Wednesday Santa Clara Study Session on Citizen Participation in Sports Complex Visioning

At a recent Santa Clara City Council meeting, City Manager Julio Fuentes spoke about the need  connecting citizens to the city's long-term planning at an early stage. It's a challenge as many know. The minute that city officials say "maybe we should" or "what if," the rumor mill goes into overdrive and by day's end slogan-bearing tee shirts are being printed. 

However, in the hope that more early discussion will help build public trust, this Wednesday at 4:30 the City Council's goal-setting sub-committee is holding a study session about the ways residents can participate in the research and  recommendations for a new Santa Clara sports park complex. Find the agenda here. The meeting is at the Council conference room, adjacent to the Council Chamber. 

The discussion was triggered by the brouhaha created when the Council began talking, at a September study session, about moving the 10 year-old Santa Clara Youth Soccer Park from its present location side-by-side with Santa Clara's new Levi's Stadium. The Council has said that no decisions have been made. You an watch the Council meeting here and selecting agenda item 5.c. 

Judge Rules: Dissolution Law Did Not Invalidate The Stadium Agreements

"Before redevelopment agencies were dissolved, the Forty Niners contracted with the City of Santa Clara's Stadium Authority and redevelopment agency to finance construction of a new stadium to be owned by the City and used by the Forty Niners. Do those contracts survive dissolution of the redevelopment agencies? The court concludes they do."

Read Judge Alan Sumner's ruling at https://services.saccourt.ca.gov/publicdms/Search.aspx and search for case # 34-2012-80001192. 

First Look at Santa Clara's Super Bowl Bid

Tuesday night Santa Clarans get their first look at what cities are expected to ante up for a Super Bowl bid. The City Council called a special meeting for Tuesday night to adopt a series of resolutions about government services – especially public safety – and tax and fee exemptions for the NFL during a Super Bowl.

Basically, the City of Santa Clara will the provide government services – including public safety, fire, emergency medical services to support the Super Bowl and related events held in Santa Clara at no cost to the NFL or to the teams playing in the Super Bowl. Instead, the San Francisco Super Bowl committee will reimburse Santa Clara for these costs – paying the city for pre-event services within 60 days of invoicing, and 50 percent of the anticipated Super Bowl event costs 30 days before the game.

Other accommodations concern city taxes and fees. One is that employees of the NFL and their affiliates will be exempt from Santa Clara hotel taxes and parking permit fees -- the estimate is this applies to around 350 people. The other is that Super Bowl tickets will be exempt from the Santa Clara's $0.35 per ticket surcharge. This is capped at $250,000 and the city estimates that most of that will be collected from regular season games.

The Council is working from estimates that a Super Bowl carries with it an economic boost for a region of $300 million. This is likely based on a Williams College study of Super Bowl economic impacts from 1970 to 2001, which posited the $300 million as the best case. The study also cautioned against confusing gross returns with net returns. 

The New Orleans Super Bowl Host Committee reported $434 million in total overall economic activity tied to the 2013 Super Bowl, according to a report in New Orleans Times Picayune. The question is, of course: How much of that activity will be in the City of Santa Clara -- or even in Santa Clara County? San Francisco clearly anticipates that it's going to get a big boost. 

All this being said, a Super Bowl would be a tremendous boost for Santa Clara both in terms of civic prestige and city visibility. These are intangibles whose effects cannot be measured in the short term, yet pay dividends for the city decade after decade in many ways. 

Here's a link to read the agenda report and the text of the resolutions.

Safe Routes to School for The Other Santa Clara School District (TOSCSD)

What's it like being part of The Other Santa Clara school districts (TOSCSD) -- i.e. Campbell and Cupertino? Well, here's an example. VTA, Santa Clara Unified School District and the City are sponsoring a "Safe Routes to School" poster contest.

For SCUSD students. I'm sure that no one meant to exclude anyone. And if you brought it up, I'm sure that someone would try to include TOSCSD. It's that it looks like nobody designing this program even thought about TOSCSD.

Children from the West Pruneridge neighborhood have to negotiate very unsafe routes to school. How many SCUSD children have to cross San Tomas Expressway, Stevens Creek Blvd, the Saratoga Ave. I-280 interchange, and I-880 all on every to school?

It's not SCUSD's fault that TOSCD isn't included. On a macro level, it's the state of California's fault for shirking the politically unpopular job of rationalizing school district boundaries.

County Board of Education Trustee Leon Beauchman is taking on this project for the county in the coming year and some of the boundaries that's going to be looked are Campbell's. (One of my readers called it "Campbell's Peculiar Institution." If you think about it, Campbell is certainly peculiar: Four-fifths of it is in other cities that have their own school districts.)

But, let's face it, we're not going to see district boundaries change in the short term.

So how about a City Council goal of pro-actively including all Santa Clara's students in city activities and programs. How? Well, how about a mailer for starters? After all, the city knows the addresses that are in those districts

What do you think?

Here's the info on the poster contest: santaclaraca.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=8478.

Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors to Santa Clara County Cities: Tough Luck

Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors President Ken Yeager is a busy man. He's got too many bicycle photo opps to get to.

Judging from his response, it seems he doesn't have have a lot of time for the whiners and complainers in the Santa Clara County Cities Association who think they're getting a raw deal from the county in the unwinding of redevelopment. In fact, he's such a busy man he doesn't have time, it seems, to find the answers to questions that county cities are raising.

Yeager's answer to the Santa Clara County Cities Association's letter about the county's aggressive asset grabs is simple: Tough luck. Any more questions? Call Deputy County Executive James Williams at (408) 299-5128.

Williams was at the last meeting of the Santa Clara RDA Successor Agency Oversight Board  explaining the county's position that Santa Clara simply needed to 'un-pay' money that had already been spent. The same meeting that Jamie Matthews called "a lot of brain damage" for  "little benefit."

Here's the county's reply to Cities Association:

Santa Clara Cities Association Tells County: RDA Actions Aggressive, Partisan and Costly

A couple of weeks ago the Santa Clara County Cities Association sent a letter to the County Bpard of Supervisors about what amounts to their dereliction of duty in the unfolding RDA dissolution debacle. To what the cities say, we would only add that it seems reasonable to ask that the Board of Supervisors give at least as much attention to hundreds of millions in public investments as they do to George Shirakawa's now-notorious expense reports.

Here's the letter in its entirety (five pages):

Contentious School Board Meetings Yield Higher Attendance, Plus a Vocabulary Lesson

Every cloud has a silver lining. Even the contentiousness that has characterized Santa Clara Unified School District Board meetings since the new board was seated in December -- although that may be hard to believe for those unfortunate enough to have endured those marathon meetings. 

The upside is that that many more people are attending board meetings and actively participating. And that, after all is what democracy is all about.

Another upside is that the community is getting to know some people, who are clearly articulate and informed about education, and, refreshingly, aren't connected with the usual suspects in Santa Clara politics. 

Let's hope that some of them come forward to run for Santa Clara Unified school board in 2014. Who knows, we may even see a new face from the South of Forest neighborhood if that area is successful in its fight to rationalize* district boundaries in this town. 

*Per Merriam-Webster, there are several meanings for the verb 'rationalize' besides "providing plausible but untrue reasons for conduct." These include: 

• To bring into accord with reason 
• To apply the principles of scientific management for a desired result
• To substitute a natural for a supernatural explanation
• To free from irrational parts (mathematical)

It seems to me that all of these apply to California's crazy quilt of school districts. They defy reason, are extremely costly and inefficient, are zealously defended by the High Priests of the Status Quo as divine directives, and need to be purged of irrelevant baggage that obstructs proper decision-making.