I would agree with Tom Clifton’s assessment yesterday about the lack of “meat” lately on SJ Inside. Maybe, on a more positive note, readers could begin a string of ideas on what they want to see done to improve downtown and San Jose. I’ll start with one: Remove the parking meters downtown for a one-year pilot program to help bring customers to downtown merchants.
How about that Gonzo. Once again he jumps on the bandwagon way too late. He finally figured out that it is good to be supportive of goals that will help protect our environment. He wouldn’t sign on months ago when many other cities were doing so. But as usual with him, better late than never.
On another topic, how about the end run the city is doing to assemble ballpark property without a vote of the public as required. City officials are simply winking and saying we might use the land for something else. How deep do you think we will be into this before the publid gets a chance to speak? Welcome to the next debacle.
How about the SJ city council submitting its “transportation priorities” to VTA with llitle public comment? (BART! BART! BART!) On Thursday, half the City Council, as VTA Board members and Vice Chair Chavze, “rubber stamping” said priorities.
Eugene Bradley
Founder, Santa Clara VTA Riders Union
When we consider what San Jose should look like in 25 years, we probably all agree that outdoor green spaces for play & recreation are near the top of the list.
Yet the mayor and many city council members block park development and resist planning ahead for new parks. For example, I can recall dedication of only two new parks in District Four in the past five years. And this is during a time when well over 350 acres of industrial land in District Four has been converted to residential land, about 300 acres in the last 18 months alone.
Even if San Jose lacks money for park maintenance (the most frequently advanced excuse for doing nothing), land for parks could be set aside through a combination of options purchase, land trade deals, and land banking for the future. Developers could even be required to comply with the city ordinance requiring dedication of 3 new acres of parkland for each 1,000 new residents. None of these things is being done at this time.
The Parkland Trust Fund is a shambles. The parks department was asked by the city council in February 2005 to prepare a financial history of the trust fund for publication in August 2005. This is information that would, at the most, be only 15 years old and is already computerized.
The parks department had to admit it had not been able to put out this simple report on time, and now has (I believe) until December 2005 to publish. This is just a report about the payments made in lieu by developers to the trust fund since the program began at the end of the 1980s, and where the money was allocated by the trust fund. The parks department can’t do it.
Most of us who have been seeking this information since late 2003 have come to the conclusion that something is going on—either the city or RDA borrowed from the Parkland Trust Fund, or the trust fund is obligated in one of the city’s fancy financial deals as some kind of collateral and is therefore untouchable.
I suspect a major scandal underlies the Parkland Trust Fund’s failure to report its activities on an annual basis as it should anyway.
Even downtown’s parks could benefit from a close look and improvements to help attract new businesses and residents to the downtown core. Both the downtown core and the suburban neighborhoods benefit from new and improved parks.
From today’s Merc story on Gonzo’s environmental flip-flop:
“…San Jose is already well on its way to achieving about half the 21 goals, said David Vossbrink, the mayor’s spokesman. Among them: implementing recycling and composting programs…”
I guess we misunderstoood that whole Norcal deal…Gonzales was just being a good environmentalist!
I don’t care what it takes, I would love to see a ballpark. Yes, we have the Sharks but with a ballpark our town might look like a big city. Unless some are afraid of that?
The PDO is a mess. Try to get a straight answer from a Councilmember about this (or anything else, for that matter.) Council has no problem approving more and more housing but can’t provide the adequate amenties. It doesn’t take years of studying to know we have areas of the city that parkland deficient. It also doesn’t take a genius to know why this has happened—can you say developer contributions?
It’s time for the people to take back our city from the big money folks who purchase our councilmembers. What are we going to do about it?
My comments on Tom Clifton’s accurate assessment of this site can be found on yesterday’s post.
As for today’s “topic” has anyone ever heard District 9’s Judy Chirco ever say a word about anything? Has anyone ever seen her quoted in the Merc or even one of the lesser weeklies?
I channel surfed recently and found her on public access talking with Bill Chew. I have never seen such lack of substance and so much rhetorical lip service than what she emitted.
Time to find somebody new to represent this district. Remember, this is the district that produced Jim Beall. Chrico couldn’t be doing a better job of following in his footsteps and the voters need to stop her in her tracks.
A ballpark, like SBC Park, would be great. What do you think the chances are that SJ will do it that way and not burden the public with paying for this private enterprise? If you said just about zero you’re probably right. As usual, our “leaders” will saddle the taxpayer with what should be a boon to the city, but instead will be a boondoggle.
Strike 3.
I was in downtown the other day, and I found it pathetic. There are so many homeless bums in the area. What a disaster! Like I said, it’s a lost cause. The area is filled with hoodlums. By the way, Ceaser Chavez plaza park’s fountain is a total decay, abandoned by the city. The park is an absolute mess, a haven for the mentally ills and alchoholics. I’ve seen downtown evolved from a great, vibrant area in 1948, which I first moved to San Jose, to a declining downtown in 1959, to disaster or bottomed out downtown in 1972, and rebuilding era from 1977 to 1999, and on to today’s dismal downtown. Downtown today is worst than the era between 1968 and 1976 since there are way more bums and abandoned building with way less retail than that time. At that time(1968-1976), there were considerable more stores in downtown and cool coffee shops to hang out. Also, there were no gang-bangers there at that time. It was kind of quiet, but it was more of a downtown because there still were quite a few older attractive buildings that were not yet torn down. There were alot more potential for that downtown since it wasn’t destroyed as of that time. Downtown presently is very sterile and devoid of life. It’s also plaqued with surface parking lots and vacant parcels- no continual flow of office/retail space: just alot of gaps between! They should have concetrate very dense development on available parking lots without destroying historical buildings. There were no watchdogs but greedy darelicts(developers and ignorant politicians). We would’ve had a great downtown with alot of characters. It would’ve been a funky downtown that’s alot of fun! That’s so awful that we have a downtown that’s worst than ever!
Smurf, you have captured the downtown saga very well from post-war to present. There is no question that even in the darkest days we had more retail and more interesting buildings that would today be jewels if only they had been saved and restored. Instead we have a collectively bland and beige palm-studded monument to Frank Taylor.
The problem with downtown is that it was sized for a population of barely 100,000 when its decline began. Now we’re pushing 1,000,000 and trying to morph the downtown into something that takes generations to develop on its own.
