Short city council journal

Your favorite lawmakers are back at it tonight, and they look great on my laptop screen here in Centerville. Unfortunately, my day started early, and it’s time for me to head back to Oakland.

Not much to report so far:
The Osgood Road rehabilitation project has been delayed by the rain.

The city didn’t get a grant for a project outside the School for the Blind

The council got an update on capital projects. City Manager Fred Diaz alluded to the fact that if there’s no more redevelopment, the city will get about $5 million more for its general fund, which it could spend on capital projects or pensions or something else.

Matt Artz


  1. It’s funny that school rehabilitation and expansion is not on Diaz’s list, but pensions are.

    And, I don’t think it’s any coincidence that Jerry Brown’s budget enables city managers to keep the union gravy trains flowing. All that talk about eliminating RDAs being a boon to education was just pillow talk.

    Every move the Dems make is directed at serving their union masters.

  2. Diaz didn’t say “pensions.” He said “operations.” I interpreted it since pensions is slated to make up one-seventh of the general fund budget next year.

  3. Marty, how do you reconcile your strong support for Anu Natarajan in the last City Council election with your hatred for union-backed Democrats? Because she’s certainly one of them.

  4. Why would the city work on school projects? That’s the district’s domain. If Republicans aren’t going to give on taxes, Democrats probably aren’t going to give on pensions and wages.

  5. @Jon, that’s an interesting point. If the city has no obligation or standing to improve schools with the money that comes in after eliminating RDAs, then I don’t see the point. Jerry Brown should make this clearer when promoting his budget.

    @Charlotte, As for Anu, she is not my vision of a perfect council candidate. She is union funded, obsessed with the future Fremont fantasy, and shows up to support wing nut causes such as the 84 improvement protests. But she has some positives, one being that she personally involved herself in a significant problem that came my way, and was key in getting the problem solved. She earned my vote in that respect.

  6. @Marty. Re Anu, it seems you’re a personal interests rather than issues voter. Re redevelopment: if the RDA’s are abolished, more than 50% of the resulting tax savings will go directly to the schools. The rest will get divided between the County and CIty governments, and other local boards and districts.

  7. That’s right, Charlotte. I vote my interests.

    I’m still confused about the net gain or loss to Fremont. And I’m getting the feeling that nobody really knows. Why is the city whining about losing RDA taxes if there will be a net gain of $5M to the general fund?

    And, I’ve seen that 50% figure reported as low as 17%, which I’m assuming is the percentage of what the state back fills with RDAs.

  8. Marty, here’s where our Redevelopment Director Elisa Tierney says that annual RDA money would go if the RDA’s were abolished (addendum to agenda of special RDA meeting on 1/17/2011):
    – $1 billion or 53% to schools (would count over and above Prop 98 requirements)
    – $290 million or 15% to counties
    – $490 million or 26% to cit ies
    – $100 million or 5% to special districts

  9. Charlotte,
    That’s a good point re Marty’s bias, but how about you? Isn’t Vinnie Bacon tooting the union horn also?

  10. @Robert, I cast my votes in line with my views on environmental and fiscal issues. I favor candidates who would preserve our financial and natural resources. Vinnie gets my support for his environmental policies.

  11. Robert, I’m sure you’re aware that others have biases, the rest of us have what we call convictions. See, doesn’t it feel better to put it that way?

    I’m wouldn’t bet on Vinnie becoming a union puppet. Especially if he can win once without them. But as Wieckowski has demonstrated, incentives await most Democrats who become a labor whore.

  12. Btw Charlotte, post #9 adds even more confusion. If Elisa Tierney is talking in terms of billions, she’s not talking about what’s specific to Fremont’s finances. What’s the net gain or loss to Fremont’s general fund, and what is the net/gain to schools?

    This should be a simple number to estimate, though it’s elusive. Smoke an mirrors?

  13. @Marty, current Fremont RDA revenue is $34.5 million annually. Net gain to Fremont’s general fund if RDA is abolished would be just over $5 million annually (this from Elisa’s report on the same Jan 17 RDA agenda). Gain to Ohlone and FUSD would be about $18.28 million annually (this from multiplying the annual RDA revenue by the 53% that would go to local school districts).

