Might be a good idea to discuss what BRT is. Many get hung up on trains which of course urbanists love; however, trains take so much time to implement as we know with High Speed Rail and SMART. But BRT can be rolled out much quicker AND buses can even be two stories (think England) and have wifi etc.

Sonoma County's efforts at sustainability are 50% window dressing until we deal with vehicle emissions.

In the second sentence change “include” to “prioritize”. Those of us who ride road bikes and would like to make non-motorized transportation our primary mode are clear: motor vehicles (especially gas-powered) still come first in Sonoma County. Projects like the Santa Rosa Southeast Greenway, the SMART Trail, the Russian River Trail, a Class I trail along the Highway 12 corridor to Sonoma, Class II bike lanes (buffered where possible) on all key streets/roads that cross through large parts of a town or are major connections between Townsend Class III designations on main neighborhood street need to come FIRST. Otherwise, existing unsafe conditions will discourage families and inexperienced riders from leaving their cars at home for the short drives that create heavy emissions or getting on a person-powered vehicle just for the healthy joy of it.

Let's make EV charging stations easy to access.

Following Petaluma's permanent ban on new gas stations, let's create a plan for the development of widely distributed and easily accessible EV charging stations. Let's consider what it might mean to allow a homeowner to place a charging station on their home's frontage (on the street, rather than in the garage or on the driveway). Let's encourage private/public partnerships to build charging hubs. Church parking lots are busy a half day/week on Sundays. Why not fund solar installations and charging stations at all those underutilized lots?

Let's get serious about enabling travel by bike. Today I am afraid to ride on most streets (in Petaluma). We need class I or class IV bike lanes (https://www.urbanchat.org/definitions.html#B), no excuses. They must be contiguous and not a negotiation of tradeoffs in new developments. In Amsterdam, one of the "big" problems for the city is illegal bicycle parking. Wouldn't it be great to have that problem?

There must be a coherent PLAN for the development of bicycle pathways, not start and stop access that puts all but the most intrepid bicyclist in danger. This is where age-friendly practices are a good litmus test. Would you let your 80 year-old-mother or 8-year-old grandson use the bikeway?