Today's letter is from a Santa Clara resident who asked us to withhold his name if we published his letter. It is a letter he first sent to the Mayor and City Council.
He writes . . .
Mayor Mahan and Council,
“Political Theater”. Those exact words were used by Councilmember Caserta to describe the polite, well researched efforts of our fellow citizens of the City to recommend that before the seven of you vote to spend ~$180 Million of the City’s money on a new 49ers stadium, it be put to a vote by the citizens. Gasp! Shocking suggestion, isn’t it? “Political Theater”- kind of a thought stopper isn’t it? Prevents any further discussion or consideration when such labeling is used. But I forget, that was Councilmember Caserta’s intent all along, right? And of course you are aware that this is now a matter of public record. Let the chips fall where they may.
But I digress. I wanted to mention I enjoyed in a sad sort of way the bit of political theater staged by the City Council regarding the SOFNA street and sidewalk repair issue. I thought it curious that when “Champion Of The People” Coucilmember McLeod proposed the motion to complete the study of street repair within five long years (when all of you will conveniently have moved on to future political horizons), there were no opposing motions, and when it came time for a vote, the motion was speedily passed. Great political theater!
And great selective ineptitude, as well, when compared to the falling-all-over-yourselves-to-comply three month deadline on the stadium project. Let’s see, five years to address a sustandard street issue by the citizens of the City, who helped buy the seats in which you imperiously sit, and two to three quick months to address a stadium proposal by a family that has more money and influence than it knows what to do with…Hmmmm, an interesting comparison to be sure. Musn’t keep the rich and powerful waiting, mustn’t we? After all, if the York family were told by “Champion Of The People” McLeod that it would be five years before a resolution was reached on The Brand New Stadium, I think they’d go elsewhere, don’t you?
Perhaps you read this, silently declaring, “What umbrage, what cynicism! How dare he challenge the ethics of our Council!”. Well you now have my email address. I invite each of you to kindly prove me wrong on any of the points implied and stated in my letter to you.
PS My views do not in any way reflect the views of the SOFNA members. I only live here in Santa Clara, as I have for the last 11 years, and pay taxes…
Regards,
[name withheld by request]
Santa Clara
As with last week's writer, this week's writer raises some good points that we haven't yet discussed here at Stadium Facts.
I agree with him that the May 15th City Council meeting provided a number of interesting juxtapositions.
First the City Manager offered an overview of the budget for the 2007-08 Fiscal Year. During the presentation, she referenced a number of items that have been cut back or frozen in the continuing efforts to keep the city from operating at a deficit. Things like cutbacks to library hours, delays in opening a new library, and a hiring freeze on 30 positions. [According to the numbers she presented, that last item saves the city $3 million a year.]
Overall, the presentation demonstrated that Santa Clara has usually been concerned with fiscal responsibility.
The next major topic of the meeting was the excellent presentation by the SOFNA regarding the terrible condition of their streets and sidewalks. We presented excerpts from their presentation last week in this post: Priorities? Duh! What priorities?
I’ll disagree slightly with the letter writer in that I had the impression from the council’s discussion that all of the Councilmembers and the Mayor would prefer the city to pay the entire bill – an estimated total of just under $15 million – for the repairs. But that was just my impression.
The problem, however, was that none of them had a plan to pay for all of it, so the only motion that was proposed was for the staff to come back in three weeks (at the June 5th meeting) with a projection of both when it could be placed into the budget sometime in the next five years and how much of the cost the city could cover.
To be very clear, I agree that this is the type of project on which the city should be using its resources, and as long as there is a fiscally responsible plan, then I hope the city will pay the full cost of this project and complete it as quickly as possible.
And then came the petition to council requesting a commitment to put any proposal for a stadium to a vote of the people (and if there is no proposal, then there would be no election.)
So here’s another interesting juxtaposition. As the writer notes, the Council needs three weeks to develop just a plan for a $15 million project in a 5 year timeframe, but the San Francisco 49ers ask for $180 million, plus a parking garage, land, bond issue, etc., to be delivered in 2-3 years, and they expect an agreement 12 weeks or so from the date of their proposal.
Among the many things I don’t like about this whole proposal is the speed at which the San Francisco 49ers are looking for an answer. It shouldn’t be Santa Clara’s problem that they came to us at such a late date with this plan.
But as the writer says, the Council to date has shown no willingness to push back on these timeline demands from the San Francisco 49ers. Sort of makes you wonder for whom they’re really working?
No comments:
Post a Comment