It has become a tradition with me to go with my friends to see the Blue Angels fly over San Francisco at the pinnacle of Fleet Week. This year I stood on a rooftop taking in the spectacular views of the Golden Gate Bridge and the city itself. The sight of the Blue Angels flying above me never seems to get old. The maneuvers, the speed and the beauty of these planes are really something to marvel at.
As with anything that is cool, different or memorable, I often take it in and then ask the question, “Why can’t WE have something like this?” Then that glass that is brimming full tips over and spills out to half empty and the event becomes clearly a case of the haves (what San Franciscans have) and the have-nots (what San Joseans haven’t got).
I know the Blue Angels began as a flight demonstration team to showcase Naval aviation at the end of World War II and they have been flying since 1946. The Blue Angels Air Show in San Francisco has become a tradition since the early 80s, barring one or two years they didn’t fly during Fleet Week. According to the Blue Angels themselves, the Department of Defense receives hundreds of requests to hold air shows featuring the Navy Blue Angels every year, and the Blue Angels’ Events Coordinator, along with Navy and Department of Defense officials, meet at a conference in Washington, D. C. for final considerations and to set the schedule. The Blue Angels fly over many cities, not just the world class ones, so why not San Jose?
In the months leading up to the show in San Francisco, there have been groups fighting to end Fleet Week and the Blue Angels show itself. Anti-war protestors want it to be stopped, and others are fearful for the safety of those on the ground in light of a crash in South Carolina earlier this year. Some people cite noise and air pollution as reasons to stop the show. The Board of Supervisors decided to keep the Blue Angels in San Francisco for another year, but barely. So what happens if this comes up again next year? Can we take it from them?
Keep in mind that this is not all about taking something that belongs to San Francisco and slapping our name one it, but, rather, finding events to call our own. I don’t think it’s very realistic that they would choose to fly over the mini-malls of San Jose instead, but let’s be opportunistic. Though we have argued the merits of the Grand Prix on this site ad nauseam, at least it was an attempt to make an event a centerpiece of the city and to put us on the map. We need more forward thinkers on the council who will try to bring events here. Think “out of the box” and start creating more traditions—and ones that don’t take millions of dollars out of our city’s pocket. We need our own Blue Angels Air Show, or our own celebrations that make San Jose a destination, not just the “Have-Not City South of San Francisco.”
Yeah, SG, I used to watch it when it was @ Moffett up at Ridge Winery with a picnic and some good Zins—your kinda party.
Some people just need something to complain about. I think its a great tradition and would welcome something like that in the South Bay.
This is such a pathetic post. There are many things which SJ has that SF does not, but in the end, the only deciding factor is cachet. Living in a famous city tells you that it’s a great city. Living in San Jose carries with it the notion that you’re a nobody. Of course, very little of this is based on anything but name recognition. Where is the Body Worlds exhibit? San Jose, and BART riders see the ads every day. Where is the world’s game coming to next year? The Earthquakes will be in San Jose. Let San Francisco have what they have and stop aspiring to be them. Becoming great is much different than becoming a clone.
S.G.:
Can’t have fleet week here, the ships will get stuck in Alviso.
Speaking of getting stuck…the Chronicle reported that BART will need around $100 million a year for the next 25 years to meet a $2.4 billion funding gap for long-range capital projects. “BART’s long-term capital needs, excluding earthquake safety programs and system expansion, total nearly $8.5 billion. The agency faces a $2.4 billion shortfall.”
9/28/07
Read that again…“excluding…system expansion.”!!! Why isn’t anyone talking about this?
Pete Campbell
Pete #5:
There has been much written about the shortcomings of BART and why the extension to San Jose is a Bad Idea. You can start reading up by checking the following websites:
http://www.vtaridersunion.org/bartsjx/
http://vtawatch.blogspot.com/
http://www.bayrailalliance.org/caltrain_metro_east
http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=152
#5
Even more important, why were we ever talking about bringing BART to San Jose via the East side of the Bay in the first place?