It doesn’t help that this is all happening smack in the middle of the world’s largest cowtown and that we’ve had (excepting maybe T McE) grossly unsophisticated leadership that has been a push-over for developers who in turn pushed over a lot of nice old buildings.
Downtown SJ is going to have an artificial Disney-like character for a very long time. Hell, the Council still hasn’t lifted the ridiculous ban on neon signage. Note to Council: what do you think it is about Vegas that provides an atmoshphere of liveliness and excitement?
Until enough people are living there and wielding their influence over future development and providing it with the personality it sorely needs, downtown SJ will continue to be an antiseptic and soulless place. Kind of like, what if they gave a downtown and nobody came? We’re experiencing that “what if” right now.
To all the OhNo’s and Kathy Chavez Napoli’s of the world…San Jose, being the 10th largest city in the country, can pursue Major League Baseball AND provide city services at the same time. Why don’t you naysayers take your “Small town USA” attitude to Los Banos and leave this blog to proud San Joseans with a vision. And by the way, the Diridon/Arena Redevelopment area is currently planned for mix-used development…nothing wrong with acquiring land for that use.
Tom Clifton is right, lets have more real discussions and political debates to improve San Jose not more wasted social discussions even if entertaining. Fridays Blog addresses our real problems with humor
Dale – Another possibility about the Parkland fund accounting problems is that showing what actual park funds have been rescived by San Jose will show how the Park Impact Fee policy of 3 acres per 1000 residents is not enforced due to numerous City Council land use decisions, credits and exceptions so that what we are actually getting is only enought developer money to build about 1 acre of parkland per 1000 residents
San Jose’s Parkland Policy is another example of San Jose’s professional politician’s promises / commitments where we have many political excuses, no accountability and very poor results
Open Thread is a great way to get San Jose’s important community issues listed and then we can start the discussion about how to solve these problems which should include the candidates for Mayor and Council offices
We should only elect candidates for political office who demonstrate they understand the important issues and are willing prior to their election to give solid committments about what they will actually do about our city’s problems with few or no future political excuses like
– the voters did not pass the special tax for ??? so we can’t do anything until we pass a new tax
– I proposed the solution but the other elected officials did not support it –
Would you put up with these types of poor excuses in your business or anywhere other than politics
These frequently used excuses clearly shows their solution was not workable since they did not work on the issues and get the promised results
We have been fooled too often by professional politican excuses. when are we going to demand accountability and results
A few days ago Patrick Fitzgerald gave this nation a peek into the scumbag politics of the office of the Vice President. Conspiratorial lies, ruthless vengeance, disdain for the rule of law, disrespect for the people: Politics, Dick Cheney Style. Real heartbreaking stuff for anyone who believes in the America envisioned by the Founders. Washington as usual? Maybe, but I can’t help but think that the bastardized rule under which we all now suffer has its roots not in the highest offices of the nation, but instead in the city council chambers and county boards of its great cities.
Case in point: The mayor that has been so often blasted on this site may be guilty of many sins, but none so significant as the one for which he has never been condemned: playing politics the way the big boys do. Mayor Ron is, sadly, much like most big city mayors: obsessed with consolidating his power, cementing his political future, operating in secrecy, and fashioning a self-serving legacy no matter the cost to the taxpayers. And while it’s true that RG’s career is reeling at the moment, it is even more true that if he can turn down the flame, his indiscretions will have done no more than singed him, leaving him still in the run for office at the state level.
In other words, the dirty dealings and character flaws that have turned so many San Joseans against him—and would disqualify him for a simple civil service job here—will not hinder him in his quest for higher office provided he can show his party that he has the backing of the right lobbyists. Ron the labor candidate; Ron the Hispanic candidate; Ron the “this space for rent” candidate.
But what if the state had an election and the cities offered up only candidates of good character? What if in future congressional races there was no candidate owned by labor or business; no one indebted to the pro-choice or pro-life zealots, no one on life support from the ACLU or the Christian Right? What if the cities produced only dedicated public servants, you know, politicians with the kind of courage and commitment once common in America; the kind of selfless dedication that propels cops into gun battles and firefighters into burning buildings? Imagine an America with real leadership; where the people and the law and the right thing all mattered.
Sounds naïve, I know. But if this city, the 10th largest in the nation, can rid itself of the back room operators, turn a deaf ear to the race hucksters, recommit to Civil Service and transparent government, we could not only enjoy the benefits of clean, professional leadership, we just might demonstrate to the rest of the nation—and that includes Washington, DC—that good government can be done.
Tom Clifton’s comments are correct if you have not read Scott Herhold’s comments in the Sunday Mercury about ” Civic decisions should pass the glue test ” you should
– San Jose’s biggest problem is that it grew too fast. After World War II, the compact agricultural town that easily served a population of 80,000 was overwhelmed by five decades of growth driven by greed.
– we need to change the way we use our land and design our buildings. We need to ask if the decision creates social glue or cohesion. If yes, approve it. If not, rethink it.
– Does opening Coyote Valley for housing create glue? It’s hard to see how. Instead, it stretches city services and creates more traffic at the edge of town.
– And big money continues to push the city toward the edges. To reject housing in Coyote Valley means defying a home-building industry that gives a lot of campaign contributions. Politicians find that hard to resist.
was great and right on target
While some negative comments are useful to identify the issues, we need more common sense comments and more workable suggestions to solve our real problems
like Scott’s as well as Tom’s, Mark T, and others on San Jose Inside if we are going to encourage political debate, discuss the issues, and improve San Jose
#!3—I have no problem with a ballpark as long as it is privately financed. The city can’t provide many of the the basic city services now and that’s without a ballpark. Should be a real special place when a ballpark is built and city services further decline.
Removing parking meters must be accompanied by time restrictions on parking. If not, bunches of folks would give up their monthly parking lot for which they pay and just stay all day at the non-metered street spot. That would not help downtown businesses.
Our current parks are a shambles. The public employees who “maintain” them (boy, is that a joke) are worthless.
Just look at the parking strip of St. James Park along Third Street. Large blocks of “grass” is brown because it’s not watered. Do the parks and rec bozos who “maintain” them look at that when they’re mowing? HELL NO! Why? It’s not in their job description. So, most of the parks we already have look like sh*t.
Although much of what you say about downtown San Hozay is accurate, it is a bit odd in the context of your perpetual praise for San Francisco.
