Yes, democratic principles of government have their limited uses within our system of Constitutional Representative goverment; direct democracy not so much. Due to the decades-long history of schizophrenic debate (and resulting inaction) regarding Manteca's downtown area, this may be one of those rare non-tax issues that demands to be put to voter referenda, such as these two:
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
BALLOT MEASURE #1 - Concept of Downtown Manteca
VOTE FOR ONE:
Option A. Do nothing. No action = No expense. Continue the status quo into the long term future.
Option B. Make downtown car-friendly. Provide infrastructure by widening Main Street and Yosemite Avenue to at least four lanes to allow free-flowing traffic and provide only necessary off-street parking.
Option C. Re-route traffic and make downtown into a walking mall. Define, consolidate and close off a downtown district to through traffic. Walking, cycling, a transit center, motorized scooter chairs, emergency vehicle access, etc.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
BALLOT MEASURE #2 - Theme of Concept for Downtown Manteca
In the event Ballot Measure #1, Option C passes, please choose between the following Theme drawings.
VOTE FOR ONE:
Option A. Artist's Rendering (Modernistic)
Option B. Artist's Rendering (Futuristic)
Option C. Artist's Rendering (Old Western)
Option D. Artist's Rendering (Cannery Row)
Option E. Artist's Rendering (et cetera)
Option F. (et cetera)
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
All natural persons, not businesses, have an opportunity to vote. Every voter with a stake in Manteca, whether large or small, gets to have his or her voice heard. If anyone declines to vote, so be it; other voters will decide without them.
Once the vote is tallied and the majority's will is known, adopt the results into an Ordinance to provide sure direction to City Councils into the future. With the major policy decision made, infrastructure development or redevelopment actions can then be carried out with some safety from the fractious cat fights and eventual erosions of will presented in past attempts to address this "litmus test" issue.
The City should be in the business of infrastructure; not in the business of business.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Despite the above discussion, it is sad commentary on council members who did not "own" their position of representatives of the people - who had already democratically delegated their authority WHEN THEY VOTED FOR HIM AND HER!
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Edit:
This Manteca Bulletin article was published Thursday, based on an interview Wednesday which covered many subjects. I have included (most of) the comments because the newspaper's system drops them when the article is archived.
Behling: Put downtown to citywide vote
Idea is to get clear agreement at ballot box to end donnybrook
http://www.mantecabulletin.com/news/article/15938/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TheSovereign:
Great, more direct democracy to screw things up even more than it has now. We need representatives that will actually make the decisions that we voted them in for. Instead, we will get more indecision, and nothing will come from it. Why elect someone who is just going to turnaround and have you make all the decisions. Lets have monthly citizen gatherings instead of the city counsel, and have the citizens decided what the city should do and the direction it goes in. Why have a council at all? Cantu4mantecamayor.com a man with a plan. That will work just as well.
TheMantecaResponse:
You just said what Behling just said and complained of him saying what you said. "Why elect someone who is just going to turnaround and have you make all the decision." Uh, that's what we all want and need in our government these days, not those in office who think they know what's best and controlling the people. Cantu is more Obama and tax and spend liberalism. In case you did not know, we do have monthly citizen meetings. It's just we have representatives. Do you know that that means?
Here is Mr. Behling's website. http://tlc4manteca.blogspot.com/
FJR:
Comment: Perhaps Mr. Brehling didn't read the replies by bloggers,on mooreheads suggestion of a Santana row in Manteca.How in the hell can we suggest something we can't afford.Does 8 straight deficits from this council suggest we can afford a Santana row.Doe's laying police officers off and cutting city workers benefits and pay, suggest we can afford a Santana row.I have only seen two candidates declare our true needs in this city in Infrastructure and that's Carlon Perry,mayor candidate and Mr. Anderson, who is running for council.We have a small population in this small city and quite a few people have felt the impact of what a long term lousy economy can do to their families.This is reflected in the 9.4% drop in sales tax revenue for this city.
Why would anyone in their right mind,vote to spend millions of dollars in RDA money on a Santana row,when our library,Dog facility and other needed infastructure has been neglected by the current council, for eight long years and has no current plans in place for any of them.
Most people can't afford frequent visits to a high priced mall like Moorehead can.Just dinner there could be half of some Mantecan's weekly grocery budget.Mr. Brehling we have had enough of big spenders,while our taxes is being spent and we face constant rate increases and heavy taxation by the state. You and Moorehead suggest big spending of RDA that supports schools and public safety,on something that is to expensive for the hard working people of Manteca.The fact is,why replace spenders on the council, when we have a big spender wanting to replace them? Mr. Brehling you just s##t your mess kit with me. {ed. What a wonderfully descriptive turn of the phrase!}
I fight for actual needs in this city,not some expensive high rolling Santana row we can't afford. I get critisized often for my conservatism,that is geared to our actual needs.I believe it's time to Spend RDA on our needs,for a change.What you and Moorehead is suggesting would be,just a continuation of filling the damn bank accounts of the RDA Agency,that exists on our taxes.
