Matt Artz


  1. KTVU aired a news story this morning stating that baseball commissioner Bud Selig sent a memo to Lew Wolff stating if Wolff can’t get the Fremont stadium issue resolved soon he will allow Wolff to talk to other Bay Area communities. Meaning San Jose would no longer be the exclusive territory of the S.F. Giants.
    Let’s see, San Jose has VTA, CalTrain and it looks like BART in their future.

  2. Please consider reading our earlier letter on this project. Since this CEQA process has started, we’ve found that more and more local residents, regional residents, and baseball fans are not being treated with respect by the A’s or its management (not to mention all the great shoreline habitat). Please write in a letter regarding your issues and non-support for this project on or by December 18th to the City of Fremont. The only way the local government will listen is if you write in!

    City of Fremont
    Community Development Department
    39550 Liberty Street P.O. Box 5006
    Fremont, CA 94538
    Phone: 510-494-4540
    Fax: 510-494-4402

  3. The East Bay Chapter of CNPS prepared this letter for presentation last night, but the process denied formal public presentation. i have attached it as follows:
    Good evening. My name is George McRae and I am here tonight representing the East Bay Chapter of the California Native Plant Society, which has over 1,500 local members.
    As an organization, we have many concerns about the proposed development at the Cisco area. It is our expectation that the impacts I will be describing tonight will be analyzed in detail in any environmental review document.
    These concerns about the development are not only limited to the proposed stadium, but also to the proposed housing development which remains on the table whether the stadium finds itself at this location or not. The project as presently constituted poses detrimental impacts to protected habitat, especially the vernal pool and other sensitive wetland ecosystems which contain endangered Contra Costa Goldfields as well as tiger salamanders, fairy shrimp and tadpole shrimp and many other protected and listed species of concern in the adjacent Don Edwards wildlife refuge. This project is considerably different from the originally proposed industrial park. The new proposal of a ballpark, and residential village will bring even greater impacts. The impacts come in many forms from unacceptable water pollutants from oil, gasoline, coolants and other fluids. The original project had a mitigation described for storm water runoff retention, but it is unclear that it is sufficient for the new proposal.
    Air pollutants such as carbon dioxide and nitrogen dioxide from automobiles are of concern as well. CO2 of course adds to altering global climate but the nitrogen impacts are only now being understood as they add significant levels of nitrogen compounds, which can drastically and in many cases irreversibly alter the floral communities. Noise and light pollution detrimentally impact migratory birds. Protected vertebrate species such as tiger salamanders are extremely sensitive and vulnerable to chemical contaminants such as herbicide surfactants.
    The addition of 3,000 residential units must be seen as increase in human population of perhaps over 10,000 individuals. The additional load of landscaping chemicals alone needs to be accounted for. The water needs of the stadium and the new residents must be taken into account. Fremont is a wholesale water customer of San Francisco. Just last month the SFPUC took the enlightened step of deciding to drastically cut its proposed withdrawal of Tuolumne river water believing its wholesale customers can meet their future water needs by increased conservation. The inclusion of a high water use facility such as a stadium defies the logic of conservation. There is also the concern as to the impacts of litter such as plastics, on the wildlife, in particular birds. Trespassing has been an ongoing issue for the refuge and will only be exacerbated. Can the area be protected from increased illegal interloping of humans deliberately destroying fences to access protected areas for destructive recreation such as off road vehicles? The permanent residents and fans will also draw in meta predators such as seagulls, raccoons, feral cats, ravens, and rats which are extremely destructive to native fauna and flora alike. We believe that the multiple impacts of a ballpark and residential development cannot be sufficiently mitigated or avoided to reduce them to a less than significant level. Therefore, we are opposed to the project. It is the wrong place for development and ought to be left as intact as possible.
    George McRae, East Bay Chapter California Native Plant Society

  4. Does anybody have the contact info for groups that have formed against the ballpark at WS and Grimmer. by now there should be a google or yahoo group.

    Let’s strike now and put the kibosh on this bad idea. If we swarm them with our opposition, it might nip this in the bud. Just writing in the blog will not stop this thing. Take time out of your day and get involved.

  5. Eric – I don’t think there’s any such organized clearhousing for groups and opponents. I think such a resource would be great – and could also be set up as a blog on something like vox or wordpress. Could you do this?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *