Voting An "Anti" Out: Case History
Voting an "Anti" Out: Case History
Land Closure Got You Down? Got Those Anti-Motorcyclist-Horsemen-Get-All-The-Breaks Blues? Then Check Out The Mistakes And Successes Of This Enterprising Group In San Mateo County. Mustering 25,000 Votes To Bounce An Unsympathetic Politician Out Of Office Is No Easy Trick— But They Did It!
BOB ATKINSON
LAND CLOSURE IS no longer a problem that we can put off. It is reality. It is widespread. But, it is not a hopeless battle, as the motorcyclists of San Mateo County have discovered.
ITEM: There are an estimated 40,000 motorcyclists in California's San Mateo County.
ITEM: In the past six years, motorcyclists have actively campaigned to obtain a county riding area, but have succeeded in securing zero miles of trails and facilities for their use.
ITEM: There are approximately 1500 horses in San Mateo County.
ITEM: San Mateo County maintains 115 miles of trails for horsemen. In addition, plans have been approved tor an additional 24b miles of horsetrails and 22 rest stops. Total existing and proposed trails equals 361 miles.
ITEM: It is against the law for motorcyclists to use these trails which could cost taxpayers as much as $984,000, but not less than $615,000. The average trail construction cost is $2500 to $4000 per mile for average terrain. Rest stops cost S37,000 each, for a total of $814,000. Minimum grand total — $1.429,000.
Shouldn't county recreational facilities be constructed and maintained to suit the recreational needs of the people on a population per sport basis?
Although several motorcycle park proposals have been turned down, other private or special interest groups’ use of public land is not opposed.
ITEM: Of the 18,099 acres of public land under the
jurisdiction of the Marin Municipal Water District, 601 2 acres are leased to private clubs for recreational purposes. Members of these private clubs participate in varying forms of sport including camping, golfing, and gun club activities. Rent ranges from $350 a year for 850 acres to $625 a year for 500 acres.
ITEM: There are two underpasses which were installed by the State of California and San Mateo County to allow horseback riders and pedestrians to cross under the Junipero Serra Freeway. One is located .just north of the Woodside Road and the other is at Walsh Road and the Junipero Serra Freeway (Highway 280). Although these are public facilities that cost taxpayers a total of $60,000, both are inaccessible to the public. One is located on private property and the entrance to the other is blocked by locked gates. Only members of certain horse clubs have keys and/or access privileges.
Obviously, influential people have more than one special interest. And, obviously, one cannot generalize and say that all
horsemen are bad, even though this recreational facility problem looks like a horsemen vs. motorcyclists conflict on the surface.
“When we speak of horsemen,” says San Mateo County Motorcycle Association spokesman Allen Bygdnes, “we’re not talking about all horsemen. An awful lot of them are real decent people. But, a very small minority are extremely wealthy. They operate differently than you and 1 would operate. They can effectively make large contributions to politicians. But, we (motorcyclists) can offer something that these politicians desperately want, and that’s votes!”
14-YEAR INCUMBENT DEFEATED
Arlen Gregorio, a 39-year-old assistant city attorney in San Bruno, a small town on the north end of the county, defeated 14-year incumbent State Assemblyman Carl A. Britschgi in his bid for state senator by 9800 votes.
Britschgi, thought by many to be a shoe-in candidate, had a consistent anti-motorcycle voting record. Much of the credit for his defeat must go to the San Mateo County Motorcycle Association.
Sound incredible? Well it is when you realize that this motorcycle association is run by a group ot tive individuals elected by representatives of all county motorcycle clubs, county dealers, and all interested motorcyclists.
These five men, aided by those who wished to donate time, mailed and distributed 40,000 political pamphlets to motorcyclists in the county two days before the election. The pamphlet endorsed Gregorio and stated that fte was willing to work to correct the injustice dealt cyclists.
As for Britschgi, the pamphlet stated that “as your assemblyman, Carl Britschgi wrote and passed a law stopping you and 40,000 other cyclists from using over l 50 miles of public trails in San Mateo County . . . and thousands of miles of trails throughout the State of California.”
Naturally, the San Mateo County Motorcycle Association cannot take full credit for the victory. Other groups were involved. But, because an estimated 90 percent of the people vote either Republican or Democrat consistently, and since motorcyclists are credited with providing approximately 25,000 votes for Gregorio, it is obvious that the cyclists’ vote was instrumental in swinging this election in favor ot a candidate who had never before held public office.
If further proof of the power of organized voting is needed, two other San Mateo County Motorcycle Association-backed candidates, Leo Ryan and Dixon Arnett, gained state assembly seats.