You Sir just made your first mistake in running for a council seat in my opinion. Fleener.
Richard_Behling:
Sov, I agree with you that elected representatives should have a spine and be leaders, making and holding to decisions based on their positions, without testing the wind on every little thing.
FJR, I agree with you that Debby Moorhead's suggestion of San Jose's project was a HUGE overreach in feasibilty and cost. Obviously, something proportionate to Manteca is called for.
But, what is called for? Much money and decades of citizens study groups, consulting firms, business surveys, politicians circulating through Pumpkin Faires - none of these methods have produced any vision that has "stuck to the wall." Go read my blog post "Let's Get Democratic About Downtown" and provide some constructive feedback (positive or negative, but not destructive) regarding the proposal.
Richard_Behling:
FJR, it will take years just to make these decisions and plan for Manteca's downtown development or redevelopment. Let's use this economic "down time" to plan it right, keeping in mind that to accomplish something like this will take many years and many future city councils holding to the plan.
mhoffman:
Right, because having no idea what to do is a sign of TRUE leadership ... Good grief.
"Manteca version of the Santa Row " How would we fill this retail space? Magic? Field of Dreams I suppose?
TheSovereign:
The problem with down town is that it no longer serves the purpose that it once did, and now the city keeps trying to turn it into something you would see at Disneyland. In order to really change downtown the city will have to buy every building, redo the fascias themselves, and then try and find businesses to want to move there. This isn't Livermore with the wide streets, and room for outside dining. They had the room and a higher tax base in order to make their downtown look upscale.
Fleener is right that there are more pressing issues in town than condos with store fronts. The two items he brought up along with repaving our streets as well as other infrastructure needs need to be addressed before spending tax dollars on folly like a downtown from Disneyland.
We need to find a way to draw more businesses to this town that will provide higher wages than retail. What is your plan Mr Behling to bring higher paying jobs that will provide greater tax dollars for the city? I am really interested, and I will listen to your suggestions.
Instead of building a new city hall because the one we have isn't big enough, rent the empty store fronts and move some of the city offices to these store fronts. In this case I agree with the notion of conservative if it means conserving what we have until the economy picks up. Use what we have to its fullest until we get to a place where we can grow again.
I would like to see a mayoral candidate put a moratorium on house building until house values stabilize, and/or rise before we add to the supply. Find a different tax revenue stream instead of bonus bucks from the contractors.
I would like to see this town not do what has happened across this country and let its infrastructure deteriorate while they spent money on frills trying to beautify their cities to look upscale.
analisa:
will us, the people of manteca get a vote ?
Jason:
Seriously, it’s not like there's not enough vacant buildings around town. Maybe someone can help me remember what the "re-development" agency is supposed to do. Something about taking the old stuff & making in new. Isn't there a strategy for this? Aren't there examples of what other agencies similarly named have done?
At this point why do we even care? Downtown has become a mute point. People got sick of the game & chose sprawl instead of a strategy. Developers just circumvented the whole mess & built their own downtowns elsewhere in Manteca. Guess what…..shops & people came….a lot of them.
Richard_Behling:
TheSovereign hit the nail on the head with the statement that downtown "no longer serves the purpose it once did," and understands my definition of conservative action over the next few years, while staying ahead of the planning curve. The question is, "Do we, or how do we, redevelop downtown?" Any Band-Aid approach will be - and has been - a complete waste of money, until a clear consensus emerges.
FJR, money WILL continue to be spent by the city on everything from salaries to operations to existing debt service to infrastructure construction and maintenance. Some of it will come from RDA as redevelopment (however defined) occurs. Candidate views on library, streets, animal shelter, business recruitment (also for TheSovereign) and other issues and amenities will come in the weeks ahead. Some of these things tie together and, incidentally, all of them require tax money. Election campaigns are all about redefining priorities, including expansions or cutbacks. (p.s. FJR, I love your wonderfully descriptive "turn of the phrase" regarding mess kits.)
Please each of you email me at RichardBehling.2010@gmail.com. I promise not to ask you for a campaign contribution. :)
FJR:
Comment: My idea for the city improvement, is to divide the city in four quadrants. Select one of these and run a pilot program.Condos over retail has been successful in many cities.If this is successful in bringing people into the town area.Then move on to another segment and develope it.By taking small steps in renovating the city,We as a city, can back off, before we unload a lot of tax money.This is taking a conservative approach at spending.Anything we do in the city area, will be a gamble. But we want get hurt financially, taking a step at the time.
