Letters to the Editor

You call that courage?
In your Sept. 8 editorial, you say
”
The Councilmembers showed courage and leadership in moving the
sewer renovation project along in the face of overwhelming public
opposition …
”
Let me get this straight. Years ago before the sewer spill, our
elected officials did nothing to deal with a system that was being
overwhelmed despite many warnings. Then we had the spill and the
building moratorium way back in 2002. Since then we have heard
little about this other than how City and County governments can’t
agree on anything.
Now four years later, because we are facing serious fines, a
plan suddenly appears that will have us pay four times as much as
just about any nearby community and we have to go with it because
it’s the only thing we can do to prevent the fines. You call that
leadership?
Real leaders deal with problems before they become crises. We
had years of warning to prevent the spill and no action. Since the
spill we have had years to look at what neighboring cities have
done and to come up with a more cost-effective solution. Waiting
until you are forced to take action is not leadership and certainly
not courageous.
Mark West
Hollister
You call that courage?

In your Sept. 8 editorial, you say “The Councilmembers showed courage and leadership in moving the sewer renovation project along in the face of overwhelming public opposition …”

Let me get this straight. Years ago before the sewer spill, our elected officials did nothing to deal with a system that was being overwhelmed despite many warnings. Then we had the spill and the building moratorium way back in 2002. Since then we have heard little about this other than how City and County governments can’t agree on anything.

Now four years later, because we are facing serious fines, a plan suddenly appears that will have us pay four times as much as just about any nearby community and we have to go with it because it’s the only thing we can do to prevent the fines. You call that leadership?

Real leaders deal with problems before they become crises. We had years of warning to prevent the spill and no action. Since the spill we have had years to look at what neighboring cities have done and to come up with a more cost-effective solution. Waiting until you are forced to take action is not leadership and certainly not courageous.

Mark West

Hollister

Del Webb and sewer rates

Be careful what you vote for.

So Del Webb wants Hollister voters to give them an exception to the city’s growth cap so they can then ask to be annexed into the city limits. I support voters’ right to decide whether large projects are in keeping with the character of the community. The negatives that I can see with this project are that it is “leap frog” development far from the city limits and city services, that building north of the airport hampers all future economic potential of the airport, and that local senior citizens will not be able to afford the steep Del Webb price tag on houses.

On the other hand, the more new sewage hookups there are, Hollister citizens have been told, the less citizens’ sewer bills will rise to finance construction of a new wastewater plant. A cynic might think the reason the developer is asking only Hollister citizens to vote on the project is clear: only Hollister citizens will be faced with a direct financial incentive to vote “yes” on the project.

Del Webb isn’t stupid – their operatives helped sell Hollister citizens on the need for the rate increase. While county residents, if allowed to vote, might have voted on the merits of the project, the developer knows that Hollister voters will also be forced to factor in their household budgets.

Tracie Cone

Panoche Valley

Don’t give away control

Vote NO on Measure S.  Approving Measure S means loss of local control for the City of Hollister.  This measure makes major changes to the city’s 2005 General Plan that have not been approved by the Planning Commission or the City Council.   It also cancels the voter-adopted growth limit of 244 homes a year passed just four years ago, in 2002.  Measure S favors a single development that wants to build 650 homes a year in the city just for their project.

If adopted Hollister would issue 994 total residential building permits every year for 6 years and 9 months!  Just think of adding 1,000 new homes a year for almost seven years.  Instead of the 1,647 homes called for by the plan, Measure S will result in more than 6,047 new homes total.  Changes to the General Plan should go through the regular process, that’s what it’s there for.  This measure is just an end-run by the sponsors who are betting you won’t really understand or carte what’s going on.  Have you read it yourself?

Even the developer claims only 15 percent of the homes will be purchased by city/county seniors, the other 85 percent is just high-rate growth with a special exemption.  If it’s approved, the city residents will have given away the barn for nothing but unenforceable and vague promises; NO on Measure S.

Marty Richman

Hollister

Develop, but develop slowly

Your Editorial of Sept. 8 is correct that Hollister needs the upgraded and expanded sewage plant and that the painful increase in fees for water and sewage is probably the best way to pay for it. But to shoulder this burden because we need the “benefits of development” is misleading. What “benefits”? Whose benefits? The developers benefit, of course, as do those who sell them land. Perhaps some businesses and maybe some new stores will benefit us all. However, we existing residents will pay a heavy price, as the proposed fees make clear.

Numerous studies find that residential development above a certain level penalizes existing residents in many ways: increased taxes, overburdened hospital, municipal services and schools. Infrastructure rarely keeps pace with new demands. And this does not mention quality of life issues like traffic, open space and more crowding. As to jobs, construction jobs are temporary – or do we plan to keep developing forever?

Having said this, I admit that a certain slow and deliberate rate of new building is desirable. For that, the new wastewater plant should be adequate for many years. And we do need housing for workers to attract new businesses that can benefit the community. We do not need more mansions to dot our hilltops or massive housing tracts to overrun our farmland.

City and county governments should serve the interests of our whole population and be very skeptical of the misleading blandishments spread by eager developers. Furthermore, those impact fees that look so good to cash strapped governments do not begin to cover the obligations they incur.

John Blake

Hollister

Due to technical difficulties …

As Murphy’s Law would have it, CMAP had some major technical difficulties cablecasting the September 5th City Council meeting from Hollister City Hall. While we were able to record the majority of the meeting, only the audio would go out live. I realize there were some hot issues on the agenda, and that many residents were disappointed that they could not see the action live that evening.

Rest assured, we were frantically trying to troubleshoot the problem throughout the evening. Between our Programming Assistant at CMAP, the on-site operator, and myself (in the middle of bathing my two year old at home…), we couldn’t crack the problem. As it turns out, CMAP’s equipment was functioning fine, but a cable device in the basement of the building had frozen up and wouldn’t send out our signal. A wise man reminded me that when you work with technology, you’re going to have technical difficulties. Ain’t it the truth.

If you haven’t seen the replay yet, you can tune in to CityView 17 at 8:30am weekdays this week, and Saturday and Sunday at 7pm through September 17.

Many thanks to our wonderful operator, Sarah Apodaca who kept her cool that night under the most trying of circumstances. Give her a kudos next time you see her at a council meeting!

Suzanne St. John-Crane

Executive Director, CMAP

Who does Rep. Farr represent?

When Sam Farr came to town the other day, he made a special point to note that he has no card identifying him as a US citizen and that there is no such card.  Well, I beg to differ. I was born abroad at a naval air station, and my documentation states VERY clearly that I am a United States citizen.  Perhaps we should start issuing United States citizen cards to U.S. representatives first, and then proceed with the rest of the population, subject to verification of course.

That way, we won’t have to believe employees are U.S. citizens as we could easily verify citizenship. The Pinnacle could have easily asked the employer mentioned in the article whether they had verified all their employee’s status using a voluntary system, at www.uscis.gov, as opposed to just asking the social security office whether the number used was a valid number. Perhaps Rep. Farr could have pointed out this useful tool. Perhaps he is too interested in counting illegal aliens for district apportionment of

congressional districts.  Michigan is currently calling for a constitutional amendment to disallow this current practice.  Perhaps Sam Farr could comment on whether he supports US citizens on any issue?

If not, who does he represent?

Mark C. Dickson

Hollister

Rallies are goldmines

I see John Lemos (Sept. 10) is still playing the part of Chicken Little, stating, “You cannot put the Hells Angels and the Mongols in one place, add massive amounts of alcohol and drugs and not expect to put our town and its people at risk.”

Having been to every Hollister rally except 2004, I never saw “massive amounts” of alcohol or any drugs.  Assuming all of these drugs are more than just a figment of his imagination (or paranoia), Little John needs to assist the police by revealing the location of this great stash.

Mr. Lemos needs to come out of his bunker and attend a like event, Street Vibrations, next weekend (in Reno), even thought it may be too scary for him, since Hell’s Angels have a presence there (I’ll be picking up a couple more shirts), just like in Hollister in years past.

When Lemos can explain why motorcycle rallies are successful in every U.S. city (that hosts them) except Hollister, then he will have a bit of credibility.

If this is truly a Hollister election issue as you state, I’m sure the mayor’s re-election bid is quite safe, since 60 percent of Hollister supports the Rally (with an estimated half of the remaining 40 being indifferent). 

Alan Viarengo

Gilroy