Much of San Francisco is a sewer. The plaza in front of City Hall had a nice pool—lengthy and clean until Feinstein & Brother Willy let the homeless there take over. They finally drained it becuase the homeless were bathing and defecating in it—what a combo, eh? And the nearby United Nations Plaza—permanent aggressive homeless grifters.
Market Street/ Mission/Howard between Fifth and Seventh makes any part of downtown San Hozay looks like a clean room in comparison.
The inner and outter Mission districts in “The City” are gang central, far more than W. Santa Clara on a Saturday night in San Hozay.
All this in the city/downtown you praise in comparison to San Hozay.
Get real, smurf…and get the cojones to tell us your real name.
Ed Rast, I did read that column and Scott really nailed it with his whole glue theme. The Council would do well to act on his points as well as yours. Whether we like it or not, this is all going to happen with baby steps. If only the urban sprawl had happened that way we might have that glue already. Rome wasn’t built in a day because they had a vision. Still no vision in these parts and the days continue to pass. . .
“Removing parking meters must be accompanied by time restrictions on parking.”
Yes, I agree, that would be part of the 1-year pilot program. I met a friend earlier today at Historic Downtown Campbell where they have 2-hour time limits and no parking meters. It seems to work for Campbell, why not San Jose. Today’s blog was one of the best- good discussions!
I don’t share all of finfan’s political views but I am definitely one of the many marginalized citizens he speaks about and agree 100% with what he’s stated in #25.
It’s too bad that people with influence are too timid to embrace his ideas and champion them. The “unique community” tail has been wagging the dog for way too long. The pile in the plaza demonstrates nicely what catering to the “unique community” results in for the marginalized majority.
First, the city must return to the merit standard in hiring and promotion. Government is important and expensive; taxpayers deserve the best bang for their buck. No more of the color-coded, gender balancing shenanigans that have inserted mediocrity and incompetence into every government equation. The city will not convince its employees that performance is paramount, or even valued, until they begin to hire and promote strictly according to ability (even one exception creates a cancer of resentment). Oh, and for those who’ve been long relying on affirmative action to get ahead, I suggest a special help program be developed: one that provides free maps and directions to the nearest community or state college.
Second, the city must get out of the race business. With the best of intentions and a ready checkbook, the city has in its dealings with its “unique communities” secured for the taxpayers one failure after another. The endless accounting scandals and the glaring incompetence these groups have delivered has done little other than leave our politically correct leaders speechless and the shameless race hucksters daring anyone to demand accountability. However, should the egalitarian urge continue to demand special programs, let them be administered by able professionals, and let them be distributed according to this society’s best need-indicator: income. Oh, and if someone’s ethnic culture needs expression or honoring, let them demonstrate their commitment to it by spending their own money.
Third, and most important, is the neutralizing of the various lobby groups. I have no expertise in this area, but it seems to me that one way to tackle this issue would be to examine the Grand Jury findings in the NorCal episode and use them to identify those interactions most inviting to misfeasance. Law changes might be required, but new ways to bring light on such transactions must be developed. If the police department can produce in court last year’s hour-by-hour activities of a patrol officer, there is no reason why the meetings of elected officials can’t be accurately tracked. And should the public’s interests require stenographers and armed guards at every meeting until we rid ourselves of these scoundrels, I’m all for it.
Regarding the public’s apathy, it is my opinion that until the power of special interest groups is curtailed, Joe Citizen will continue to stay away. And who can blame him after decades of being marginalized for his lack of uniqueness, his lack of minority status, his lack of appeal to “progressives.” Until the taxpayer who simply wants safe streets and clean sidewalks garners more interest at City Hall than does the Andean Indian who wants the mayor to honor his “Son of the Sun” god, don’t expect a packed house come Tuesday.
JohnMichael, you’re right about the most part of SF being a sewer, but if you compare downtown SJ to SF, downtown SJ is sewer stinch comparing to downtown SF. I was talking about downtowns, not the whole city. Thus, downtown SF is fairly clean, and downtown SJ is a sewer filth. Like I said, I was just talking about downtown, and downtown SJ is a disaster while downtown SF is vibrant and active with all kinds of old, cute buildings. There are, which you know, alot of retail in downtown SF; also, it’s fun to be there. Downtown SF was spared the destruction downtown SJ experienced in the last 40 years with stores and businesses taking flight to suburbs and outlying areas. What a horrible past and present leadership!
While I agree the city should return to a merit standard for hiring and promotions. I disagree with your color coded comments and the direction your comments appear headed. While RG is the mayor most of his advisors in power positions in SJ government are still headed by “majority & marginalized citizens” who have been instrumental in the current and future challenges of this city. They always escape the spotlight somehow, anyone ever question why is still Del the CM today after performing so poorly. Remember Cisco, Furniture Contract, to name a few of the spotlight was shown on, but who got thrown under the bus a women and a person of color Jose from public works. Why the Office Economic Development continues drive the process of moving jobs outside of San Jose instead working to bring jobs and business to SJ. Fleece the citizens with a $10M tent and are unable to deliver a 100% commitment from EBAY to support the project? I wonder what type of incentives did the City offer EBAY to move from Campbell to San Jose? These deals are being done by your “majority & marginalized citizens” and the staff which is composed the same composition.
Yes the City should get out of the race business and get on with having people who are qualified based on merit not based on who they know of influence. The problem is that if they did that a lot of your code word “majority & marginalized citizens” might be out of work. As you stroll around this city guess who is building this city, planning & designing, and running the permitting process? Responsible for feeding information to the elected officials who continue trust them even after be burned so many times and having to come to the citizens time and time again with egg on their face.
So fear not “majority & marginalized citizens” you are still in control of the process just operating behind the spotlight and when its put on you, are still able to escape.
Larry Stone has been trying to get performance standards into the Assessor’s office since he was elected the FIRST time. He’s now campaigning for his third term, and he is still unsuccessful
The public employee unions and the teachers unions have a stranglehold on lack of performance at all levels of government, not just here locally. Look up “bloat” in the dictionary, and CalTrans pops up, as just one example.
Dale Warner and I had an exchange off this blog about how dilapidated our parks are. The S-Jay park and rec employees mow lawns week after week that are browned out due to broken sprinklers, but do or say nothing about it. “That’s not my job Mang”.
Arnold tries to do what he thought was his mandate after bumping Wilson, but the interest groups put together millions to keep it business as usual. So what can we do? Sadly, not much unless we have another Boston Tea Party.
