This week’s open forum where you can write about anything you like.
20 Comments
Greg, and John,
Thank you both for bringing up this topic. Like you, I’m very concerned about the water shortage, especially since I’ve seen so much water waste myself. John, where do you go to report water waste?
Every time I go to walk my dog at Houge, or Butcher Park, I see broken sprinklers. Or I see sprinklers watering more of the sidewalks than grass. I’ve driven by or walked past large apartment complexes or homes that either have broken sprinklers, or that are watering more of the sidewalks than grass too. If we are so concerned about conserving water then why is no one paying attention to these things that waste so much water?
Greg, you are asking the million-dollar question that plagues many of us! Why are we building so much housing when we are already draining so much of our water resources now? I have yet to see large apartment complexes installing water saving toilets, shower heads etc. Is it because they cost too much?
I was very interested in some of the things SF is doing. They are using seawater to power something’s, and I believe, if I am not mistaken, that I heard of a new invention that makes seawater drinkable. Has anyone else heard about that?
I also read an interesting article on MSN that talked about why all the serious flooding that is occurring may be man’s fault. The article has experts discussing how the way we build on land and redirect rivers, and lakes causes serious flooding in suburban areas. It was a very interesting read and made a lot of sense. I’ve posted the article below:
The question isn’t whether or not they should be allowing new development, its how are they going incorporate water conservation in the new development that NEEDS to occur. I know you guys want all the benefits and none of the drawbacks of living in an area of economic growth, but thats not realistic.
There is not going to be a state wide mandate to stop building houses, and we’re all going to using the same water supply. Stop burying your heads in the sand.
Kathleen- Interestingly, Greg and I both happened to “rant” on this topic independently of one another. I usually report parks problems directly to the Parks Department. Then, when I fail to get any reaction I call Chirco’s office and talk to her surly assistant.(Chirco herself is never available) Of course, it’s not enough just to give her the NAME of the park. I have to describe WHERE it is too!
You know, Kathleen, there are many (SJI bloggers included) who believe that we should always discuss these various topics as if they existed in isolation. Witness many of the comments about the recent tragic death of the young bicyclist. Many posters are angry that the topic of illegal immigrants had been raised- as though there is absolutely no connection between the fact that the driver was an illegal alien (allegedly) and the fact of the little girl’s death. And on the subject of potential water shortages the same people will object to the suggestion that there’e any connection between water shortages and dramatic population increases caused by the City’s policy of encoraging high density infill housing. These people (voters, unfortunately) seem to think that every single problem can be solved without affecting anything else just as long as Government gets involved and spends enough money.
I believe that GOOD government is government that anticipates and PREVENTS problems- not government that merely REACTS to problems. In San Jose City Hall we have the most REactive government conceivable. The policies that have been promoted by City Hall (abundant “affordable” housing, living wage, sanctuary city, downtown redevelopment, unioniztion of city employees, etc.) have actually CAUSED most of the problems that it is now trying to “solve”.
I shall now step down from my soapbox (after all, it IS “rants and raves” day) and pose this question;
“Isn’t this an extraordinarily beautiful day?” Just look at that sky and feel that breeze!
I’m posting this at the request of Animal Shelters and Rescuers. If you can help please do, and please pass this on! Thank you!
This time Watsonville area- URGENT APPEAL (SPACE, MEDICAL SUPPLY, FOOD, DONATIONS CAN BE SENT THROUGH US OR DIRECTLY THROUGH sv feed
OPEN SUN 10-5 831 438-3194 call Dennis OR CHRISTINE TO PAY FOR HAY, RABBIT FOOD BUCKETS WATER CROCKS – everything WILL BE NEEDED YOU CAN THINK OF –
Our Watsonville shelter is located there! Right in the path. 500 areas burning – 9 BUILDINGS LOST SO FAR!!! MANY MORE AT RISK- THIS IS ANOTHER DENSELY POPULATED AREA. Lots OF ANIMALS
Several of our foster sites are evacuated. The Watsonville shelter is being evaluated. If anyone can help – space to foster temp some of these rabbits call me – I need to collect names and numbers then find a way to get them on this side of the hill –
Send any financial contribution s to http://www.therabbithaven.org use pay pals! Or call – note for the fire. We will be buying supply for extra bunnies needing temp shelter Pray for all those families evacuated I hope they have homes to go to One of the evacuated homes is Lara Walker who heads up THE rabbit program at Watsonville.
