property somewhere doesnt make you the devine power in that area. There are kids skim boarding poeple walking dogs(myself included) and many other things. But you can bet if they built a fence that wouldnt stop me from enjoying what was never theres to take away in the first place. Adam Jeske 2009-05-18T14:51:22Z David Watts Barton comment-7785 2009-05-18T04:49:09Z 2009-05-18T04:49:09Z This is a really beautifully-reasoned and -written exposition of something I hadn't heard about before. I hope you keep us abreast of how this develops. David Watts Barton 2009-05-18T04:49:09Z William Burg comment-7784 2009-05-18T04:09:05Z 2009-05-18T04:09:05Z Where is this proposal currently? Has the neighborhood association spoken with the city about this, and if so, what was the city's response? William Burg 2009-05-18T04:09:05Z