You’re gonna hafta define for me what you think “downtown” SF is. I lived in SF from 1963-1977, with a one year break. I have no idea where “downtown” SF is.
Is it Civic Center? Is it Market Street? Is it Union Square? Is it The Finanacial District? To me, it’s none of the above.
SF is almost unique West of the Mississippi in that it consists of districts and neighborhoods. But downtown—I don’t believe SF has one.
FinFan, Mark T. & Greybeard all make excellent points.
But it seems to me that San Hozay is virtually ruddrless at this point, so the day-to-day decisions that affect us all (planning, building, parks & Rec, VTA) are being made by individuals who have no leaders.
Gonzo/Guerra are gone and they know it— The lamest of Ducks. Del was neutered the day he took the job. There isn’t a single spine on the entire city council. They’re all raising money to pay for polls to tell them how to think and talk so they can get re-elected to their do-nothing seats.
They still don’t get it after all these years—Prop. 13 was about too much government waste requiring payment by the citizens and non citizens who actually work for a living.
In Sacto, with HUGE deficits, how can there be any debate about tax cuts vs. service cuts. Hell, we don’t get much service as it is, and they want to raise more money to throw at the problems.
It’ll go that way, down a slippery slope, until one day we’ll realize we’re all in a small lifeboat and the non-performers just won’t eat.
Barry Witt of the Merc this morning sez VTA will delay the latest sales tax vote for BART to December 1. Still too much dissention on the VTA Board for “consensus” building.
This is a win for the people in a way. It forces VTA and the SJ city council members who sit on its board to think about voter trust and honesty in its planning. Given the 3 sales taxes every SJ and county resident already pays to VTA (2 of which since 1978), only a clueless fool would dare approve a fourth sales tax anyway.
Eugene Bradley
Founder, Santa Clara VTA Riders Union
ps. Ed: I plan on being at the conference on the 12th in SJ
Please don’t mistake my desire to make merit paramount as an endorsement of the abilities of any one group (to get specific, white males). There is no doubt that the faces behind the mistakes of the past and the disappointments of the present have been more often than not white in color. There is also no doubt that in a merit-based system many of those particular white faces would never have ascended to their positions of power. Instead, they would have been challenged into improvement or out-competed at every rung of the career ladder by their talented peers. You see, merit attracts and keeps talent, while the compromised system under which we now suffer coddles mediocrity, rewards cronyism, and destroys values.
I’m not rooting for any one race or gender; I’m simply rooting for the best people available.
Downtown SF is defined the area from SBC park to the south to area north of the Financial district to the north, right beyond the Transamerica bldg. and from Hyatt Regency to the east and the theater district to the west, close to Union Sqaure. It’s a happening area! San Jose is a dirty sleepy cowtown with menacing crime in the downtown area. By the way, there are more homeless bums in downtown SJ.
San Jose is in the mess it is in because loyality is the most important trait and is rewarded to the Gonzales – Guerra administration not merit, ability or truth
Ops, sounds like the Bush administration and on second thought maybe they are Republicans in disguise since they sure act that way – abusive, vendictive, mean spirited, keep an enemies list, remember who did not support them without question, promote loyal not qualified friends and absolutely sure they know better than other elected officials, public or voters on many issues where often they are entirely wrong as history will soon show
The consequesnces of their bias for loyality has been devastating for San Jose
Issues don’t get aired, good ideas don’t come forth or are ignored, merit is not rewarded, people are not respected, power politics is rewarded, campaign contributors are given contracts and development rights, and the downside risks of decisions are not studied or assessed in the chase for short term political results leaving numerous problems for future taxpayers.
Sounds like Bush could hire Gonzales-Guerra and they would fit right in to the recent vacancies
Mr. O’Connor,
You bring up an interesting point…is there a “downtown” San Francisco? It seems to me the whole city could be considered “downtown.” And speaking of San Fran…high-end retailers, shoppers and tourists seem to coexist happily with the homeless and mental health cases at Union Square. Perhaps we in San Jose can learn from that example.
For starters, what downtown SJ needs are practical stores like Mervyn’s, Target and maybe Staples so residents don’t have to drive off to buy underwear or laundry detergent when they need them. They create foot traffic too that will someday be able to support (drumroll please)… a Bloomingdales.
S.J. downtown needs a strip mall 18 stories high with Bloomingdale’s on the top 4 floors and a restaurant on the 18th. The nearest Bloomingdale’s is Stanford Shopping Center. How about this for a start?
Clauer, a Water Tower Place (Chicago) type shopping complex would be great downtown—someday. As for Bloomingdales, it makes perfect sense for downtown because people will go there instead of making the trek to Stanford, IF the setting can offer the same type of pleasant shopping experience that Stanford does. That doesn’t mean outdoors or anything, just a nice destination where you can spend some time, and get your parking validated!
JohnMichael, ask all the real estate brokers, and they’ll define the downtown area from 4th st. to the west and the ferry/market place terminal to the east, and downtown is defined from the Pyamid tower to the north and China Basins to the south which includes SBC park. Bottomline is downtown SF includes Union Square, Financial District and SoMa area! Yes, the South beach area is also downtown SF. You should check it out with the SF economic development officials, and they will give you the same area definition. Downtown SF, you know, is great and also very clean and safe. That’s why I constantly refer SF, the center of Silicon Valley.
Smurf has you on this one. I grew up in SF and Smurf’s definition is what has always been considered Downtown SF.
Bigger issue to me is San Jose lack of both a downtown and nieghborhoods with charm and charactor. Only nieghborhood I can think of is Willow Glen. The rest of San Jose is tangled sprawl in my opinion.
Downtown is just a plain mess; only reason I go there is to drink!
I would agree with Tom Clifton’s assessment yesterday about the lack of “meat” lately on SJ Inside. Maybe, on a more positive note, readers could begin a string of ideas on what they want to see done to improve downtown and San Jose. I’ll start with one: Remove the parking meters downtown for a one-year pilot program to help bring customers to downtown merchants.
How about that Gonzo. Once again he jumps on the bandwagon way too late. He finally figured out that it is good to be supportive of goals that will help protect our environment. He wouldn’t sign on months ago when many other cities were doing so. But as usual with him, better late than never.
On another topic, how about the end run the city is doing to assemble ballpark property without a vote of the public as required. City officials are simply winking and saying we might use the land for something else. How deep do you think we will be into this before the publid gets a chance to speak? Welcome to the next debacle.