That was just stupid. Apparently. stupidity was in abundance in Ron Gonzale’s head.
Now BART to San Jose between Frisco and San Jose has promise, and probably should be built.
BART to San Jose is also BART to East Bay
Ask yourself why is Silicon Valley Leadership Group which has done little for us unless they greatly benefit first pushing for BART to East Bay?
What they are not telling you is Silicon Valley corporations want easy access to East Bay’s cheaper land for both lower cost employee housing and lower cost business locations that their senior executives can go to by BART
Santa Clara County taxpayers will pay billions so more high tech jobs can leave San Jose and valley to go to East Bay business campuses thanks to BART to East Bay
Have BART connect Fremont to downtown San Jose. Then there could a western spur connecting to San Jose Airport and on to the city of Santa Clara. Then tunnel under the Santa Cruz Mountains and the Pacific Ocean so it could connect to the Tokyo Subway System. From there it could veer towards Beijing, China and Bangalore, India. After that it could loop back to Daly City, CA and on to San Francisco to re-fuel with LSD.
I have lived in SF for 16 years and have seen the Blue Angels perform about 20 times (they perform twice during Fleet Week).
This year, I have had serious concerns about the Blue Angels flying over SF. With me, this is not about being anti-war or anti-military, rather pro-safety.
Both Mayor Gavin Newsom and Senator Diane Fienstein commented on Saturday they were not on the Anti-miliatary bandwagon and seemed to steer all the Blue Angel opposition towards the anti-military extremists.
What concerns me is that there was virtually no mention of the South Carolina incident and they seemed to steer all the opposition towards so-called anti-military only.
As for me, I’ve enjoyed watching the Blue Angels over the years, but unlike many others, I view the South Carolina incident very seriously.
Let’s take things into perspective.
1) The South Carolina crash occured less than six months before fleet week – April 21, 2007.
2) If this can occur in South Carolina, it can occur anywhere, including San Francisco.
The changes of a plane crashing in San Francisco, which many will argue are small, but it’s not zero percent. Even if it is a small chance, it’s not a chance I’m willing to take.
A Blue Angel crashing in San Francisco could potentially have damages over several hundred million dollars, possibly exceeding $1 Billion depending upon the location. Also, the potential of hundreds of deaths if it doesn’t crash in an open field.
Please don’t classify anyone who opposes the Blue Angels in San Francisco as “Anti-War” or “Anti-Military” simply because they see potential catastrophic consequences of a crash in our area.
The risk is there and it is real.
I did not notice that this year’s show was far more conservative when compared to those of the previous decade. The planes were not flying as close togther, the head-ons seemed slower and farther apart, and some of the more daring maneuvers I recall from the past seem to have been eliminated.
Pete,
VTA’s BART to San Jose project is not BART’s project per VTA-BART agreement
VTA has complete construction and financial responsibility not BART plus once BART is built VTA is required to pay millions to VTA % of BART yearly operations of entire BART system
What is this undisclosed VTA cost?
1 BART Board knows how fake BART To San Jose projected passengers and revenues are and BART will require required tens millions per year operating losses or $1-2 billion before it is profitable VTA’s Light Rail took 20 years to get to orginal highly inflated revenue and passengers numbers
2 BART construction costs are under estimated by $3-5 billion ( Not $4-5 billion years old estimate but $7-10 billion depending on when built )
3 VTA is currently short $3 billion in operating expenses that recent VTA consultants report disclosed but Mercury and politicians are ignoring
VTA needs additional $7 – 10 billion they are not telling you about plus disclosed $4 – 5 billion cost not fully funded
VTA and politicians have over estimating passenger and revenue numbers and under estimated construction costs which is common on public transit projects to get voter approval
Local Politicians will later go to public with sad faces and ask for more transit taxes to bail out mismanaged politician run public transit while blaming former politicians and economic conditions for purposeful wrong estimates
Measure A backers have tried to pass more transit sales taxes and failed but will try again with another BART sales tax in 2008
Many BART opponents are not against public transit but against more poorly planned VTA public transit projects that will bankrupt VTA when we need improved transit to / from work, homes, airport and shopping inside Santa Clara County
I loved the Blue Angels at Moffett! It’s what inspired me to enlist in the Navy back in the late 80’s (sure miss those air shows). If not San Jose, could we bring the Blue Angels and air shows back to Moffett field? In other non-related news, it appears the Motif Lounge in SoFa was officially baptised this weekend as a San Jose nightspot….huge brawl early Sunday that required a police cavalry response (Merc., 10/9). This is a shame! Sal Pizarro described Motif a couple of weeks back as being “a Santana Row-type establishment in downtown San Jose.” Unfortunately, it might wind up being just another downtown San Jose-type establishment in downtown San Jose. Again, such a shame!
