17

Union Pacific puts most of NUMMI land back on the market

This is obviously incredibly good news for the city, since a giant railyard would have killed development possibilities in and around the future Warm Springs BART Station.

SJ Business Journal broke the story. Read their blurb here.

Here’s the paragraph they put online for free:

The railroad, which purchased the property last December, wants to sell 94 acres of the northern parcel and 53 acres to the south, but the 94 acres will only be on the market for 12 to 15 months. If it is not sold within that time frame, UP may move ahead with plans to put the property to rail-related use as originally conceived, said Aaron Hunt, spokesman for Union Pacific.

Matt Artz

  • Marty

    Bud Selig just fired up his paper shredder.

  • charlie C

    Question #1
    What high ranking FCNer said this…
    “I knew that the railroads were here before I moved here, I don’t know that a railroad yard will be such a tremendous impact to us as residents.”
    Bud & Lew need to come back to the table…Fremont can *still be saved*.

  • bbox231
  • Niles Baxter

    I recognize that you feel, Charlie, that Fremont can still be saved by a stadium complex. There are those of us, however, who feel that Fremont was saved from the negative impacts that a stadium would have brought through the combined actions of concerned citizens who opposed the project, with help from existing local businesses and a national economic downturn.

    Fact is, there are bigger fish to fry, like what is structurally wrong with the way this city/state/country are managed and what can be done to improve that situation. I think I get your point on privately financed sports facilities that save taxpayer dollars (from a separate post); can’t we all find the areas where there is mutual agreement and move forward?

    To that end, I would encourage everyone to read the first official statement issued by Occupy New York:

    http://nycga.cc/2011/09/30/declaration-of-the-occupation-of-new-york-city/

  • West

    Thank you for posting that link Niles Baxter.
    I completly agree with that beautifully written document.

  • Marty

    That was profound, Baxster. Here’s the short version for those who’d rather not sift through the platitudes:

    We, the “Occupy” movement are pretty much against the same s**t the Tea Party was against in 2009, before we marginalized them as neocons and racists. But we really thought back then that Obama would nationalize the banks, perp walk a few bankers and have our mortgage balances written down. Damn, none of that even came close to happening. So, the best we could come up with is that the top 1% are paying 34% in federal taxes instead off 39%.

  • Dan Ondrasek

    hmmmm…

    5% of what I make: I could use that for things like food and school tutoring

  • Dan Ondrasek

    …off to generate tax revenues.

  • Marty

    5% of what I make: I could use that for things like food and school tutoring

    You misunderstood, Dan. The question is how is collecting 5% more from the top 1% of earners’ income is going to improve the lives for the other 99%. I’m not against raising taxes, but I think this question should be addressed in real terms.

    Extending unemployment and paying down debt will do very little for workers in the short term. I don’t need to hear this from the street – my guess is that 9 of 10 of the protesters don’t even know why they’re there. But I would like some articulation from the president, since this is becoming his sole focus for the campaign.

  • Jon Simon

    Marty,
    The 5% could be invested in health, education, and infrastructure. That will help the 100%.

  • Dan Ondrasek

    I am in the middle of a s-storm at work and do not have the time to research this

    I believe that the benefits that we in this former great state have all enjoyed came from my father’s “Greatest Generation” paying their fair share. What I would like help from you and all on this BLOG is to understand the tax rates at that time. Without knowing, I will bet you that that top 1% had a lot fewer loopholes to wiggle through in 1946 that those same folks do now. We need to stop with the math-play and truly understand if/why the middle class is paying a higher percentage of taxes that the uppers.

    The uppers need to do this for their own self-preservation

    If they don’t and this isn’t addressed, that “wave” that was the Tea Party is going look like a ripple as the tens of millions that are un or under-employed wake up and jump on this one….

    Hope I’m wrong.

    (I want less corruption or more participation in it)

  • Marty

    Sans a law dictating executive pay ratios (will never happen), I can’t imagine any real benefit coming from these protests, at least in their current form. Sliding a few upper tax rates back to 2002 levels will do nothing for the middle class (Unless you consider an Obama re-election on it’s face value a boon).

    The movement will become more left centric, and therefore more partisan and lose support precipitously. If they are to organize into another pseudo-third party a la the Tea Party and install representatives into government, they will come at the expense of Democrats, sliding legislative majority to the right.

    Violent revolution, or the innuendo of, would serve little to overturn economic injustice, as the top 1% are sheltered both financially and literally. It would be the store fronts of the middle class that would be broken, so to speak.

    The only movement I see successful is all the leftbags making up with the teabaggers and taking on two party government. Will never happen, because now everybody hates each other – a reality Obama is readily embracing. He’s a divisive, and that’s why I want him out.

  • Dan Ondrasek

    I agree with the first statement. Again, I hope I am wrong but this is not a bunch of hippies in loin clothes beating drums (as much as Fox News would like you to believe this).

    “The movement will become more left centric, and therefore more partisan and lose support precipitously”
    – disagree: it didn’t happen with the TeaBags and there are a hellava lot more people who buy into the above manuscript. Take a case study: Venezuela. Don’t be quick to roll your eyes – they had a strong middle; an educated populace but they allowed to rich to eat the middle.
    Two classes: the lower didn’t have power or money.
    But they had one thing:
    VOTES.
    Enter Chavez; a couple quick changes in the constitution and the country spiraled into socialism.

    ..and Marty, it didn’t happen with “Violent revolution” – there were a couple of deaths and many protests but not as many as one would think…
    Regarding your statement “top 1% are sheltered both financially and literally” – the top 1% are sheltered there too – they are just all new faces: those who have kissed Hugo’s behind (granted there are always one or two smart old-schoolers left behind but they can’t leave their houses either).

    We have never had a class war here because we in the middle always felt that somehow, someway they/we were going to live on the hill.
    I am not hearing that as much anymore. Are you?

    They better throw some “cake” to those folks in the loin cloths…
    Again, I hope I am wrong…..

  • Dan Ondrasek

    – disagree: it didn’t happen with the TeaBags and there are a hellava lot more people who buy into the above manuscript.

    Clarification: the Baggers did go more right-centric but their impact will be felt for years.

  • Marty

    So, we have the politics of fear.

    Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

    Hugo branded socialism is a hot fantasy for many, but there is no chance in this country for the foreseeable future (though, 50 more years of open borders should provide adequatee conditions).

    We are in down times, but remember, this is the first depression where the American unemployed had iPhones. Venezuelans could barely feed themselves.

  • Dan Ondrasek

    ….I think this is your point: Those same iPhones created the Arab Spring?

    Don’t go to sleep – there are some very new things happening here …and that pendulum always swings way too far right or left.

  • Marty

    I don’t see anything new. Remember, the early 2000s were defined by domestic and worldwide protests daily, and we still invaded two countries. Just showing up has proven symbolic at most.

    94-95% of college educated workers have jobs, which spells contentment. As does 3+ years of UE insurance to help maintain one’s iphone data plan. ;)

    Also, an agent would have to be employed to enact whatever changes were demanded. At the extreme, the most hopeless countries rely on a military backed coup. Without a doubt, impossible in this country.

    There’s the government, which from the latest numbers is trusted by about 30% to improve economic conditions (core Tea Party sentiment is pretty universal, despite the marginalization).

    So, that leaves an articulate, charismatic, messiah-like character to take the country by storm, motivate the young and give the voters a reason to “hope”.