The protestors have left for the time being and quiet has returned to the plaza of the smoking fountains at San Jose City Hall. How long the peace will last is an open question. It is far too early to discern the answer. But one thing is clear: the primary heroes in the enterprise are evident to all. First and foremost is Sam Liccardo, the District 3 council member who seized the reins and achieved a resolution, snatching stalemate from the jaws of defeat. Then there is Mayor Chuck Reed, who dug the cement out from around the feet of many in City Hall and gave his approval to the agreement that ended the hunger strike of the redoubtable Ly Tong. Vice Mayor Dave Cortese is one who clearly knew that ending this protest, for whatever reason, was the correct course.
On the District 7 front, somewhat predictably, Madison Nguyen was unable to play any role in the concluding act of this unfortunate struggle. Her plight is uncomfortable to see, but the damage to her stature and future is a sad prospect that no one can take any satisfaction in. It is one of the foreseeable consequences of the Little Saigon affair that was otherwise so totally unpredictable.
And on the buffeted Coyote Valley front, the Coyote Housing Group has apparently raised the white flag. They cited economic uncertainty, market forces and expensive planning delays as having made the project impossible to pursue. What they left out was the simple fact that political miscalculation and terminal denseness in planning was the larger reason. They cozied up to the former mayor in a sycophantic way: strike one. They voted with their money in the mayor’s race: strike two. They hoped their questionable plan and its densities, combined with enough sweet talk to the neighbors, church groups and Joe Citizens would get them the permits: strike three and you’re out. Certain members, like the canny Steve Schott, understood the insanity of the group’s approach but could not talk any sense into them.
Let us conclude with the immortal valedictory of Councilman Forrest Williams: “Of course I am disappointed, we have done so much work.” Of such work are the financial crises of San Jose made, and Mr. Williams has been a prime cheerleader for such past blunders. Ave atque vale.
Tom, citing Chuck Reed as a “hero” in the debacle that was (and is) Little Saigon really damages your credibility here. He showed absolutely no interest in discussion and compromise until he was effectively blackmailed (BTW, next time I want something from the city, I’ll know to head downtown and go on a hunger strike). I voted for Mayor Reed but I won’t make that mistake again.
I agree with Dave #2—Chuck was 3 1/2 months late getting dressed for the dance. Not as dense as Madison, but about as effective as Forrest until he was bailed out by colleagues who took control of a ridiculous situation. He needs to do a lot of shoring up if he wants four more years.
The best news in years. Coytote Valley was such a mistake from the beginning during the Mayor Hayes administration. Luckily, Mayor McEnery was elected and Coyote Valley was done from that time, even with the tremendous push from developers over the past 20 years and a corrupt administration in the Mayor Gonzo years.
It’s still disgusting to hear that economic outlooks, not lessons learned about sprawl and its inefficiencies, are what derailed the Coyote plans. I can’t believe people are so dumb in 2008 that it would even be considered, building more McMansions on cul de sacs where everything is accessible only by car. This isn’t Stockton or Los Banos.
Whatever, we’ll take the win.
Mayor Reed and the City Council should never got involved on voting on this issue. Madison should have handeled the matter in a town meeting within he own district.
Excellent news that CV development has a reprieve but I agree with #5 that it has nothing to do with responsible behavior on the part of developers—that sort of thing is foreign to them—and everything to do with economics.
I also agree with the above posts that Reed didn’t play a key role in the LS resolution. That was Sam’s thing and I think he’s clearly demonstrating that he can lead, something Reed is pathetically incapable of doing. Reed’s strict midwestern roots prevented him from entertaining any sort of compromise. Doesn’t he realize that compromise goes with the territory? I held my nose when I voted for him—given the alternative, but the last thing I want is 4 additonal years of his inept leadership. I sure hope Sam throws his hat into the ring when the time comes and brings a more progressive atmosphere to the business of running the nation’s 10th largest city.
All Reed needs to complete the current picture at City Hall is a black habit and a ruler.
I agree completely with #6 #3 and the other posts about the soccer moms in this town and the suburban types around here.
I couldn’t agree more with #5 when he laments Reed’s bad hair. How in the world will San Jose ever rise above being a cowtown when we have a mayor with bad hair?
And #9, don’t get me started about that pile on the plaza!
Everybody lost in the Little Saigon “Affair,” except those of us who hold the position that the city governmentt should not subsidize extracurricular activities such as monuments to particular interests groups or ethnic camps. All that ever had to be done was for one store owner to paint the side of one of their buildings, welcoming everyone to…(fill in the blank).