Back in the Good Olde Days, the Blues used to perform at an annual airshow at Moffett Field, back when that facility was a Navy base. The show was free, and there were lots of aircraft on display. For more information, check with the Moffett Field Historical Society’s Moffett Field Museum:
http://www.moffettfieldmuseum.org/
What was Club Motif in it’s prior life? Is this a new club, or just a renamed club?
In either event, it still seems to attract the type of folks we don’t need.
Does Scott Kneis spend any time dowtown on weekend nights after 11:00 p.m.? Does he know what he’s pushing on us?
Take a few moments to research just how the Blue Angels select their venues. San Jose won’t be seeing them for a quite a while
Some day, it will happen. Some day, we’ll quit understanding ourselves via what newspapers and tv shows highlight, and rather understand ourselves by what it’s really like to live here. Schools. Traffic. Livability. Sustainability. Low Crime Rates. High employment rates. Vibrant small businesses. And the artistry of the millions of small things that make a city great, not the pr-driven big things that cost money and get newspaper headlines.
I’d vote for 60 miles of trails in a flash before 60 Seconds of Blue Angels.
Mercury today – VTA can seek smaller tax hike
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed legislation Wednesday enabling the Valley Transportation Authority to put a one-eighth-of-a-cent sales tax measure on the ballot next year, and perhaps determine whether BART to San Jose is ever built.
Voters rejected a county-sponsored tax in 2006 calling for a half-cent hike, and BART supporters believe a smaller increase might be easier to get voter approval.
“After all the discussion we have had for the last seven years about whether BART is going to happen or not, what better way than to put it out to voters,” said Supervisor Liz Kniss, a VTA board member.
“Now we’ll see whether we really have public support. With a project of this size, it’s important to know if the public is behind it.”
VTA projections have shown the agency needs the equivalent of an additional quarter-cent sales tax – about $80 million annually – to fill a $3 billion gap in its 30-year financial plan
– a plan General Manager Michael Burns said recently that the VTA will reconsider, perhaps eliminating some transit projects promised voters.
The VTA’s current long-range funding plan relies in part on collecting $750 million in federal money for the $4.7 billion BART extension to Silicon Valley.
But federal officials have said the funds can’t be approved until VTA demonstrates it has enough money to operate BART.
The reason ridership on light rail has gone up is because there are more options – for example, you now can go from Campbell to Mountain View. BART will only benefit those who commute to the east bay – if you want to go to SF, it makes more sense to take Caltrain. I suggest we table BART for now and find a way to bypass the downtown bottleneck and a way of connecting to the airport by either extending light rail or putting in the people mover promised in Measure A. New York City is adding a new subway line so that more people have access to public transportation. That should be our goal.
I wouldn’t vote for anything that will be run by the overpaid and inept crowd at VTA. Until VTA demonstrates a consistent ability to run buses and trolleys properly, giving them billions for BART makes no sense at all.
Single Girl
Why not just move to San Francisco and leave San Jose behind.
#18 I doubt if I’d vote for it even if VTA was a stellular entity. Think the route through downtown is questionable and needs more thought. At this point, I can’t wait to cast my ballot!