Julie who heads of SV RABBIT ADVOCACY PROGRAM IS DESPERATELY TRYING TO EVACUATE. She is stuck on Hwy one with the rescue trailer.
WE HAVE PLACES FOR RABBITS, SMALL ANIMALS BIRDS, CONTACT US -WE WILL NEED EXTRA SPACE SOON we ARE STILL HOUSING ANIMALS FROM THE FIRST TWO FIRES!
YOU MAY ALSO CALL heather Metz EGLI AT 831 212-1154 FOR EMERGENCY RABBIT OR SMALL ANIMALS CARE. WE CAN TRIAGE THE ANIMALS FROM THERE –
MT MADONNA GILROY OVER 17 IS ONLY WAY TO GET FROM Watsonville TO SV SANTA CRUZ AT THIS POINT. (FOR THOSE READING THIS. IN HARMS WAY
APTOS HIGH SCHOOL IS THE EVALUATION CENTER – GRAHAM HILL SHOW GROUNDS (NORTH SIDE) ALSO A RESCUE CENTER FOR PEOPLE WITH ANIMALS. Large ANIMALS Watsonville fairgrounds (SOUTH SIDE)
I WILL KEEP YOU POSTED –
THOSE OF YOU NEAR THIS FIRE PLEASE FIND YOUR ROUTE THAT IS OPEN AND LEAVE. The RED cross AND THE salvation ARMY ARE READY TO HELP – THE HAVEN IS HERE FOR YOU AS WELL.
RABBIT PEOPLE COME FORWARD ADN LET US KNOW name ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER YOU CAN BE REACHED AT – HOW MANY ANIMALS YOU CAN HOUSE.
5 – So, how do you propose to keep building housing and adding more people and not exhaust a finite water supply? It’ll be a good trick if you can do it, but since I doubt you can, we better smarten up and stop building thousands of housing units that our natural resources cannot possibly supply.
8. I think you missed my point. The thousands of housing units are going to be built no matter what. Not you or I or anyone can do anything to prevent that from happening. If we prevent it in San Jose it will be built in Stockton. If we prevent it in California it will be built in Nevada and Arizona. And guess what, we’re all still going to be using the same water supply.
I don’t know how we are going to handle our growth on our existing water supply, but that problem should be our topic of discussion, not whether or not we should build more housing.
I’m sorry if I’m looking at the issue from
too practical a standpoint, but personally I think that this is an issue that will have to be addressed, rather than written off as impossible like you have done.
Earlier this week, I heard someone say, “I’ll believe there’s a water shortage when local Governments stop approving more housing development.”
Clearly, the entire State suffers from insufficient water for the nearly 40 million residents. And it isn’t just the occasional drought, most of California is classified as semi-arid.
Yet, politicians, lobbyists and developers continue to champion increases in the housing stock, ignoring that our water supply remains relatively fixed. Does this make sense?
I recently read that Carl Guardino, the SVLG czar, does not include water resources among his list of altruistic objectives… transportation, education, affordable housing, etc.
Perhaps the overlooked and recently re-discovered State legislation passed earlier in this decade will provide sensibility in solving our dilemma. The law mandates that new development must be accompanied by evidence that an adequate supply of water be available.
I sincerely hope that common sense soon takes precedence over the uncontrolled growth that’s long been allowed.
San Jose City Council members should be required to pass a test that demonstrates some rudimentary awareness of the Parks in their district.
Why does it always take a complaint from me to get any action on problems? If I was a Councilman I’d be the one visiting the Parks in my area. I would consider it part of my job. Wallenberg and Rubino Parks (probably Chirco) have sprinkler systems that are out-of-control wasteful of water. There’s an Old Faithful style geyser at Wallenberg and a wetland area at Rubino that rivals the Everglades!
