Cassie DeYoung At Pro-Bill Lockyer, Anti-241 Completion Rally

Lats Friday, Joan Irvine Smith (wealthy heiress, environmental activist and hard-core anti-241 opponent) and Richard O'Neill (wealthy developer and former California Democratic Party chairman)
hosted a reception for Attorney General Bill Lockyer, who is running for Treasurer.

While billed as a reception honoring Lockyer, judging by the roster of speakers it was more like an anti-Foothill South rally. Bill Lockyer recounted his efforts to litigate the 241 completion to death. Lockyer was followed by Governor Schwarzenegger's brother-in-law Bobby Shriver and Natural Resources Defense Council senior attorney Joel Reynolds -- both of whom are dedicated to killing the completion of the 241 toll road.

According to my source, some of those in attendance were actually Foothill South supporters who were under the impression the event was going to be what it was billed as: a Lockyer reception.

Among those in attendance at this event for the Democratic Treasurer nominee was Cassie DeYoung, who two nights before had been a guest speaker at the Laguna Woods Democratic Club along with Democratic Controller nominee John Chiang.

Now, what was Cassie DeYoung doing at a Bill Lockyer/anti-Foothill South rally?

Remember, Cassie DeYoung is on record as supporting completion of the 241 toll road (albeit on the condition that TCA and the enviros find a mutually agreeable consultant to do another EIR). Does her attendance at this anti-241 rally signal a change in position?

Or was Republican DeYoung one of those who went thinking it was a reception to honor the Democratic nominee for state Treasurer?

Neither possibility is comforting to 5th District voters who are pro-241 completion, Republican -- or both.

Comments

[Traffic Relief delayed is traffic relief denied]

I doubt many voters in the fabulous fifth district would appreciate Ms. DeYoung's suggestion that we delay building this needed traffic relief project in order to conduct yet another EIR.

This project has been on the plans since 1981... A quarter century of analysis is long enough... Time to pave!

[One Who Knows]

Poor Cassie.

If she had attended an event honoring Claude Parish (Lockyer's nominal GOP opponent) you would have criticized her for wasting her time with such a loser!

She just can't win.

[Anything but]

"Poor" is not an adjective I would put in front of Cassie's name :)

[Jubal]

She just can't win.

Let's hope so.

[Alex Brant-Zawadzki]

Traffic relief? You're JOKING, right? Toll roads increase demand for traffic. Land value rises near interchanges because developers know that consumers (who can afford toll roads) can get to those places quickly and easily - toll roads do not carry their weight traffic-wise as they are less congested. Thus, office-blocks, apartment towers, and commercial zones spring up along the toll roads. Many people drive to and from these destinations, not to mention the additional population brought in by housing developments the roads induce.
Long story short, the roads bring many, many more drivers into the road system, and those people don't spend all their time on the toll roads. They have to get to the roads, they have to get from the roads, they drive wherever they please (it IS the car culture after all, isn't it?)

This is not a traffic relief option. This is in NO WAY a traffic relief option. So what else have you got, Little Miss I'm-So-Confident-In-My-Position-I-Post-Anonymously?

[And your answer is?]

You DO know that 14,000 homes are planned for Rancho Mission Viejo, right? Those have been approved and are going in whether Foothill-South is there or not.

So explain again how roads cause growth?

The toll roads take about a quarter-million trips per day off the freeways and city streets... Sounds like traffic relief to me!

I love your argument that we can't build toll roads because it will encourage offices and commercial buildings (i.e. a strong economy). We certainly can't have options that allow folks to get to those places "quickly and easily" to borrow your phrase.

I believe that if you give folks a choice between the freeway and the toll road, there will be some that take the toll road and save a significant amount of time and some that will take the freeway, but will still save time because of those drivers who take the toll road.

You act like if Foothill-South isn't built, you'll have less people using the freeway. Or if Foothill-South is built, you'll have more drivers. What you fail to grasp is that the number of drivers will continue to increase whether you deal with the situation or not.

So what is your traffic relief solution? And be serious... I say build Foothill-South and give commuters an option. What say you?

[Alex Brant-Zawadzki]

No, I act like Foothill-South is not a form of traffic relief. That is the particular lie I am trying to debunk today, and that is what my information is focused on.
And saying Foothill-South is an OPTION for traffic relief is like saying methadone is an OPTION for heroin relief. It might take the sting away, but it just doesn't quite do the job, does it?

[And your answer is?]

Of course it does the job! The toll roads save me about an hour per day (30 minutes each way). That's an hour more per day I spend with my family. An hour of my time is worth more than the few dollars I pay in tolls each day.

But you never answered my question... What is your traffic relief solution?

[Alex Brant-Zawadzki]

And you never explained why you're anonymous

Don't worry, I understand.

I wouldn't want to be associated with supporting the toll roads either.

Nothin' but love for your cowardly behind.
With grudging respect
Alex

Why the heck is Dick Oniell supporting that idiot? Dick is the one that is building all of those homes down there. Why the heck would he support someone that opposed his major transportation effort?

[Alex Brant-Zawadzki]

Gosh, why would Dick O'Neill oppose the Foothill-South (241) Toll Road extension?

Mybe because the toll road would run straight through the Donna O'Neill Land Conservancy.

Donna O'Neill. You know ... the late Mrs. Dick O'Neill?