In about a year, three supervisory positions will be open in the county, and you can bet that the motorcyclists will back candidates sympathetic to their cause. With this, their strategy becomes clear.
Richard Bygdnes, San Mateo County Motorcycle Association member, puts it this way, “Right now, it’s not politically wise, if you’re an elected official, to be on the motorcyclists’ side. It is wise to be on the horsemen’s or conservationists’ side. So we never will, I don’t think, make small strides. When we get to the point where we have an equal balance of power, then it will be a cascading effect. We’ll really get someplace. But, until it’s politically beneficial to help us, we’ll get nothing.”
RESULTS SANS PUBLIC DONATIONS
What is even more impressive is the fact that they did not ask the public to donate money in the name of securing land. A combination motorcycle race and association picnic was held, with dealer and manufacturer cooperation. It yielded a $1500 profit over all expenses, including the mailing and printing of political pamphlets.
Door prizes were featured, and tickets were sold for two months prior to the activity. Each dealer in the county and two distributors donated money for gift certificates. The grand prize was a $1000 gift certificate, redeemable at any participating dealer. Furthermore, some manufacturers were willing to reduce dealer cost on the machine of the winner’s choice, if the winner elected to choose a motorcycle. Thus, the association’s profit was increased.
Just as people are reluctant to donate money to unknown groups, only two or three percent will write letters to politicians when requested. People will sign petitions, but politicians don’t seem to take either of these methods of expressing public sentiment too seriously. “Politicians,” says Richard Bygdnes, “know that motorcyclists are a disorganized mob.” And, without organization, they pose little threat during an election.
Despite their recent successes, the San Mateo County Motorcycle Association began, like most groups, by writing letters and submitting petitions to the five members of the Parks and Recreation Committee-one of the various departments that advises the five-man County Board of Supervisors.
IT ALL BEGAN WITH A SURVEY
In May 1968, at the request of the Parks and Recreation Department, a survey was conducted. The actual questionaire asked the public whether or not they would use an interconnecting trail system with three parking areas. 3457 cards were completed in favor of a motorcycle trail system in San Mateo County. Three individuals were against the proposal.
It was also determined that 68 percent would use the trails 4 times per month, 15 percent would use trails twice a month, 13 percent would occasionally ride on trails, and 4 percent would never use them.
In addition, county officials wanted motorcyclists to fill out a rather extensive questionaire. It asked each person for the estimated value of his equipment (possible tax information), and queried about possible membership dues, insurance costs, and an additional money bond.
PLAN ONE, FAILURE ONE
Based on the public’s response, and encouraged by the apparent concern of the Parks and Recreation Department, Allen Bygdnes made some recommendations to Ralph H. Shaw, Director of Parks and Recreation for San Mateo County.
First of all, he suggested a reapportionment of existing county trails based on the number of participants in various trail activities.
Secondly, he asked for a readjustment of the membership of the trails committee itself so that its members would reflect the proportions of the various trail users.
Concerning the trail system, Allen Bygdnes recommended arranging the trails so that they would link the north, south, and central portions of the county. Plan one also called for three parking areas and the enforcement of a muffler/spark
arrester law. Although Allen Bydgnes and other concerned cyclists met with Shaw no less than 21 times, no action was taken.
CYCLISTS ON TRAILS COMMITTEE
Progress, however, was made. In September of 1968, two motorcyclists, Allen Bygdnes and Ray Abrams, a co-owner of A&A Motors in Redwood City, were appointed to the Trails Committee.
The Trails Committee is an official advisory subcommittee of the Parks and Recreation Department. Naturally, the purpose of this subcommittee, and the Parks and Recreations Department itself, is to provide recreational facilities for all of the people of San Mateo County.
The Abrams/Bygdnes appointment is a seemingly significant step in obtaining a riding area for cyclists, especially considering the current distribution of committee member interests. The 17-member Trails Committee is composed of 10 horsemen, two Sierra Club members, two motorcyclists, one Boy Scout representative, and two new members who have not expressed their recreational interests.
Since two motorcyclists were appointed, one is able to make a motion to the committee, and the other can second it. This is exactly what Abrams and Bygdnes did. But, when these proposals came to a vote, they were obviously at a disadvantage.
200 CYCLISTS SHOW CONCERN
Frustrated by lack of progress in the Trails Committee, Abrams, Allen Bygdnes, and attorney Dan Clapp went directly to the County Board of Supervisors and requested the board to provide motorcycle facilities for the county’s 40,000 motorcyclists.