All this run by a City that lectures ME about conserving water. The nerve!
1) Just got back from Santa Barbara. Why can’t 1st Street downtown be like State St.? Awesome retail, restaurants, paseo’s…makes Santana Row look like a strip mall.
2) A plea to current/former SJ leaders and Lew Wolff: Work with the incoming Giants General Managing Partner Bill Neukom to finally free San Jose from those restrictive territorial rights. Cisco Field belongs in downtown San Jose, not Fremont!
3) Three scenarios where downtown San Jose finally turns the corner: High-Speed rail bond passes this November (thus transforming the Diridon/Arena area), San Pedro Square gets that “SF Ferry Building” facelift, and see above #2.
4) See book “Images of America: San Jose’s Historic Downtown. Arcadia Publishing, 2004.” You mean are downtown once had awesome architecture (unlike the old MLK Library) and was filled with life?
The current high-speed rail proposal, in its current form, deserves to fail. The routings in both the north and the south are bad. In the north, see: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lazytom/1470574027/
The route should go via Altamont/580, not pacheco/152
In the south, the route should go via the I5/grapevine route, not via Tehachapi/palmdale/lancaster.
Also, the price tag is too high: $40 billion before the inevitable cost overruns.
9 – Who says the housing is going to be built no matter what? At some point, some elected official is going to get a clue that we need to change the way we do things.
If you are correct the housing will be built regardless of whether or not we can support that housing, then let it be built somewhere else that has a more sufficient water supply.
At some point we will have to stop growing or face the dire consequences.
Nobody missed your point.
When you consider that the rate of population growth amongst U.S. citizens has just about leveled off it is apparent that the overall population explosion in California is due to a dramatic increase in the number of immigrants, both legal and illegal.
We Americans DO have the right to control who and how many come into our home. To suggest that we must resign ourselves to a future of uncontrollable population increases suggests that somebody DOES have their head in the sand and his initials are RCM.
“connection between water shortages and dramatic population increases caused by the City’s policy of encoraging high density infill housing.”
High density infill housing does not cause a population increase. Births, immigration, and longer life spans cause a population increase.
People are not going to cease to exist just because we build less housing. You can force them to live 3 families per apartment. You can make them miserable.
But they aren’t going to disappear.
Unless someone is also calling for mandatory birth-control, or the cessation of tax-breaks for more than one child, then they have no relevance, credibility, or authority in calling for no new housing.
Of all the talk of deporting illegal aliens back to whence they came, little has been discussed over California’s nursing shortage. Specifically, how the state outsources nurse training to Mexico for the “cheaper costs” and available nursing instructions…
The Bay Area alone is expected to have a shortfall of 14,000 nurses by 2020. As the debate over our state’s “drought” and housing needs rage on, in the end, housing along with better, and reliable water sources (from seawater perhaps) will be needed. Otherwise, as the Bay Area’s population ages, and fewer nurses are available, seniors and those who need care may be forced to move out of state or out of the country to get the care they needed. Potential nurses would likely have to leave California to practice, as housing is too expensive with too few options available.
You just don’t get it. Part of living in an area of economic growth means that there is going to be population growth as well. You cannot have one without the other, there is no way around it. If we don’t plan for accommodating that growth, then we it will continue unplanned.
You probably think that people in the crumbling rust belt cities, who’s jobs have been shipped overseas, are just thrilled to death that developers aren’t trying to build multi story condos in their towns.
The headline in this week’s Business Journal says “City Offers $45M to Avert New Home Tax”. This relates to the plan for adding 27 million square feet of office space and 32,000 new homes in North San Jose. The article goes on to say the money would come from the Redevelopment Agency to help build a school, and buy land at two locations.
I’m tired of hearing how the City can come up with enormous amounts of money to apply to cherry picked projects, and how there are apparently no geographical boundaries for RDA projects. Is Alviso the new frontier?
I’m tired of hearing how the RDA has lots of money and at the same time the City has a budget deficit. It’s time to examine the tax generation and allocation framework from the top down. Every time one of these headlines touts huge sums of available funds from RDA and the next day’s article talks about empty coffers for the City operating budget, the City leaders dig a deeper hole in terms of public support, public relations, and trust. Don’t start to tell me how the RDA is not the same as the City – blah, blah, blah – that is further argument that there is a deeper structural problem here.
I’m tired of hearing about growing North San Jose and the benefits of this magnitude of growth. If the City budget can not support the existing demand for public safety and other City services, why should I believe that this growth will dig us out of the budget or jobs/housing imbalance and magically lead us to prosperity?
And then there is the issue of water for North San Jose…
Richard C Mongler,
San Jose is the city we live in. It is in our own best interest to see that the trashing of San Jose is stopped or at least slowed down. We don’t have any say-so about what Stockton or Modesto or Hollister or Los Banos do but we do have a vote in our own hometown. I “get it”. I understand exactly what you, Greg Perry, and The Pope are saying. I just disagree. This is a discussion that has 2 extremes. I don’t believe either one of us are extremists. Surely even you would object if your next door neighbor proposed a plan to demolish his Willow Glen home and replace it with 4 houses on the same piece of property. You might selfishly feel that he was profiting in the extreme while at the same time devaluing YOUR property. It’s just a matter of degree that we’re talking about here. I believe that we are sacrificing too much of our quality of life in the name of economic growth. You, on the other hand, think we are obligated to sacrifice more. You will undoubtedly get your way. After all you have big business, labor, minority groups, politicians, social activists, environmentalists, gay rights activists, and developers on your side. I, on the other hand, am just a citizen.
Greg, and John,
Thank you both for bringing up this topic. Like you, I’m very concerned about the water shortage, especially since I’ve seen so much water waste myself. John, where do you go to report water waste?
Every time I go to walk my dog at Houge, or Butcher Park, I see broken sprinklers. Or I see sprinklers watering more of the sidewalks than grass. I’ve driven by or walked past large apartment complexes or homes that either have broken sprinklers, or that are watering more of the sidewalks than grass too. If we are so concerned about conserving water then why is no one paying attention to these things that waste so much water?
Greg, you are asking the million-dollar question that plagues many of us! Why are we building so much housing when we are already draining so much of our water resources now? I have yet to see large apartment complexes installing water saving toilets, shower heads etc. Is it because they cost too much?
I was very interested in some of the things SF is doing. They are using seawater to power something’s, and I believe, if I am not mistaken, that I heard of a new invention that makes seawater drinkable. Has anyone else heard about that?
I also read an interesting article on MSN that talked about why all the serious flooding that is occurring may be man’s fault. The article has experts discussing how the way we build on land and redirect rivers, and lakes causes serious flooding in suburban areas. It was a very interesting read and made a lot of sense. I’ve posted the article below:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25254541
ANIMALS ARE SMARTER !
http://www.ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/03/animal-minds/virginia-morrel-tex
Maybe it`s time for a change?
The question isn’t whether or not they should be allowing new development, its how are they going incorporate water conservation in the new development that NEEDS to occur. I know you guys want all the benefits and none of the drawbacks of living in an area of economic growth, but thats not realistic.
There is not going to be a state wide mandate to stop building houses, and we’re all going to using the same water supply. Stop burying your heads in the sand.
Kathleen- Interestingly, Greg and I both happened to “rant” on this topic independently of one another. I usually report parks problems directly to the Parks Department. Then, when I fail to get any reaction I call Chirco’s office and talk to her surly assistant.(Chirco herself is never available) Of course, it’s not enough just to give her the NAME of the park. I have to describe WHERE it is too!
You know, Kathleen, there are many (SJI bloggers included) who believe that we should always discuss these various topics as if they existed in isolation. Witness many of the comments about the recent tragic death of the young bicyclist. Many posters are angry that the topic of illegal immigrants had been raised- as though there is absolutely no connection between the fact that the driver was an illegal alien (allegedly) and the fact of the little girl’s death. And on the subject of potential water shortages the same people will object to the suggestion that there’e any connection between water shortages and dramatic population increases caused by the City’s policy of encoraging high density infill housing. These people (voters, unfortunately) seem to think that every single problem can be solved without affecting anything else just as long as Government gets involved and spends enough money.
