[Sosfbay-discuss] Briefs missing from 9/11 EV Green Minutes

Tue Sep 18 21:02:38 PDT 2007

Hi All -
Sorry for the omission from my previous submission. Here are the briefs I
created regarding the BAREC issue and the 49ers Stadium Issue. I am also
including a letter received from www.notwithmymoney.org regarding the
stadium issue that provides an update. I am attaching the letter in pdf as
well since it just doesn't translate well, with the footnotes, in plain
text.

In greenness,
Kaisha

BAREC Issue   City of Santa Clara

Project Facilitators & Contact Information: www.SaveBAREC.org; Kirk Vartan,
Spokeperson:  Phone: 888-BAREC-80, press 0 (888-227-3280, press 0); email:
spokesperson at SaveBAREC.org
Issue History & Concerns:
·         Historical Information & Background:
1. The State of California owns the land and this is the LAST significant
piece of public agricultural land in Santa Clara.
2. We have been battling with the State and City of Santa Clara for over
five years
3. The State has been trying to sell the land for housing since Jan. 2003
(lots of issues, but not necessary for an overview)
4. The City of Santa Clara recently (June 19th) passed all resolutions
necessary to allow the development (against the overwhelming majority of
Santa Clarans and neighboring residents of the area)
5. Our group led the effort to get two referendums passed by getting 12,000
signatures in three weeks (two petitions - 6,000 signatures each).  We
challenged the zoning change from Agriculture to Planned Development and the
General Plan Amendment.
6. The two referendums are now officially on the Feb 5, 2008 ballot.
7. If the referendums pass, the housing plan will be halted.
8. We need ALL of the City of Santa Clara to rally around this.
·         In the effort to protect the citizens and the BAREC land.  On
Friday, August 10, 2007, SaveBAREC.org filed a CEQA (California
Environmental Quality Act) lawsuit against the City of Santa Clara for
adopting what we feel is an inadequate Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
The lawsuit (actually a petition) challenges six major flawed areas in the
Environmental Impact Report (EIR), including the soil testing and cleanup,
traffic, significant impacts, loss of farmland, and history.
·         In filing this "Petition for Writ of Mandate," SaveBAREC is
challenging the validity of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in an
effort to protect the residents from a faulty cleanup process and the
community from an environmental document that is inaccurate.
·         Our priority right now is the referendum.  We hope the Council
will save the City of Santa Clara over $172,000 and simply rescind the
resolutions.  If they do not, the Council will be forced to put these two
resolutions on the ballot in February 2008, costing the taxpayers an
additional $172,000.
·         To keep this 17 acre agricultural piece of public land public.
Additionally, we believe an educational, urban farm would best benefit the
public and provide a financially sustainable way to preserve the land in
open space forever.

How we can be involved:
·         Write a letter to the City Council: 1500 Warburton Avenue Santa
Clara, CA 95050
·         Call the City Council: (408) 615-2250
·         Send an email to the City Council
·         Attend a City Council meeting and speak out. Meetings are
generally held at least two times per month on Tuesdays at 7:00 P.M. at City
Hall in the Council Chambers, 1500 Warburton Avenue.
·         Send an Letter to the Editor of the Mercury News
·         Send an Letter to the Editor of the Santa Clara Weekly
·         Spread the word!
49ers Stadium Issue   City of Santa Clara

Project Name:        Santa Clara Plays Fair
                     Not With Our Money

Contact Information:  www.StadiumFacts.org
Project Concerns:
Public expenditure of at least $287,000,000 in cash, property, and other
assets.
A per resident cost of over $2,500.
Less than 10% facility utilization.
Loss of our municipal power reserve fund.
Misplaced priorities.
No comparison shopping.
Little, if any, direct return on investment.

How we can be involved:
Write a letter to the City Council: 1500 Warburton Avenue Santa Clara, CA
95050
Call the City Council: (408) 615-2250
Send an email to the City Council
Attend a City Council meeting and speak out. Meetings are generally held at
least two times per month on Tuesdays at 7:00 P.M. at City Hall in the
Council Chambers, 1500 Warburton Avenue.
Send an Letter to the Editor of the Mercury News
Send an Letter to the Editor of the Santa Clara Weekly
Spread the word!

Events:  City Council Meeting (9/11/07) and city’s Art and Wine festival the
weekend of Sept. 15 & 16, and we could use help talking with people and
possibly gathering signatures (Only residents can gather signatures if it’s
for an official petition.)

