Conaway Ranch - a few different views.

As the battle over 17,000 acres in Yolo County heats up, here are a few views from both sides, and a little commentary.
In this corner, the big government types, and their backers.

"The Yolo Board of Supervisors has a long-standing tradition of agricultural and open space preservation. Simply stated, our goal is to protect more than 17,000 acres of prime farmland, water, gas, flood control and wildlife habitat resources for the public benefit.
One final point: We do not answer to investors, but to the people."

You don't answer to investors? The County does not have the money to seize the Conaway Ranch so it is seeking outside financing. Who you ask would loan the County the millions to make the deal happen? The Rumsey band of Wintun Indians. The same tribe, who just two months ago, received a special exemption to build an 18 hole golf course on farmland protected by the Williamson Act.

Does anyone else see a conflict of interest in lending money to the same agency you negotiate with to expand your casino operations.

On the other side, people who don't thing much of imminent domain used in this way. Most likely, conservatives. But I can't be sure.

From my vantage point the county supervisors are executing a plain old "land grab," not for the protection of the assets, but to try to squeeze some type of financial leverage in the hope of fattening the county treasury down the line. Unfortunately, they have no money, and an ultimate cost to the county in legal fees, court fees, appraisal fees, a jury awarded price which might exceed $100 million plus interest for the three to five years of litigation could be very expensive.

Then there are those who just like to get down to the facts.

The Supervisors already have the power to approve or disapprove all development and have the authority to allow changes to general plans and zoning laws; and the owners may not develop the Ranch unless given permission to do so by the county. That can all be done without acquiring the property at a cost of $60 million, which the county doesn't have, and won't interfere with private property rights of the current owners; and won't curtail the public use of some of the land which the owners already sponsor and promote.

You may notice that all of these letters were written to my local paper, the Daily Democrat, or as we call it "the Daily Disappointment"
I thought you may want some local flavor on this topic.