I believe that GOOD government is government that anticipates and PREVENTS problems- not government that merely REACTS to problems. In San Jose City Hall we have the most REactive government conceivable. The policies that have been promoted by City Hall (abundant “affordable” housing, living wage, sanctuary city, downtown redevelopment, unioniztion of city employees, etc.) have actually CAUSED most of the problems that it is now trying to “solve”.
I shall now step down from my soapbox (after all, it IS “rants and raves” day) and pose this question;
“Isn’t this an extraordinarily beautiful day?” Just look at that sky and feel that breeze!
I’m posting this at the request of Animal Shelters and Rescuers. If you can help please do, and please pass this on! Thank you!
This time Watsonville area- URGENT APPEAL (SPACE, MEDICAL SUPPLY, FOOD, DONATIONS CAN BE SENT THROUGH US OR DIRECTLY THROUGH sv feed
OPEN SUN 10-5 831 438-3194 call Dennis OR CHRISTINE TO PAY FOR HAY, RABBIT FOOD BUCKETS WATER CROCKS – everything WILL BE NEEDED YOU CAN THINK OF –
Our Watsonville shelter is located there! Right in the path. 500 areas burning – 9 BUILDINGS LOST SO FAR!!! MANY MORE AT RISK- THIS IS ANOTHER DENSELY POPULATED AREA. Lots OF ANIMALS
Several of our foster sites are evacuated. The Watsonville shelter is being evaluated. If anyone can help – space to foster temp some of these rabbits call me – I need to collect names and numbers then find a way to get them on this side of the hill –
Send any financial contribution s to http://www.therabbithaven.org use pay pals! Or call – note for the fire. We will be buying supply for extra bunnies needing temp shelter Pray for all those families evacuated I hope they have homes to go to One of the evacuated homes is Lara Walker who heads up THE rabbit program at Watsonville.
Julie who heads of SV RABBIT ADVOCACY PROGRAM IS DESPERATELY TRYING TO EVACUATE. She is stuck on Hwy one with the rescue trailer.
Call me or better yet email please if you can help in any way.
DI******@TH************.ORG
831 239-7119 408 866 6100
Auntie Heather
The RABBIT HAVEN
WE HAVE PLACES FOR RABBITS, SMALL ANIMALS BIRDS, CONTACT US -WE WILL NEED EXTRA SPACE SOON we ARE STILL HOUSING ANIMALS FROM THE FIRST TWO FIRES!
YOU MAY ALSO CALL heather Metz EGLI AT 831 212-1154 FOR EMERGENCY RABBIT OR SMALL ANIMALS CARE. WE CAN TRIAGE THE ANIMALS FROM THERE –
MT MADONNA GILROY OVER 17 IS ONLY WAY TO GET FROM Watsonville TO SV SANTA CRUZ AT THIS POINT. (FOR THOSE READING THIS. IN HARMS WAY
APTOS HIGH SCHOOL IS THE EVALUATION CENTER – GRAHAM HILL SHOW GROUNDS (NORTH SIDE) ALSO A RESCUE CENTER FOR PEOPLE WITH ANIMALS. Large ANIMALS Watsonville fairgrounds (SOUTH SIDE)
I WILL KEEP YOU POSTED –
THOSE OF YOU NEAR THIS FIRE PLEASE FIND YOUR ROUTE THAT IS OPEN AND LEAVE. The RED cross AND THE salvation ARMY ARE READY TO HELP – THE HAVEN IS HERE FOR YOU AS WELL.
RABBIT PEOPLE COME FORWARD ADN LET US KNOW name ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER YOU CAN BE REACHED AT – HOW MANY ANIMALS YOU CAN HOUSE.
5 – So, how do you propose to keep building housing and adding more people and not exhaust a finite water supply? It’ll be a good trick if you can do it, but since I doubt you can, we better smarten up and stop building thousands of housing units that our natural resources cannot possibly supply.