Update from notwithmymoney:
1 Byron Fleck is an attorney, former Chair of the City of Santa Clara
Planning
Commission and former City Planning Commissioner. Karen Hardy is a teacher,
former Chair of
the City of Santa Clara Planning Commission and former City Planning
Commissioner.
2
http://www.mercurynews.com/search/ci_6796073?IADID=Search-www.mercurynews.co
m-www
.mercurynews.com
1
The Billionaires York $222 Million
Subsidy Request From Your Money
Seven Months Later
How Our City Council Has Served Us Based on
A “Guess”
and a Comment
by, Byron Fleck & Karen Hardy1
“It’s something we’ve never done before. So six months at best was a
guess.”
Santa Clara Mayor Mahan offering an explanation why the City
feasibility study (originally projected to be completed at the end of
July, then end of September) may now slip to the end of the year,
or later.2
Guess? A “guess” is flipping a coin. A “guess” might be something you
do in the absence of fact. A “guess” might be something you do when the
consequence of a wrong “guess” is inconsequential.
A “guess” is a gamble.
We do not think it much to ask that when our Mayor and City Council decide
to
spend our money, they do so based on something more than a “guess.”
3 See video, http://cbs5.com/video/?id=24296@kpix.dayport.com
4 http://www.ci.santa-clara.ca.us/pdf/collateral/Implementation-plan.pdf
See, p.15
5
http://www.ci.santa-clara.ca.us/pdf/collateral/49ers-20070710-Agenda-Report-
Additional-Legaland-
Fiscal-Services.pdf See, p. 1,2.
2
Here are the consequences of “The Guess.”... over just the last seven
months.
- The subsidy request from your money to the billionaire York family swelled
from $160 million3 ($6,000 per Santa Clara household) to $222 million4
($8,000
per Santa Clara Household), a 40% overrun.
-The cost for the “Feasibility Study” jumped from $200,000 to $315,000, a
60%
overrun. The City Manager warned the Council that more overruns are likely.5
-The projected date for the completion of the “Feasibility Study” slipped
from the
end of July, to the end of September to, now, possibly, the end of 2007.
Five months late, after an originally projected six month period. A delay
overrun
of 70%.
These facts, of course, beg the question, “If our City Council can’t get the
numbers
right without double-digit overruns, how will they do building and operating
an
$854 million stadium?”
Scary.
That, unfortunately, is just the beginning. More consequences of “The Guess”
follow.
//////
6
http://www.ci.santa-clara.ca.us/pdf/collateral/January_9_Agenda_Report_re_Pr
oposed_49ers_St
adium.pdf p.4.
7
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/03/28/MNGDROT5PH1.DTL&
feed=rss.n
ews
8
http://sayhey.wordpress.com/2007/06/04/santa-clara-49ers-offseason-update-wh
o-needs-electricit
y/
3
On January 2, 2007, the Santa Clara City Council made a promise to each
resident. They unanimously adopted a set of guidelines to protect residents
in evaluating the billionaires’ subsidy request. They promised to follow
them.
Here is how our Santa Clara City Council has performed on the most
significant
guidelines.6 We thought you should know.
1. No use or obligation of General Fund monies of the City of Santa Clara.
This is deception. “General Fund,” “Redevelopment Fund,” or “Utility Fund.”
Regardless of “Fund”, these are all your monies. Want proof? When there is a
utility rate increase by the Santa Clara Electric Utility, who pays that
increase?
You do. It is your money. It is your Electric Utility.
We now know that the billionaire’s York proposal, as discussed below,
expressly
intends to raid your Redevelopment and Utility funds.
2. No tax increase put on Santa Clara residents, businesses or ratepayers to
fund a stadium project.
Promise not kept. Just two months after the City Council made this promise
to
you, Santa Clara’s City manager conceded Santa Clara utility rates would
have to
increase as much as 16% to support the subsidy to the billionaires.7
$20 million to $30 million of your money would be used to move an electrical
substation.8
9
http://www.mercurynews.com/search/ci_6796073?IADID=Search-www.mercurynews.co
m-www
.mercurynews.com
10 Subsidy proponent or opponent, all residents must be aghast at the
negotiating
ineptitude demonstrated by the Mayor and Council. Prior to Mayor Mahan’s now
infamous
declaration that a then $160 million subsidy from your money was “doable”
(despite the fact she
had not yet read the 49ers proposal at the time of her “doable”remark),
Cedar Fair was supportive
4
3. Great America Theme Park/Cedar Fair must agree to cooperate with any
proposed stadium project sited on existing City-owned lands leased or
committed to them.
The City/Agency requires a written acknowledgment from Cedar Fair stating
they will not assert business interference or negative effects by the
ongoing
feasibility studies/discussions...pertaining to a proposed stadium to be
located in
their leased parking lot. THIS AGREEMENT MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR
TO PURSUING DISCUSSIONS WITH THE 49ERS. (Emphasis added).
Promise not kept. There is not, to date, any such written agreement.
Notwithstanding the failure to secure the agreement, your City and the 49ers
have
been engaged in negotiations, directly and indirectly, throughout the period
from
when your City Council made this promise through the present.
What is the consequence of your City negotiating with the 49ers without the
promised written acknowledgment of Cedar Fair? Simple. Your City is now
exposed to liability for hundreds of millions of dollars.
There is no other explanation why our City Council would proceed without the
Cedar Fair agreement other than recklessness, in conscious disregard of the
welfare of City residents.
4. If Cedar Fair agrees to cooperate on a proposed stadium project, there
should be no financial loss to the City/RDA from diminished land lease
payments from the existing Theme Park ground lease.
Promise not kept. Of course, there is no agreement.9 Given that the City
Council
is falling all over itself to give away $8,000 from every Santa Clara
household to
billionaires, guess who might also want a subsidy? Cedar Fair?10
of the 49ers proposal. Soon after the Mayor’s “doable observation, Cedar
Fair went on the
record to oppose the stadium. See, San Jose Mercury News, Patel & Swift, “
49ers specify city
share of stadium” April 25, 2007 Sec 1B, and
http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_6151899
11 http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/09/10/BA5NS1EUQ.DTL
5
5. Any proposed or approved stadium project in the City of Santa Clara will
be the result of a visible, public process, open to the community.
Promise not kept. Second only to your right to vote (more on that shortly),
nothing more fundamental to a democracy than the right to know what your
elected officials are doing.
Remember, negotiations were not to begin between your City and the 49ers
until
after a written agreement with Cedar Fair is made protecting us from
liability. No
such agreement has been made.
Additionally, negotiations on a stadium proposal with the 49ers, expected to
last a
few months, was not to begin until after presentation of the Feasibility
Study,
now anticipated to be year end or later.11
Therefore, if there is no agreement in place to protect us from a lawsuit
from
Cedar Fair nor has the time yet arrived to negotiate a proposal with the
49ers,
what’s to hide?
Apparently, a lot.
On May 10, 2007 we, as residents, requested all documents relating to
negotiations with the 49ers. Given the above, there should not have been
any.
Yet, hundreds of documents were produced. More disturbing, the City Council
refused to produce hundreds of other documents responsive to our request,
under various claims of “exemption” under the California Records Act.
Thereafter, consistent with the promise made to you of a “visible public
process”
we asked the Santa Clara City Council, through its attorney, to waive the
claims of
exemption (which they can under law), but they refused.
12
http://www.mercurynews.com/search/ci_6796073?IADID=Search-www.mercurynews.co
m-www
.mercurynews.com
13 http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=local&id=5297305
14 http://www.mercurynews.com/columns/ci_6063910
1 5 http://www.mercurynews.com/columns/ci_6063910
6
C omment.
"We haven't come up against one obstacle, or one factor, that violates our
principles for going forward," Mahan said.12
Of course, given the results above, the Mayor’s statement is a lie.
Santa Clara Mayor Patricia Mahan is on record as opposing a public vote on
the
billionaires subsidy.
Mayor Mahan, Santa Clara: "I think it would politicize the issue beyond
what's
necessary. We built the theme park behind us as a land use issue without a
vote of
the people. We built the golf course over here without a vote of the
people."13
We believe the Mayor’s position is a collective slap in the face to Santa
Clara
residents.
You will recall that when we last asked the City Council to put on the
ballot any
final proposal for a subsidy from your money for binding decision by the
voters of
Santa Clara, we were met by the following:
Councilmember Moore: “If you want it on the ballot, you pay for it.”
Councilmember Caserta: “This is an act of political theater.”14
All other Councilmembers: Silent.
Notwithmymoney.org is an organization composed entirely of Santa Clara
residents opposed to giving billionaires $8,000 from each Santa Clara
household
to construct and operate and $854 million professional football stadium.15
Please, have your Santa Clara family, friends and neighbors join us NOW at
membership at notwithmymoney.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: THIS IS ANOTWITHMYMONEY2.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 77793 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cagreens.org/pipermail/sosfbay-discuss_lists.cagreens.org/attachments/20070918/78dbba71/attachment.pdf>