Mr. Soveriegn also wants to proceed with caution, for he has been watching the trend in spending set by this council. He mentioned a new city hall, in addition to the infrastructure I mentioned, in a previous posting. This council has a huge bldg. they bought for 6M in RDA funding.This has the square footage to house a good portion of the city hall.This is the Qualex bldg.They just let sit,for it doesn't even give us a tax base. I also think the city should avoid any partnership on erecting a water slide in Manteca.I think this should be entirely owned and developed, by private interest.This would give us sales tax and property taxes for the city, without investing our taxes.I think the city should draw up a contract with a private party, to use the land free, as long as the owners remained in business. If they didn't,then all property would revert back to the city. Parking fees would be split 50 50 with the city, for the usage of the land.Our leaders should call on me more often to devise plans for them, that saves us tax dollars. Lets talk moritorium on building homes, that Mr. Soveriegn and I have both mentioned on more than one occasion. The city should refrain from giving any developer discount land incentives and our tax dollars. Then you wouldn't have to worry about a moritorium.Sales tax givebacks s/b something we should never do.If developers want to take a hike, then tell them don't let the door hit you in the butt.
I would also put the cities interest in the BLD up for sale.Twenty percent of the total income for the city is rediculous.That way the city would get out of this rediculous contract they signed with BLD.That way,we would receive a tax base for the city and sales tax as well.I don't believe the city signed a document, that prevented the sale of our city interest.
I would also unload the golf course this city subsidizes in play.This is not a business that is providing income for this city.RDA can't be expected to always pick up the lions share of our financing.Some has to filter into schools and public safety.
I would also sell off all surplus land and buildings to return our tax base to the city.We are not in the real property business.
Hang in their Soveriegn.
Mr. Brehling, your telling the people of Manteca, that anything planned for this city, will take years to develope.I have been a resident for eight years and many people have been here all their lives and I have seen nothing in the way of projects for this city or our needed infrastructure. I and others have seen this council spend us into eight deficits and tell us there is no damn money for our needs.We are tired of this bull Mr. Brehling.It want take years and it shouldn't. Plans for this city and it's future infrastructure needs, should be top priority over any project.Money has to be generated, perhaps in the fashion I suggested.The time is now and if your not up to the challenge, don't run for the job.I personally don't care for manana council members.If you want to be a council person,don't give us a future agenda, give us one that will be taken serious now.I don't cut no slack on slackers.I seen no time frame for any of your suggestions Mr. Brehling.One big spender is the same as the ones that exists on the council.Tell me why I should vote for you Sir, when we already have big spenders running as incumbants.Give us something tangible that we can relate to and I might consider voting for you.Apparently the high roller Debby Moorehead has influenced you in proposing a Santana Row for a population still in the latter part of the 60ks.
I am so estatic with this unaffordable dual concurrence.
Fleener.
Richard_Behling:
Jason and TheSovereign and I all agree that downtown Manteca's retail muscle has been relocated, in this case to Hwy 120, leaving a void in the "center" of town. Planning experts across the USA - and here in Manteca - have wrestled with what to do with downtown.
Listen to me carefully, Fleenor. Debby Moorhead's Santana Row is too big, too costly and clearly an overreach for Manteca, but her IDEA was received by most people as a MODEL for a scaled down unitary project. Today's John Harris article clearly illustrates the piece-by-piece approach, with reference to the 2020 study as his personal vision. Both approaches take time and money.
Don't mistake planning - real, detailed, advanced planning - as inaction. No city, including Manteca, can just go in and immediately reconstruct roads, water, sewer, etc. where private property interests exist. The basic options are 1) wait and buy the property or 2) take it through eminent domain for compelling government interests (and watch holy hell break loose!)
Upper level jobs won't come until businesses have suitable resources, bearable tax burdens, and a sustainable customer base.
The theory is government serves the people's personal and economic interests; the reality is governments have longer life spans than individuals and they move more slowly with longer planning horizons.
This next council's mandate - and my part on it - during this economic lull is to:
LOOK INWARDLY at administration,
OVERHAUL departments, systems, pensions,
SLOW DOWN the pace of all expenditures,
CUT OUT "welfare" transfers,
PLAN the amenities, services, and infrastructure that only a city can provide (and no more than that), and
WAIT for people/businesses to again create their own wealth.
p.s. In my view, the old Qualex building would make a terrific (and very large) animal shelter.
mhoffman:
How will RETAIL help anything without a Jobs plan? Seriously, this 'Field of Dreams' approach to Government is completely F'ed. It is possible that Manteca feels that DEVELOPMENT is the only viable job in this area. Perhaps they think that is they grease that wheel enough, it will just carry the town.
This whole mess sound just like 2000 all over again. One would think that even the dumbest legislator would learn the lesson of not doing the same thing that got us into this mess in the first place.
.