8. I think you missed my point. The thousands of housing units are going to be built no matter what. Not you or I or anyone can do anything to prevent that from happening. If we prevent it in San Jose it will be built in Stockton. If we prevent it in California it will be built in Nevada and Arizona. And guess what, we’re all still going to be using the same water supply.
I don’t know how we are going to handle our growth on our existing water supply, but that problem should be our topic of discussion, not whether or not we should build more housing.
I’m sorry if I’m looking at the issue from
too practical a standpoint, but personally I think that this is an issue that will have to be addressed, rather than written off as impossible like you have done.
Earlier this week, I heard someone say, “I’ll believe there’s a water shortage when local Governments stop approving more housing development.”
Clearly, the entire State suffers from insufficient water for the nearly 40 million residents. And it isn’t just the occasional drought, most of California is classified as semi-arid.
Yet, politicians, lobbyists and developers continue to champion increases in the housing stock, ignoring that our water supply remains relatively fixed. Does this make sense?
I recently read that Carl Guardino, the SVLG czar, does not include water resources among his list of altruistic objectives… transportation, education, affordable housing, etc.
Perhaps the overlooked and recently re-discovered State legislation passed earlier in this decade will provide sensibility in solving our dilemma. The law mandates that new development must be accompanied by evidence that an adequate supply of water be available.
I sincerely hope that common sense soon takes precedence over the uncontrolled growth that’s long been allowed.
San Jose City Council members should be required to pass a test that demonstrates some rudimentary awareness of the Parks in their district.
Why does it always take a complaint from me to get any action on problems? If I was a Councilman I’d be the one visiting the Parks in my area. I would consider it part of my job. Wallenberg and Rubino Parks (probably Chirco) have sprinkler systems that are out-of-control wasteful of water. There’s an Old Faithful style geyser at Wallenberg and a wetland area at Rubino that rivals the Everglades!
All this run by a City that lectures ME about conserving water. The nerve!
1) Just got back from Santa Barbara. Why can’t 1st Street downtown be like State St.? Awesome retail, restaurants, paseo’s…makes Santana Row look like a strip mall.
2) A plea to current/former SJ leaders and Lew Wolff: Work with the incoming Giants General Managing Partner Bill Neukom to finally free San Jose from those restrictive territorial rights. Cisco Field belongs in downtown San Jose, not Fremont!
3) Three scenarios where downtown San Jose finally turns the corner: High-Speed rail bond passes this November (thus transforming the Diridon/Arena area), San Pedro Square gets that “SF Ferry Building” facelift, and see above #2.
4) See book “Images of America: San Jose’s Historic Downtown. Arcadia Publishing, 2004.” You mean are downtown once had awesome architecture (unlike the old MLK Library) and was filled with life?
enough ranting and raving for now…
Regarding #3 in post #10 above:
The current high-speed rail proposal, in its current form, deserves to fail. The routings in both the north and the south are bad. In the north, see:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lazytom/1470574027/
The route should go via Altamont/580, not pacheco/152
In the south, the route should go via the I5/grapevine route, not via Tehachapi/palmdale/lancaster.
Also, the price tag is too high: $40 billion before the inevitable cost overruns.
9 – Who says the housing is going to be built no matter what? At some point, some elected official is going to get a clue that we need to change the way we do things.
If you are correct the housing will be built regardless of whether or not we can support that housing, then let it be built somewhere else that has a more sufficient water supply.
At some point we will have to stop growing or face the dire consequences.
Richard C Mongler,
Nobody missed your point.
When you consider that the rate of population growth amongst U.S. citizens has just about leveled off it is apparent that the overall population explosion in California is due to a dramatic increase in the number of immigrants, both legal and illegal.
We Americans DO have the right to control who and how many come into our home. To suggest that we must resign ourselves to a future of uncontrollable population increases suggests that somebody DOES have their head in the sand and his initials are RCM.
“connection between water shortages and dramatic population increases caused by the City’s policy of encoraging high density infill housing.”
High density infill housing does not cause a population increase. Births, immigration, and longer life spans cause a population increase.
People are not going to cease to exist just because we build less housing. You can force them to live 3 families per apartment. You can make them miserable.