What struck me about this sad affair, was how willing everyone was to let outside stakeholders weigh in on this issue. How many of those protestors lived and/or worked in San Jose? When/Why does a “community” (without boundaries) get to determine/dictate what goes on in a city (with boundaries)? Do we get to apply this calculus to other regional issues? If so, perhaps the cities in our surrounding “community” should do more to deliver social services such as affordable housing, traffic congestion, and the like.
Pete Campbell
Every other part of San Jose was not spared the axe so why should coyote valley be any different? Council continues to pump and pillage other neighborhoods at the expense of not developing other areas.
I say build a megamall there complete with Lowes, Target, Macy’s etc and we won’t have to keep flipping other space in congested areas to squeeze more money out of them. Valley Fair increasing in size another 30%?? You have got to be kidding right? The infrastructure in that area of D6 can’t even support the current number of people. 280/880 is a complete mess. This area is constantly being squeezed for more and more development just so south san jose can have it’s vacant coyote valley (probably with some park in there too.) Makes me sick to my stomach. It’s about time other parts of the city start sharing the burden of cuts and revenue streams that the rest of us put up with, I pay the same or probably MORE taxes than most people in the area.
Tom, your column touting Liccardo as a hero, and a leader makes me really mad. I’m surprised that a historian like you, who takes so much pride in your ability to present the facts supported by history has taken this opportunity to rewrite history. Sam “Smiling,” Liccardo is the furtherest thing from a hero I’ve ever seen in my lifetime. Leader? If he is ever voted in as Mayor of San Jose I will happily move one city over and/or work very hard to defeat him by supporting someone else.
Liccardo brought a fraudulent petition before Council, deflected responsibility for doing so by scapegoating the guy who gave the petition to him, violated the Reed Reforms by not putting this petition on the agenda 10 days in advance so the public could view it, and worked to save his royal butt from further embarrassment by being a SMALL part of the desperate face saving, little to nothing agreement that was made with the LS supporters. I was outside City Hall the night this agreement was reached and I can tell you that Liccardo was desperate to get something anything done to make this go a way. And trust me when I say this agreement did nothing but dry-dock this issue for the moment. It is far from over, and that is too bad because a long lasting agreement could have been reached if a true “good faith effort,” was even attempted.
Vice Mayor Cortese, Council Members Chu and Constant are the ones who fought to bring SANITY to the Council who stood in cement and arrogantly blew off the rights of the LS people. Even Oliverio with his quite no vote had enough integrity to do the right thing.
Kansen Chu and Pete Constant are the only true heroes in my book here. From start to finish they stood by the law, city procedures, the RDA survey and never once deviated from that position. You haven’t once given them credit or even acknowledged their part in this. To give credit to Sam “Smiling” Liccardo for something he did only to face save is just disgusting to me, and serves as an insult to my intelligence.
Liccardo went from saying that the city openly acknowledges that the majority of the people wanted the name Little Saigon, to giving LS supporters a sign that they pay for, and that they had every right to do without his so called help in the first place. He then followed this so called “good faith deal,” by making it clear that the city IS NOT designating D7 business district Little Saigon.
You call that leadership? I call that the two-faced campaign flier I receive at my door every election time, when a candidate wants my vote. I have to wonder what kind of DA he really was.~
Novice #8, are you on crack? You’re # 8 and you’re complaining about #9; #5 said nothing about bad hair; and there’s no mention of soccer Moms anywhere.
Que Pasa?
Coyote Valley should remain undeveloped. This was an enormously, huge, big, large, gigantic, stupendous win for the real stakeholders of California. Now, the salmon can swim, the mountain lions can roam and the eagles can soar. After all, aren’t they the REAL stakeholders?
#2, 3 & 7: If you believe that Liccardo put together the Little Saigon compromise then you’ve probably only been reading the Mercury’s (biased) coverage.
In it’s one-sided coverage the Merc never reported that it was Reed who engaged in shuttle diplomacy between the various factions, who ultimately nailed down the compromise deal.
Smiling Sam was only too happy to take credit when the Merc gave it to him. Now that version of the story seems to have take on a life of it’s own.
Now that Coyote development is finally off the table, it is time to start some intelligent infill planning.
Reid-Hillview is on 180 acres in East San Jose alongside Capitol Expressway, which has Light Rail being built down the center. By developing 100 acres for industry, 40 acres for parks and recreation, and 40 acres for housing, we bring in tax income for the city and county, provide housing on a transit line, and jobs to East San Jose.
