No Friends of Our’n – Anti-Growth Group Opposed in Council Chambers (Updated)

George Rebane

Just returned from a very significant meeting of the Grass Valley City Council.  The council chambers were packed – SRO.  Mayor Johnson opened the session with some well deserved citations and proclamations recognizing local organizations doing good.  Then he opened up the meeting to public comment.  Howard Levine, Exec Director of the GV Downtown Association, stepped up to the podium and delivered a prepared statement that correctly and succinctly framed the proposed anti-growth initiative that has been announced by a nascent group calling itself Friends of Grass Valley. 

Howard outlined the divisive and strangling future that this initiative, if successful, would impose on Grass Valley and Nevada County in general.  At the end of the statement when he came to the “we stand together” to oppose this inititiative, with a few exceptions, the whole chamber stood in solidarity to make their feelings known.  A very impressive statement lost on none.

After Howard Levine finished, Steve Enos stepped up to the mike and delivered a similar statement of opposition.  In short, what impressed me was the broad political spectrum of support that was present tonight.  I saw Jeff Ackerman of The Union, Martin Light ED of CABPRO, Gil Mathews CEO of the ERC, Peter Van Zant former Supervisor, and many other community notables were there to make this statement on an issue that was not even on the Council’s agenda.  It was simply the timely thing to do.  Everyone understood that such an initiative would drive jobs from the county and board up windows on Mill and Broad Streets.

Mayor Mark Johnson concluded that segment of the evening with appropriate remarks that recognized the sentiments of the folks who showed and gave all hope as to which way the Council would be leaning on this when push comes to shove.  As Pogo once famously said to Porky, “Yep, son, we have met the enemy, and he is us.”

==== 9apr08 gjr

More perspective on this meeting and issue is available from Russ on NC Media Watch here.  Also, I was a bit amused by this morning's report in The Union where it was reported that "about 100 people stood  up" at the meeting in support of Howard Levine's statement.  Since almost everyone was standing and the chamber holds a little more than one hundred, it reminded me of the story of Abe reporting on a footrace that he had lost to Ben.  Abe truthfully recounted that he had come in second in a competition in which Ben had placed next to last.

Comments

[Overtaxed and Unheard]

Peter was against the no-growth initiative, he stood in agreement with ERC and CABPRO?

[George Rebane]

To answer Overtaxed and others who may be equally surprised, let me just state that I have confirmed the accuracy of my report.

[Dixie Redfearn]

Good synopsis! There were many more than 100 people standing..as you saw. This was the most significant event of the meeting, yet was relegated to a paragraph. Politics makes strange bedfellows when you have John Spencer and Joey Jordan agreeing on anything!

[Howie Muir]

Yet, it is curiuos that none of the opponents of the initiative, including The Union, have yet managed to present fact-based arguments about just how the initiative is wrong-headed, or how it is that adopting the core of the city's current approved General Plan unchanged is such a horrendous idea. Perhaps politicians are uncomfortable with the idea of actually adhering to public policy or allowing the citizens they serve to set those public policies?

[George Rebane]

Fact1 - Every general plan becomes progressively dated and out of touch with the community's needs as it collects birthdays. The GVGPis no different. It is for that reason that general plans are finally redrafted.

Fact2 - Public opinion is manipulable and volatile. Interjecting a public vote to approve every new development that does not conform to a dated GP places yet another risky hurdle in the way of someone who wants to invest in the community thereby making it less likely that such investments will be attempted.

Fact3 - Businesses are closing down and are slow in coming to western Nevada County. Our economic growth is nil to negative which portends a very bad future for all county residents. There is an effort underway by the four joint jurisdictions to come up with a process that promotes economic growth in Nevada County. There is no evidence that putting in place the requirement for popular approval of new developments will promote the growth and welfare of any jurisdiction.

[russ]

Howie,

Here are some facts from an article I wrote in 2003 for the Capitol Journal on managed growth impacts:

Dr. Samuel R. Staley, Ph. D. Senior Fellow at the Reason Public Policy Institute, looked at the consequences of local growth management on affordable housing in WASHINGTON and FLORIDA, which both have controlled housing based on density, household size, household income and geography. His study found in FLORIDA that 20% of housing price increases could be attributed to compliance with growth management legislation. In WASHINGTON it was 26%. In Ventura County, CALIFORNIA, another RPPI study found that growth controls will produce a shortage of 14,000 to 27,000 units by 2020, creating a huge market demand for existing housing.

You can read more of this article at NC Media Watch on Thursday the 24th.