  14. Marty will take any position on any issue as long as it allows him to argue with others, call them names and be the center of attention. I know the behavior … I have a four year old at home.

  15. Pitre, you’re two for two here at the TCB for presenting nothing other than your personal hatred and name calling directed at me.

    Perhaps you should teach that four year old how to take a stand on issues instead of whining like his opinionated, yet inarticulate and insecure mother.

  16. #16…PITRE the POMPOUS continues to PONTIFICATE. A favorite tactic of the FCN. As you know The Fremont Citizens Network has imposed their will upon us. Unless we wise up and smell the Bacon they will do it again. It’s a fact that majority of Fremont’s voters most certainty would have voted like the Santa Clara’s voters did ( about 60% approval) to bring Fremont all the benefits of a professional sports franchise. Alas we have been duped. The majority of us fell asleep at the wheel and as a result we were swift boated by the uncompromising and unreasonable.

  17. Marty,

    You spew hatred here all of the time. Name calling? In this thread alone you said “wing nut causes”, “union puppet” and “labor whore”. When I got you to admit you were being a hypocrit you called me a weasel. The pot again is calling the kettle black.


    The fat lady has sung. Your side lost. Get over it and quit being such a sore loser.

  18. With respect to comment 18 by Charlie C, the Fremont Citizens’ Network did not bring about the demise of the proposal to build a baseball stadium, 3150 houses and 500,000 square feet of retail space. The original proposal put the stadium west of 880 where there is insufficient public transportation for the fans. Also, the Catellus Corporation opposed the stadium in front of the City Council representing the Auto Mall businesses.

    When the proposal for a stadium was changed to put it next to the Warm Springs BART station, Mr. Wolff did not even want to pony up the money for a new environmental impact report. That is, Wolff really wanted a stadium in San Jose, but he also wanted the long-term development rights for 3150 houses plus 500,000 square feet of retail space.

    In summary, the stadium did not happen in Fremont simply because the stadium was merely a lure to capture the City Council into giving development rights that would have swamped Fremont schools, devalued the other housing in Fremont, and would have needed public funds from the Redevelopment Agency as a subsidy.

  19. Paul I agree 100% but this is a waste of your time and effort when it comes to Charlie and Marty over the ballpark. They really think that FCN is responsible for the ballpark failure. Not economics not that most of people in Fremont don’t even want a stadium. Why not blame the real people like backdoor dealing Bob W-ass-erman and his good ol boys network. If they would have been upfront about the whole project instead of trying to force it down our throats maybe we would have a ballpark today.

  20. #20 Paul…I disagree. The FCN is clearly responsible for being irresponsible. First it’s swift boat politics then it’s mar#20 Paul…I disagree. The FCN is clearly responsible for being irresponsible. First it’s swift boat politics then it’s marginalize anyone who disagrees with your side. Responsible people could have made this work. Thanks to the Fremont Citizens’ Network a once in a lifetime golden opportunity is now gone. Unlike the A’s they were NOT going to be reasonable. Now we have lost years of steady cash flow, thousands of jobs, tax revenue, upscale development, tourist and the civic pride a professional sports franchise would have brought to us.
    #19 Pitre I would agree that the majority of Fremont voters are losers and we should be sore. Fremont is less desirable place to live than it could have been.
    #22 Worble…if it got on the ballot it would have passed just like it did in Santa Clara.

  21. Marty,

    I remember that discussion. That’s where you contradicted yourself within a few hours. You were supposed to find two lines where I contradicted myself but never did leaving you as the only verified ‘hypocritical pud’.

    #60 – “Piter, the FCN really didn’t do much other than collect an email list. Let’s give the back patting a rest.”

    #70 – “I obviously believe FCN was a major player, or I wouldn’t have started a blog critical of them.”


    We heard you the first time and the 322nd time. Maybe you should move into the great neighborhood next to Oakland Coliseum. I’m sure the area will sprout jobs and retail soon. Give it time. It’s only been 45 years.

Leave a Reply

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