Of course, once Reid-Hillview is gone we also can start to use the nearby land on Tully Road and along Capitol Expressway that remains fallow due to being in an airport safety zone. This will generate even more tax income for the city and county.
This is a golden opportunity to start renovating the Eastside, but we can be sure our incompetent and corrupt city and county politicians will screw it up.
#14- MC,
Very well said. Bravo!
JMO, how much would you wager that post #8 (yes 8) shows up on the mash-up page next week?
Tom,
I’m delighted to hear that Coyote Valley will remain as is… at least for a while. The numbers never came close to playing out when one considers the cost of infrastructure. With the City’s current budget plight, developing Coyote Valley would have “broken the bank.”
As for Forrest, I think he serves as little more than a paper weight in his remaining months on the Council.
Good laughs on this one. There were no heroes or leaders in the entire Little Saigon fiasco. This was an issue that should never have reached the Council and certainly should never have been allowed to paralyze city government for months.
#11—We get it that you don’t like Sam. You diminish your credibility with the cutesy “smiling” reference all the time. In fact, it comes dangerously close to the personal attacks you constantly think are being directed at you. Attacking a physical attribute of someone could be construed as an attack and I’m sure you wouldn’t want that.
As for Coyote, this is the best news in a long time. The ill-fated plan should have been killed years ago. Once again there was little leadership on this, although Reed did make it clear he wanted jobs before housing, but the costly task force planning process was allowed to continue in-spite of the GP Update Task Force process. This is one crazy city.
# 11 and #20,
Soon Dave Cortese our Vice Mayor will be termed out. From my point of view, based on what I`ve seen on the City Council, my first choice for the new Vice Mayor would be Pierluigi and next Nancy Pyle, they have my vote. I have nothing against Sam but, both Oliverio and Pyle look at the city of San Jose as a whole, they see “10 districts”. To me thats an important asset ! Think about it?
#18 JMO
The toxic report didn`t stop development of BAREC. The grid lock on Interstate 280 @ Winchester on ramp during commute hours didn`t stop anyone from developing BAREC.
JMO, from my point of view, I`d like like to see the City fix our City roadways like Minnesotta, Willow St from Lincoln Ave east to First street, pot holes on Hamilton between Meridian and Leigh. The curbs on Willow Street are less than 1” higher than the street level in many places. Willow street from Minnesotta and Palm Street under the Guadalupe is a blighted area. Almaden Blvd from Interstate 280 to Alma St. was never compleeted, it`s six lanes in front of the Sobrato/Bea building, then cuts down to two narrow lanes all the way to Alma where it connects with Almaden Expy.
These problems are not in the RDA, so no one cares.
How about the sewer plant?
How can we talk about Coyote Valley when we can`t take care of our present pressing problems?
#15—I’d wait until the toxics report is in before I made any grandiose plans for that land.
Cortese, Chu, Constant and Oliverio gave it their best.
I don`t believe the Mayor and Council should have stayed out of this issue from the beginning. Theis was Masdison`s problem to solve, it belonged in her district. She should have listened to the majority of the people in her district.
#11 & 14 you said it pretty well on the other issue.
#24 Kathleen,
Ok, I respect your opinion and you may be a better judge than I.
I have a question for you. I will add Nancy Pyle to the list I have been told of Council people I`ve been told vote as a block in favor of the Union. Now let me understand you…“we need a Vice Mayor who can make up his/her own mind , and stand strong”. In your opinion that is Pete Constant, OK.
My question: We need additional police officers badley in San Jose. Crime,“Homiceds have doubled from 6 to 12 from 01 to 0/3/07 compared to the same period in 2008. In front of Willow Street Park in a short 2 block area we have seen three accidents in the first 63 days in addition,the green cover protecting the six tennis courts in the park along Willow Street and the little league sign were all graffitied. All in the first 63 days. We need police officers badley, everyone agrees. We are in a recession and crime also increases desperatly during recession times.Why hasn`t Pet spoken out and stood strong on this issue. He is a retired police officer and Union Member. Why hasn`t he taken the initative to solve this problem?
Pete certinally has enough votes on the council to support a position for more officers. How many union votes are on the council.
The PD is part of the Cities union group?
I attended the last budget meeting Tuesday nite and both Nora Campos and Nancy Pyle expressed a need for more police officers. The previous Tuesday nite, the same two again expressed a need for more police officers. The Chief of police spoke up about the 64 civilians that were cut from his staff. Don`t you think Pete Constant had two excellent opportunities to speak up…maybe start a motion…? Nora, Nancy and Pierluigi would have joined in. How many council votes does he need? Well???