The date was March 24, 1970. All of the parking places surrounding the county’s Hall of Justice were filled with motorcycles! More than 350 cyclists crowded into the supervisors’ chambers to hear Clapp’s argument that motorcyclists paid $650,000 in county taxes in 1969 while horsemen paid only $55,000. Said Clapp, “We pay 10 times as much and yet get nothing. We are tired of four and a half years of indifference.”
But this display accomplished nothing. Facts were referred to the County Manager for review.
EQUAL REPRESENTATION DEMANDED
At one of the Trail Committee meetings, Allen Bygdnes discovered that it is the policy of the Trails Committee to drop members who have acquired three unexcused absences during one year.
Study of the committee’s official attendance report re-
vealed that five members should have been dropped for missing meetings.
At the July 15, 1970 meeting, Charles Vogel. Chairman of the Trails Committee, announced that he was resigning because of a recent appointment to the Pacific Coast Trail Committee, which is constructing 2400 miles of federal horse trails. Vogel, also an officer of the State Horsemen’s Association, felt he “could no longer handle all assignments without doing injustice to one or the other.”
Because Vogel’s resignation and the attendance rule would create six vacancies in the committee, Allen Bygdnes submitted a motion to appoint six motorcyclists to the Trails Committee to fill the vacancies.
KICKED OFF COMMITTEE
On July 28. 1970, just 13 days after the Bygdnes request to appoint motorcyclists to the Trails Committee in place of those who violated the attendance rule, Allen Bygdnes and Ray Abrams were officially dismissed from the Trails Committee.
The official reason for dismissal was the Abrams/Bygdnes/ Clapp appearance before the County Board of Supervisors without Trails Committee approval. Curiously, this occurred almost three months prior to dismissal. Furthermore, there was no mention of dismissal during this interim period.
FAILURE FOUR
Following their dismissal, motorcyclists were informed that they would have to deal directly with the Board of Supervisors in all requests for recreational motorcycle tacilities.
Logically speaking, San Mateo County’s most recent motorcyclist proposal, the Hosking motorcycle park plan, should be a reality. Instead, it is the fourth cycle facility failure.
In the first place, the Hosking site is located within the area west of Skyline Blvd. and south of the Half Moon Bay road-an area which the county has recently designated for motorcycle park use.
Ultimately, this plan would have provided the county with a completely equipped park, including roads and trails extending from Skyline Blvd. to Portola State Park, with absolutely no cost to taxpayers.
SO WHAT WAS THE PLAN?
1. Allen Hosking made an agreement with a company headed by Carl T. Olson to lease or purchase 1560 acres of his property.
2. All acreage was to be deeded to San Mateo County, subject to deeds of trust.
3. All county motorcyclists would be voluntarily assessed $10 per year until the county tax assessor could provide such a tax. One dollar would be kept by the county to cover the cost of collection. The remaining $9 would be turned over to Olson to provide a profit, cover operating costs, and finance improvements.
4. In approximately 10 years, after the land and all improvements were paid for, all 1 560 acres including improvements would be turned over to San Mateo County “to use as they will.”
This request was denied by the County Planning Commission, and 40,000 cyclists still lack a place to ride!
5 YEARS, ZERO RESULTS
As noted earlier, the San Mateo County Motorcycle Association has been working for over five years to obtain county recreational facilities. Letters have been written. Petitions have been signed. Proposals have been made.
County officials have responded with a mere two page report, the findings of which represent almost 300 man years of work.
This report is not a pure research project, as its title “Motorcycle Research by the Department of Parks and Recreation, San Mateo County” suggests. Rather, it is a 10 paragraph, chronological summation of past motorcyclist proposals. No solutions are offered and it is easy to see why some motorcyclists believe that county officials are “dragging their feet.”
Specifically, the report deals with the following: Discussions, but no agreements with two property owners concerning leasing property; two land offers by a ranch owner that motorcycle representatives opposed because of unsuitable terrain; two letters of introduction to lumber companies that achieved no results; and four proposals for commercial operations that have not been approved by the county.
In short, what little “research” this report contains is worthless!
ANSWER: ORGANIZED VOTING
In order to get a proposal passed by county, city, or state government, it is necessary to have elected officials that are sympathetic to the cause at hand.
Today, in San Mateo County, organized voting is producing desirable results. Those in government who have repeatedly voted against motorcycle facilities are systematically being voted out of office. Because of this, San Mateo County motorcyclists will have a county-operated motorcycle facility in the forseeable future.
But more important, a successful political pressure group, like the San Mateo County Motorcycle Association, can be formed in any city or county in this country.
All it takes is a small group-say a half dozen guysrcapable of organizing a political mailing stating the voting records of various elected officials shortly before an election.
Land closure is widespread, but it need not be so. [Ö]