How about the SJ city council submitting its “transportation priorities” to VTA with llitle public comment? (BART! BART! BART!) On Thursday, half the City Council, as VTA Board members and Vice Chair Chavze, “rubber stamping” said priorities.
Eugene Bradley
Founder, Santa Clara VTA Riders Union
SAN JOSE NEEDS LONG TERM PARKLAND PLANNING…
When we consider what San Jose should look like in 25 years, we probably all agree that outdoor green spaces for play & recreation are near the top of the list.
Yet the mayor and many city council members block park development and resist planning ahead for new parks. For example, I can recall dedication of only two new parks in District Four in the past five years. And this is during a time when well over 350 acres of industrial land in District Four has been converted to residential land, about 300 acres in the last 18 months alone.
Even if San Jose lacks money for park maintenance (the most frequently advanced excuse for doing nothing), land for parks could be set aside through a combination of options purchase, land trade deals, and land banking for the future. Developers could even be required to comply with the city ordinance requiring dedication of 3 new acres of parkland for each 1,000 new residents. None of these things is being done at this time.
The Parkland Trust Fund is a shambles. The parks department was asked by the city council in February 2005 to prepare a financial history of the trust fund for publication in August 2005. This is information that would, at the most, be only 15 years old and is already computerized.
The parks department had to admit it had not been able to put out this simple report on time, and now has (I believe) until December 2005 to publish. This is just a report about the payments made in lieu by developers to the trust fund since the program began at the end of the 1980s, and where the money was allocated by the trust fund. The parks department can’t do it.
Most of us who have been seeking this information since late 2003 have come to the conclusion that something is going on—either the city or RDA borrowed from the Parkland Trust Fund, or the trust fund is obligated in one of the city’s fancy financial deals as some kind of collateral and is therefore untouchable.
I suspect a major scandal underlies the Parkland Trust Fund’s failure to report its activities on an annual basis as it should anyway.
Even downtown’s parks could benefit from a close look and improvements to help attract new businesses and residents to the downtown core. Both the downtown core and the suburban neighborhoods benefit from new and improved parks.
From today’s Merc story on Gonzo’s environmental flip-flop:
“…San Jose is already well on its way to achieving about half the 21 goals, said David Vossbrink, the mayor’s spokesman. Among them: implementing recycling and composting programs…”
I guess we misunderstoood that whole Norcal deal…Gonzales was just being a good environmentalist!
Winkin’, Blinkin’, and Nod
I don’t care what it takes, I would love to see a ballpark. Yes, we have the Sharks but with a ballpark our town might look like a big city. Unless some are afraid of that?
The PDO is a mess. Try to get a straight answer from a Councilmember about this (or anything else, for that matter.) Council has no problem approving more and more housing but can’t provide the adequate amenties. It doesn’t take years of studying to know we have areas of the city that parkland deficient. It also doesn’t take a genius to know why this has happened—can you say developer contributions?
It’s time for the people to take back our city from the big money folks who purchase our councilmembers. What are we going to do about it?
My comments on Tom Clifton’s accurate assessment of this site can be found on yesterday’s post.
As for today’s “topic” has anyone ever heard District 9’s Judy Chirco ever say a word about anything? Has anyone ever seen her quoted in the Merc or even one of the lesser weeklies?
I channel surfed recently and found her on public access talking with Bill Chew. I have never seen such lack of substance and so much rhetorical lip service than what she emitted.
Time to find somebody new to represent this district. Remember, this is the district that produced Jim Beall. Chrico couldn’t be doing a better job of following in his footsteps and the voters need to stop her in her tracks.
A ballpark, like SBC Park, would be great. What do you think the chances are that SJ will do it that way and not burden the public with paying for this private enterprise? If you said just about zero you’re probably right. As usual, our “leaders” will saddle the taxpayer with what should be a boon to the city, but instead will be a boondoggle.
Strike 3.
G & H –
You are right on. We need a real rep in District 9. Let’s start looking around.
I was in downtown the other day, and I found it pathetic. There are so many homeless bums in the area. What a disaster! Like I said, it’s a lost cause. The area is filled with hoodlums. By the way, Ceaser Chavez plaza park’s fountain is a total decay, abandoned by the city. The park is an absolute mess, a haven for the mentally ills and alchoholics. I’ve seen downtown evolved from a great, vibrant area in 1948, which I first moved to San Jose, to a declining downtown in 1959, to disaster or bottomed out downtown in 1972, and rebuilding era from 1977 to 1999, and on to today’s dismal downtown. Downtown today is worst than the era between 1968 and 1976 since there are way more bums and abandoned building with way less retail than that time. At that time(1968-1976), there were considerable more stores in downtown and cool coffee shops to hang out. Also, there were no gang-bangers there at that time. It was kind of quiet, but it was more of a downtown because there still were quite a few older attractive buildings that were not yet torn down. There were alot more potential for that downtown since it wasn’t destroyed as of that time. Downtown presently is very sterile and devoid of life. It’s also plaqued with surface parking lots and vacant parcels- no continual flow of office/retail space: just alot of gaps between! They should have concetrate very dense development on available parking lots without destroying historical buildings. There were no watchdogs but greedy darelicts(developers and ignorant politicians). We would’ve had a great downtown with alot of characters. It would’ve been a funky downtown that’s alot of fun! That’s so awful that we have a downtown that’s worst than ever!
Smurf, you have captured the downtown saga very well from post-war to present. There is no question that even in the darkest days we had more retail and more interesting buildings that would today be jewels if only they had been saved and restored. Instead we have a collectively bland and beige palm-studded monument to Frank Taylor.
The problem with downtown is that it was sized for a population of barely 100,000 when its decline began. Now we’re pushing 1,000,000 and trying to morph the downtown into something that takes generations to develop on its own.
It doesn’t help that this is all happening smack in the middle of the world’s largest cowtown and that we’ve had (excepting maybe T McE) grossly unsophisticated leadership that has been a push-over for developers who in turn pushed over a lot of nice old buildings.
Downtown SJ is going to have an artificial Disney-like character for a very long time. Hell, the Council still hasn’t lifted the ridiculous ban on neon signage. Note to Council: what do you think it is about Vegas that provides an atmoshphere of liveliness and excitement?