Pete certinally has the common ground on the council to get the job done, stand strong. Your thoughts.
The Union isn`t the enemy here.
BUILD IT!! I am tired of you south bay whiners driving to my side of town to do your shopping. We don’t want your soccer mom suv’s loading up cases of cheerios for your six pack of kids.
#25- Richard,
Please correct me if I’m misunderstanding but did Pete vote against increasing Police Officers? Pete has always supported anything Police Officers needed. He was, the last I heard, in favor of the Mayor’s stand on increasing our Police force.
As to Nora and Nancy voting like they did, I’m proud of them that is great! Nora has always, as far as I know, supported Police and Fire. She has always been a strong advocate of both departments. Nancy’s vote always follows Nora so….
As to Unions not being the problem you are correct. Labor Leaders are the biggest problem I’ve seen involved in making things tough. I believe if I understand this correctly, the Police have the retired Police Officers Union, and the regular Police Officers Union of active Police Officers. It goes for Fire Fighters unions too, at least that is my understanding. Please correct me if I’m wrong about this. There are also local unions too, who don’t always agree with other union stands.
During elections I’ve seen different unions supporting different candidates, so I am under the impression that they are not connected to one another.
Can anyone help me clarify this more accurately?
Kathleen,
Yes Pete is for an increase in police officers. But you said” a new Vice Mayor…that can stand strong”.
OK, Pete should be the leader on the city council to start the motion toward adding additional police. With his experience and Union Support, what is he waiting for ? The Mayor and City Manager are sitting in the meeting waiting for someone to speak up.
I like Pete, so maybe i`m saying “Pete lets get it together”. Police coverage should be on the forefront of the issues. Who is going to start the wheels in motion, you and me ???
Secondly, I don`t see the Union`s as the major problem here. I`ll keep on saying it…The problem is the City has a revenue problem ! Cutting and more cutting is not going to solve our problems. We need to get up to 125 jobs for every 100 citizens in San Jose. My God, Palo Alto has over 350 jobs for every 100, even Gilroy has a ratio of 125 jobs for every 100. We need more sales tax revenue.
All we keep on doing is building more condos and apartments when we are losing jobs in this city. Our freway`s are grid locked and we build more housing. What is everyone thinking about.
The people in City Hall need to grow jobs and sales tax revenue. This is the problem.
Invest RDA money and Economic delelopment money in things that bring back revenue returns to run the city. This is not rocket science.
There is a police shortage, you are not going to get more police by cutting their wages and benefits. The ones we have will leave and go to other cities to work.
We need to grow our city. New companies won`t move here if we don`t offer a better quality of life to their employees.
Kathleen, just look at our ferrways and CalTrain every morning Monday through Friday. Everyone is going north of San Jose to work because thats wwhere the jobs are. How can you blame the union`s for that ?
Oakland and the east bay cities have the same problem. Look at the traffic on the Golden Gate and Bay Bridge every morning going into San Francisco. The built BART under the bay from the east bay into San Francisco and it is packed every morning,
San Jose and the East Bay Cities have the same problem, “a lack of good jobs’‘.
The answer to our problems are in City Hall not the Union Hall.
#20- Paper Boy- The Mercury News and the Metro wrote several stories on how Liccardo sits on the dais and jokes with Oliverio, and laughs, and smiles all the time when people are speaking, hence the name, Sam “Smiling” Liccardo. When asked about his rude behavior he said he enjoys joking around with Oliverio. Hum. I guess he doesn’t get that there is a proper time and place for playtime, and that the dais, while someone is speaking is not one of them. As to Smiling Liccardo, I do not like nor dislike him, don’t know him, and don’t want to.
As to your statement that calling him that is personal attack, that is your perception and you are entitled to it. What I said about Sam “Smiling” Liccardo above is the truth, and I stand by it 100%.
#21- Richard,
My vote for Vice Mayor would be Pete Constant. We need a Vice Mayor who can make up his/her own mind, and stand strong. Nancy Pyle has made too many rude remarks to citizen groups, and has too many ties to Labor to be Vice Mayor.
Nora Campos is a good lady, but her Labor ties, and her constant feuds with the Mayor would be bad for the City. It is too bad though because Nora has done some great things for our youth, and for Fire Fighters.
I love Kansen Chu, but he needs more time to get his feet wet.