But they aren’t going to disappear.
Unless someone is also calling for mandatory birth-control, or the cessation of tax-breaks for more than one child, then they have no relevance, credibility, or authority in calling for no new housing.
Of all the talk of deporting illegal aliens back to whence they came, little has been discussed over California’s nursing shortage. Specifically, how the state outsources nurse training to Mexico for the “cheaper costs” and available nursing instructions…
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20070916-9999-1b16nurses.html
The Bay Area alone is expected to have a shortfall of 14,000 nurses by 2020. As the debate over our state’s “drought” and housing needs rage on, in the end, housing along with better, and reliable water sources (from seawater perhaps) will be needed. Otherwise, as the Bay Area’s population ages, and fewer nurses are available, seniors and those who need care may be forced to move out of state or out of the country to get the care they needed. Potential nurses would likely have to leave California to practice, as housing is too expensive with too few options available.
Something to think about…
John Galt, look at posts 14 and 15.
You just don’t get it. Part of living in an area of economic growth means that there is going to be population growth as well. You cannot have one without the other, there is no way around it. If we don’t plan for accommodating that growth, then we it will continue unplanned.
You probably think that people in the crumbling rust belt cities, who’s jobs have been shipped overseas, are just thrilled to death that developers aren’t trying to build multi story condos in their towns.
The headline in this week’s Business Journal says “City Offers $45M to Avert New Home Tax”. This relates to the plan for adding 27 million square feet of office space and 32,000 new homes in North San Jose. The article goes on to say the money would come from the Redevelopment Agency to help build a school, and buy land at two locations.
I’m tired of hearing how the City can come up with enormous amounts of money to apply to cherry picked projects, and how there are apparently no geographical boundaries for RDA projects. Is Alviso the new frontier?
I’m tired of hearing how the RDA has lots of money and at the same time the City has a budget deficit. It’s time to examine the tax generation and allocation framework from the top down. Every time one of these headlines touts huge sums of available funds from RDA and the next day’s article talks about empty coffers for the City operating budget, the City leaders dig a deeper hole in terms of public support, public relations, and trust. Don’t start to tell me how the RDA is not the same as the City – blah, blah, blah – that is further argument that there is a deeper structural problem here.
I’m tired of hearing about growing North San Jose and the benefits of this magnitude of growth. If the City budget can not support the existing demand for public safety and other City services, why should I believe that this growth will dig us out of the budget or jobs/housing imbalance and magically lead us to prosperity?
And then there is the issue of water for North San Jose…
Richard C Mongler,
San Jose is the city we live in. It is in our own best interest to see that the trashing of San Jose is stopped or at least slowed down. We don’t have any say-so about what Stockton or Modesto or Hollister or Los Banos do but we do have a vote in our own hometown. I “get it”. I understand exactly what you, Greg Perry, and The Pope are saying. I just disagree. This is a discussion that has 2 extremes. I don’t believe either one of us are extremists. Surely even you would object if your next door neighbor proposed a plan to demolish his Willow Glen home and replace it with 4 houses on the same piece of property. You might selfishly feel that he was profiting in the extreme while at the same time devaluing YOUR property. It’s just a matter of degree that we’re talking about here. I believe that we are sacrificing too much of our quality of life in the name of economic growth. You, on the other hand, think we are obligated to sacrifice more. You will undoubtedly get your way. After all you have big business, labor, minority groups, politicians, social activists, environmentalists, gay rights activists, and developers on your side. I, on the other hand, am just a citizen.
In Loving Memory Of Vahid Hosseini, Who Was Shot March 23, 2008, and Sadly Died June 3, 2008, A Stop The Violence Peace March Will Be Held:
When: Sunday, June 29th @ Noon
Where: Sacred Heart Church (325 Willow Street in San Jose)
To City Hall (200 East Santa Clara Street)
(Cold Water Will Be Provided)
Why: To Promote Peace In The Community And To Remember All Victims Effected By Violent Crime
This March Is Being Organized By The Vahid Hosseini Family
Contact: Casandra Hosseini 408-206-2881 or
Ca*******@ao*.com