Until enough people are living there and wielding their influence over future development and providing it with the personality it sorely needs, downtown SJ will continue to be an antiseptic and soulless place. Kind of like, what if they gave a downtown and nobody came? We’re experiencing that “what if” right now.
To all the OhNo’s and Kathy Chavez Napoli’s of the world…San Jose, being the 10th largest city in the country, can pursue Major League Baseball AND provide city services at the same time. Why don’t you naysayers take your “Small town USA” attitude to Los Banos and leave this blog to proud San Joseans with a vision. And by the way, the Diridon/Arena Redevelopment area is currently planned for mix-used development…nothing wrong with acquiring land for that use.
Tom Clifton is right, lets have more real discussions and political debates to improve San Jose not more wasted social discussions even if entertaining. Fridays Blog addresses our real problems with humor
Dale – Another possibility about the Parkland fund accounting problems is that showing what actual park funds have been rescived by San Jose will show how the Park Impact Fee policy of 3 acres per 1000 residents is not enforced due to numerous City Council land use decisions, credits and exceptions so that what we are actually getting is only enought developer money to build about 1 acre of parkland per 1000 residents
San Jose’s Parkland Policy is another example of San Jose’s professional politician’s promises / commitments where we have many political excuses, no accountability and very poor results
Open Thread is a great way to get San Jose’s important community issues listed and then we can start the discussion about how to solve these problems which should include the candidates for Mayor and Council offices
We should only elect candidates for political office who demonstrate they understand the important issues and are willing prior to their election to give solid committments about what they will actually do about our city’s problems with few or no future political excuses like
– the voters did not pass the special tax for ??? so we can’t do anything until we pass a new tax
– I proposed the solution but the other elected officials did not support it –
Would you put up with these types of poor excuses in your business or anywhere other than politics
These frequently used excuses clearly shows their solution was not workable since they did not work on the issues and get the promised results
We have been fooled too often by professional politican excuses. when are we going to demand accountability and results
A few days ago Patrick Fitzgerald gave this nation a peek into the scumbag politics of the office of the Vice President. Conspiratorial lies, ruthless vengeance, disdain for the rule of law, disrespect for the people: Politics, Dick Cheney Style. Real heartbreaking stuff for anyone who believes in the America envisioned by the Founders. Washington as usual? Maybe, but I can’t help but think that the bastardized rule under which we all now suffer has its roots not in the highest offices of the nation, but instead in the city council chambers and county boards of its great cities.
Case in point: The mayor that has been so often blasted on this site may be guilty of many sins, but none so significant as the one for which he has never been condemned: playing politics the way the big boys do. Mayor Ron is, sadly, much like most big city mayors: obsessed with consolidating his power, cementing his political future, operating in secrecy, and fashioning a self-serving legacy no matter the cost to the taxpayers. And while it’s true that RG’s career is reeling at the moment, it is even more true that if he can turn down the flame, his indiscretions will have done no more than singed him, leaving him still in the run for office at the state level.
In other words, the dirty dealings and character flaws that have turned so many San Joseans against him—and would disqualify him for a simple civil service job here—will not hinder him in his quest for higher office provided he can show his party that he has the backing of the right lobbyists. Ron the labor candidate; Ron the Hispanic candidate; Ron the “this space for rent” candidate.
But what if the state had an election and the cities offered up only candidates of good character? What if in future congressional races there was no candidate owned by labor or business; no one indebted to the pro-choice or pro-life zealots, no one on life support from the ACLU or the Christian Right? What if the cities produced only dedicated public servants, you know, politicians with the kind of courage and commitment once common in America; the kind of selfless dedication that propels cops into gun battles and firefighters into burning buildings? Imagine an America with real leadership; where the people and the law and the right thing all mattered.
Sounds naïve, I know. But if this city, the 10th largest in the nation, can rid itself of the back room operators, turn a deaf ear to the race hucksters, recommit to Civil Service and transparent government, we could not only enjoy the benefits of clean, professional leadership, we just might demonstrate to the rest of the nation—and that includes Washington, DC—that good government can be done.
Tom Clifton’s comments are correct if you have not read Scott Herhold’s comments in the Sunday Mercury about ” Civic decisions should pass the glue test ” you should
http://www.broward.com/mld/mercurynews/13035250.htm
– San Jose’s biggest problem is that it grew too fast. After World War II, the compact agricultural town that easily served a population of 80,000 was overwhelmed by five decades of growth driven by greed.
– we need to change the way we use our land and design our buildings. We need to ask if the decision creates social glue or cohesion. If yes, approve it. If not, rethink it.
– Does opening Coyote Valley for housing create glue? It’s hard to see how. Instead, it stretches city services and creates more traffic at the edge of town.
– And big money continues to push the city toward the edges. To reject housing in Coyote Valley means defying a home-building industry that gives a lot of campaign contributions. Politicians find that hard to resist.
was great and right on target
While some negative comments are useful to identify the issues, we need more common sense comments and more workable suggestions to solve our real problems
like Scott’s as well as Tom’s, Mark T, and others on San Jose Inside if we are going to encourage political debate, discuss the issues, and improve San Jose
#!3—I have no problem with a ballpark as long as it is privately financed. The city can’t provide many of the the basic city services now and that’s without a ballpark. Should be a real special place when a ballpark is built and city services further decline.
Jose #1:
Removing parking meters must be accompanied by time restrictions on parking. If not, bunches of folks would give up their monthly parking lot for which they pay and just stay all day at the non-metered street spot. That would not help downtown businesses.
Dale # 4.
So, what is the demographic of park attendees?
Our current parks are a shambles. The public employees who “maintain” them (boy, is that a joke) are worthless.
Just look at the parking strip of St. James Park along Third Street. Large blocks of “grass” is brown because it’s not watered. Do the parks and rec bozos who “maintain” them look at that when they’re mowing? HELL NO! Why? It’s not in their job description. So, most of the parks we already have look like sh*t.
And you want more poorly maintained parks? HHmm.
Smurf #11:
Although much of what you say about downtown San Hozay is accurate, it is a bit odd in the context of your perpetual praise for San Francisco.
Much of San Francisco is a sewer. The plaza in front of City Hall had a nice pool—lengthy and clean until Feinstein & Brother Willy let the homeless there take over. They finally drained it becuase the homeless were bathing and defecating in it—what a combo, eh? And the nearby United Nations Plaza—permanent aggressive homeless grifters.
Market Street/ Mission/Howard between Fifth and Seventh makes any part of downtown San Hozay looks like a clean room in comparison.
The inner and outter Mission districts in “The City” are gang central, far more than W. Santa Clara on a Saturday night in San Hozay.
All this in the city/downtown you praise in comparison to San Hozay.
Get real, smurf…and get the cojones to tell us your real name.
Mark T # 12 is far closer to the truth than smurfie
So, finfan, in the face of an apathy pandemic far larger than the avian flu pandemic can ever become, just how do we do that?
Ed Rast, I did read that column and Scott really nailed it with his whole glue theme. The Council would do well to act on his points as well as yours. Whether we like it or not, this is all going to happen with baby steps. If only the urban sprawl had happened that way we might have that glue already. Rome wasn’t built in a day because they had a vision. Still no vision in these parts and the days continue to pass. . .
“Removing parking meters must be accompanied by time restrictions on parking.”
Yes, I agree, that would be part of the 1-year pilot program. I met a friend earlier today at Historic Downtown Campbell where they have 2-hour time limits and no parking meters. It seems to work for Campbell, why not San Jose. Today’s blog was one of the best- good discussions!
I don’t share all of finfan’s political views but I am definitely one of the many marginalized citizens he speaks about and agree 100% with what he’s stated in #25.
It’s too bad that people with influence are too timid to embrace his ideas and champion them. The “unique community” tail has been wagging the dog for way too long. The pile in the plaza demonstrates nicely what catering to the “unique community” results in for the marginalized majority.
JMO (#22),
First, the city must return to the merit standard in hiring and promotion. Government is important and expensive; taxpayers deserve the best bang for their buck. No more of the color-coded, gender balancing shenanigans that have inserted mediocrity and incompetence into every government equation. The city will not convince its employees that performance is paramount, or even valued, until they begin to hire and promote strictly according to ability (even one exception creates a cancer of resentment). Oh, and for those who’ve been long relying on affirmative action to get ahead, I suggest a special help program be developed: one that provides free maps and directions to the nearest community or state college.
Second, the city must get out of the race business. With the best of intentions and a ready checkbook, the city has in its dealings with its “unique communities” secured for the taxpayers one failure after another. The endless accounting scandals and the glaring incompetence these groups have delivered has done little other than leave our politically correct leaders speechless and the shameless race hucksters daring anyone to demand accountability. However, should the egalitarian urge continue to demand special programs, let them be administered by able professionals, and let them be distributed according to this society’s best need-indicator: income. Oh, and if someone’s ethnic culture needs expression or honoring, let them demonstrate their commitment to it by spending their own money.
Third, and most important, is the neutralizing of the various lobby groups. I have no expertise in this area, but it seems to me that one way to tackle this issue would be to examine the Grand Jury findings in the NorCal episode and use them to identify those interactions most inviting to misfeasance. Law changes might be required, but new ways to bring light on such transactions must be developed. If the police department can produce in court last year’s hour-by-hour activities of a patrol officer, there is no reason why the meetings of elected officials can’t be accurately tracked. And should the public’s interests require stenographers and armed guards at every meeting until we rid ourselves of these scoundrels, I’m all for it.
Regarding the public’s apathy, it is my opinion that until the power of special interest groups is curtailed, Joe Citizen will continue to stay away. And who can blame him after decades of being marginalized for his lack of uniqueness, his lack of minority status, his lack of appeal to “progressives.” Until the taxpayer who simply wants safe streets and clean sidewalks garners more interest at City Hall than does the Andean Indian who wants the mayor to honor his “Son of the Sun” god, don’t expect a packed house come Tuesday.
JohnMichael, you’re right about the most part of SF being a sewer, but if you compare downtown SJ to SF, downtown SJ is sewer stinch comparing to downtown SF. I was talking about downtowns, not the whole city. Thus, downtown SF is fairly clean, and downtown SJ is a sewer filth. Like I said, I was just talking about downtown, and downtown SJ is a disaster while downtown SF is vibrant and active with all kinds of old, cute buildings. There are, which you know, alot of retail in downtown SF; also, it’s fun to be there. Downtown SF was spared the destruction downtown SJ experienced in the last 40 years with stores and businesses taking flight to suburbs and outlying areas. What a horrible past and present leadership!
Response to frustrated finfan #25
While I agree the city should return to a merit standard for hiring and promotions. I disagree with your color coded comments and the direction your comments appear headed. While RG is the mayor most of his advisors in power positions in SJ government are still headed by “majority & marginalized citizens” who have been instrumental in the current and future challenges of this city. They always escape the spotlight somehow, anyone ever question why is still Del the CM today after performing so poorly. Remember Cisco, Furniture Contract, to name a few of the spotlight was shown on, but who got thrown under the bus a women and a person of color Jose from public works. Why the Office Economic Development continues drive the process of moving jobs outside of San Jose instead working to bring jobs and business to SJ. Fleece the citizens with a $10M tent and are unable to deliver a 100% commitment from EBAY to support the project? I wonder what type of incentives did the City offer EBAY to move from Campbell to San Jose? These deals are being done by your “majority & marginalized citizens” and the staff which is composed the same composition.
Yes the City should get out of the race business and get on with having people who are qualified based on merit not based on who they know of influence. The problem is that if they did that a lot of your code word “majority & marginalized citizens” might be out of work. As you stroll around this city guess who is building this city, planning & designing, and running the permitting process? Responsible for feeding information to the elected officials who continue trust them even after be burned so many times and having to come to the citizens time and time again with egg on their face.
So fear not “majority & marginalized citizens” you are still in control of the process just operating behind the spotlight and when its put on you, are still able to escape.
Greybeard
FinFan #25:
Sadly, much of what you say is true.
Larry Stone has been trying to get performance standards into the Assessor’s office since he was elected the FIRST time. He’s now campaigning for his third term, and he is still unsuccessful
The public employee unions and the teachers unions have a stranglehold on lack of performance at all levels of government, not just here locally. Look up “bloat” in the dictionary, and CalTrans pops up, as just one example.
Dale Warner and I had an exchange off this blog about how dilapidated our parks are. The S-Jay park and rec employees mow lawns week after week that are browned out due to broken sprinklers, but do or say nothing about it. “That’s not my job Mang”.
Arnold tries to do what he thought was his mandate after bumping Wilson, but the interest groups put together millions to keep it business as usual. So what can we do? Sadly, not much unless we have another Boston Tea Party.
Smurf#28:
You’re gonna hafta define for me what you think “downtown” SF is. I lived in SF from 1963-1977, with a one year break. I have no idea where “downtown” SF is.
Is it Civic Center? Is it Market Street? Is it Union Square? Is it The Finanacial District? To me, it’s none of the above.
SF is almost unique West of the Mississippi in that it consists of districts and neighborhoods. But downtown—I don’t believe SF has one.
FinFan, Mark T. & Greybeard all make excellent points.
But it seems to me that San Hozay is virtually ruddrless at this point, so the day-to-day decisions that affect us all (planning, building, parks & Rec, VTA) are being made by individuals who have no leaders.
Gonzo/Guerra are gone and they know it— The lamest of Ducks. Del was neutered the day he took the job. There isn’t a single spine on the entire city council. They’re all raising money to pay for polls to tell them how to think and talk so they can get re-elected to their do-nothing seats.
They still don’t get it after all these years—Prop. 13 was about too much government waste requiring payment by the citizens and non citizens who actually work for a living.
In Sacto, with HUGE deficits, how can there be any debate about tax cuts vs. service cuts. Hell, we don’t get much service as it is, and they want to raise more money to throw at the problems.
It’ll go that way, down a slippery slope, until one day we’ll realize we’re all in a small lifeboat and the non-performers just won’t eat.
Time for another Boston Tea Party, folks..
Barry Witt of the Merc this morning sez VTA will delay the latest sales tax vote for BART to December 1. Still too much dissention on the VTA Board for “consensus” building.
This is a win for the people in a way. It forces VTA and the SJ city council members who sit on its board to think about voter trust and honesty in its planning. Given the 3 sales taxes every SJ and county resident already pays to VTA (2 of which since 1978), only a clueless fool would dare approve a fourth sales tax anyway.
Eugene Bradley
Founder, Santa Clara VTA Riders Union
ps. Ed: I plan on being at the conference on the 12th in SJ
Greybeard (#29),
Please don’t mistake my desire to make merit paramount as an endorsement of the abilities of any one group (to get specific, white males). There is no doubt that the faces behind the mistakes of the past and the disappointments of the present have been more often than not white in color. There is also no doubt that in a merit-based system many of those particular white faces would never have ascended to their positions of power. Instead, they would have been challenged into improvement or out-competed at every rung of the career ladder by their talented peers. You see, merit attracts and keeps talent, while the compromised system under which we now suffer coddles mediocrity, rewards cronyism, and destroys values.
I’m not rooting for any one race or gender; I’m simply rooting for the best people available.
Downtown SF is defined the area from SBC park to the south to area north of the Financial district to the north, right beyond the Transamerica bldg. and from Hyatt Regency to the east and the theater district to the west, close to Union Sqaure. It’s a happening area! San Jose is a dirty sleepy cowtown with menacing crime in the downtown area. By the way, there are more homeless bums in downtown SJ.
San Jose is in the mess it is in because loyality is the most important trait and is rewarded to the Gonzales – Guerra administration not merit, ability or truth
Ops, sounds like the Bush administration and on second thought maybe they are Republicans in disguise since they sure act that way – abusive, vendictive, mean spirited, keep an enemies list, remember who did not support them without question, promote loyal not qualified friends and absolutely sure they know better than other elected officials, public or voters on many issues where often they are entirely wrong as history will soon show
The consequesnces of their bias for loyality has been devastating for San Jose
Issues don’t get aired, good ideas don’t come forth or are ignored, merit is not rewarded, people are not respected, power politics is rewarded, campaign contributors are given contracts and development rights, and the downside risks of decisions are not studied or assessed in the chase for short term political results leaving numerous problems for future taxpayers.
Sounds like Bush could hire Gonzales-Guerra and they would fit right in to the recent vacancies
Smurf #35:
Gimme a break!
The area around SBC Park is South Beach, not downtown.
The Financial District is just that—it’s not downtown.
The Transamerica Building is at the edge of North Beach. It ain’t downtown.
The theatre district west of Union Square is WAY different from the area around the Hyatt Regency, which is in The Embarcadero, not downtown.
You have no cred on what SF districts are, smurf. You didn’t get a single one correct. You sure you’ve ever been there????
Clauer:
Do we have enough transplanted New Yorkers to support a Bloomingdales downtown San Hozay with Stanford so close?
Mr. O’Connor,
You bring up an interesting point…is there a “downtown” San Francisco? It seems to me the whole city could be considered “downtown.” And speaking of San Fran…high-end retailers, shoppers and tourists seem to coexist happily with the homeless and mental health cases at Union Square. Perhaps we in San Jose can learn from that example.
Clauer:
For starters, what downtown SJ needs are practical stores like Mervyn’s, Target and maybe Staples so residents don’t have to drive off to buy underwear or laundry detergent when they need them. They create foot traffic too that will someday be able to support (drumroll please)… a Bloomingdales.
S.J. downtown needs a strip mall 18 stories high with Bloomingdale’s on the top 4 floors and a restaurant on the 18th. The nearest Bloomingdale’s is Stanford Shopping Center. How about this for a start?
Clauer, a Water Tower Place (Chicago) type shopping complex would be great downtown—someday. As for Bloomingdales, it makes perfect sense for downtown because people will go there instead of making the trek to Stanford, IF the setting can offer the same type of pleasant shopping experience that Stanford does. That doesn’t mean outdoors or anything, just a nice destination where you can spend some time, and get your parking validated!
JohnMichael, ask all the real estate brokers, and they’ll define the downtown area from 4th st. to the west and the ferry/market place terminal to the east, and downtown is defined from the Pyamid tower to the north and China Basins to the south which includes SBC park. Bottomline is downtown SF includes Union Square, Financial District and SoMa area! Yes, the South beach area is also downtown SF. You should check it out with the SF economic development officials, and they will give you the same area definition. Downtown SF, you know, is great and also very clean and safe. That’s why I constantly refer SF, the center of Silicon Valley.
JMO
Smurf has you on this one. I grew up in SF and Smurf’s definition is what has always been considered Downtown SF.
Bigger issue to me is San Jose lack of both a downtown and nieghborhoods with charm and charactor. Only nieghborhood I can think of is Willow Glen. The rest of San Jose is tangled sprawl in my opinion.
Downtown is just a plain mess; only reason I go there is to drink!