Showing posts with label Video. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Video. Show all posts

Sunday, April 5, 2020

Fable: THE TOWN MOUSE AND THE COUNTRY MOUSE

A Town Mouse once visited a relative who lived in the country. For lunch the Country Mouse served wheat stalks, roots, and acorns, with a dash of cold water for drink. The Town Mouse ate very sparingly, nibbling a little of this and a little of that, and by her manner making it very plain that she ate the simple food only to be polite.



[Illustration]


After the meal the friends had a long talk, or rather the Town Mouse talked about her life in the city while the Country Mouse listened. They then went to bed in a cozy nest in the hedgerow and slept in quiet and comfort until morning. In her sleep the Country Mouse dreamed she was a Town Mouse with all the luxuries and delights of city life that her friend had described for her. So the next day when the Town Mouse asked the Country Mouse to go home with her to the city, she gladly said yes.
When they reached the mansion in which the Town Mouse lived, they found on the table in the dining room the leavings of a very fine banquet. There were sweetmeats and jellies, pastries, delicious cheeses, indeed, the most tempting foods that a Mouse can imagine. But just as the Country Mouse was about to nibble a dainty bit of pastry, she heard a Cat mew loudly and scratch at the door. In great fear the Mice scurried to a hiding place, where they lay quite still for a long time, hardly daring to breathe. When at last they ventured back to the feast, the door opened suddenly and in came the servants to clear the table, followed by the House Dog.

[Illustration]

THE TOWN MOUSE AND THE COUNTRY MOUSE


The Country Mouse stopped in the Town Mouse's den only long enough to pick up her carpet bag and umbrella.
"You may have luxuries and dainties that I have not," she said as she hurried away, "but I prefer my plain food and simple life in the country with the peace and security that go with it."

Better a little in safety, than an abundance surrounded by danger.

Friday, January 11, 2019

The Suburbs: Planners, Smart Growth and the Manhattan Illusion


Excellent 6 minute video critique of Smart Growth in Southern California
 "If you really believe that suburbs are going to die, then let them die, and let the market address the situation" says Joel Kotkin, Chapman University professor and urban planning specialist.

But letting the market work is far from ideal for California's regional planners and local politicians, who want almost 70 percent of new housing over the next 25 years to be multi-unit apartment-style dwelliings, despite the facts that more than half of Southern California households reside in a single-family home and that more people are leaving California than are coming in.

"In a great nation like ours, you can't let people do what they want. It has to be coordinated," says Hasan Ikhrata, the executive director of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Ikhrata's group, which directs planning for the Southern California region via subsidies and contracting with big developers, foresees a future in which Southern California is dense, full of high-rise buildings, and connected by rail, much like New York City.

The problem is, LA isn't New York. No city but New York is New York, and attempts to force high-density, New York-style development onto areas that don't need it can result in terrible unintended consequences.

"Many people see a light rail and think the San Francisco trolley line," says Damien Goodmon, spokesman for the Crenshaw Subway Coalition. He lives in LA's historical black neighborhood Leimert Park and has seen the effects bad planning can have on established communities.

"You can have transit riders and still destroy a community," says Goodmon.

And the ultimate irony of the unending push for high-density planning in sprawling Southern California is that while, yes, Manhattan is denser than LA, if you zoom out a bit, LA-Long Beach-Anaheim is already the densest urban region in the United States. That happened without any sustained, conscious high-density housing development or state-of-the-art rail transit.

"One of the things that happens when you force this kind of high-density development is you destroy the very urban neighborhoods that retain the middle class," says Kotkin. "The neighborhoods have to fight this kind of guerilla-style."
Marin is greenwashing urban growth.

Saturday, May 13, 2017

A second look: Marin Grassroots Protestors outside the Citizen Marin Town Hall Meeting on March 20, 2013

Editor's Note: This video is worth a second look after the "State of Emergency" news conference by Marin Grassroots. Here you will see many of the same participants refusing to interact with their fellow citizens inside the meeting. Notably, John Young of Marin Grassroots won't go in because "he wasn't invited and on the agenda" at the end of the tape.
Brief video with the protestors outside the Citizen Marin Town Hall on March 20, 2013.  The Town Hall event was open to the community to talk about affordable housing solutions.  People from all perspectives were encouraged to speak up about their views on affordable housing.
This group of activists were organized by Cesar Lagleva,  a Marin Profesional Public Employee Union Shop Steward (M.A.P.E.) encouraged others to protest against the public event.  Their cries of Racism, NIMBYism and Classism are meant to intimidate people from speaking openly about housing.  The irony is that most people inside at the event SUPPORT a fair allocation of affordable housing provided it is financially responsible and fits in to existing neighborhood densities.
Cesar was author of the highly offensive Marin Voice article I mentioned in an earlier post here.
Also present was the every present protestor and self proclaimed "Janitor of Political Waste Management", Jimmy Fishbob Geraghty. His daily rants about "racist Marinites" can be found on the San Rafael Patch and Marin IJ online.  You will often see him holding signs and protesting around the Bay Area.  If you can't get enough of him on the public news sites, you can get the full rants on his facebook page.   After this footage was shot, I spoke with him briefly, and came away with a positive impression of him.  He seems earnest but misguided and genuinely a nice guy.  It was one of my personal highpoints of the evening.

Local affordable housing lobbyist,  Dave Coury, also was present wearing his button to end Racism, Nimbyism and Classism.  He had been overheard at the February 2013 planning meeting asking for "affirmative action complaints against the Dixie School district" on his cell phone in the lobby during testimony about the Housing Element and its effects on school funding for Dixie School District.  He also has publicly called on the supervisors to simply zone all land in Marin within 1/2 mile of 101 Freeway as 30 units per acre multifamily housing.  We can only guess his client list funding his activities. In the July 9, 2013 Board of Supervisors meeting,  Dave Coury called the struggle for housing in Marin ""a war" and linked a shooting in Marin City to the housing issue.
Cesar Lagleva, sat next to me at a One Bay Area Plan meeting on April 16th.  I greeted him and offered to shake his hand and he shot back "don't touch me".  Clearly, we have a ways to go on our friendship.
Cesar Lagleva, is one of the organizers for Concerned Marinites to End Nimbyism (CMEN ..no jokes please) and their website is http://www.concernedmarinites.org/. where you will find more of their rhetoric.    It is amazing to me that this public employee union official  attacks the taxpayers that support him with such language  I am told he is a clinical social worker or psychologist. Here is a puff piece put out by his union.
Supervisor Steve Kinsey was the keynote speaker.  He thanked M.A.P.E. for organizing and told the crowd that "Marin can be very unwelcoming". Like the rest of the crowd gathered,  he was invited to participate the open town hall inside and share his views.  Supervisor Kinsey did not attend but stopped for a TV news interview, got in his car and sped off.
We think a fruitful discussion about affordable housing will begin with honest, open dialog and not with shouts of RACISM, CLASSISM and NIMBYism. 

We still have time to talk and my offer for a cup of coffee to share with Cesar is still open.

Wednesday, August 3, 2016

Sunday, May 1, 2016

The Great Debate, "Plan Bay Area, Is it good for Marin?"


 

In case you weren't there, or if you were there and are still talking about it and want to share the highlights here is an HD video of The Great Debate.




Timepoints for reference:


00:00 Host, Robert Eyler, CEO, Marin Economic Forum
03:17 Panel Introductions
05:46 Is PBA good for the region and Marin??
06:57 Pledge of Alegiance
07:29 Mark Luce, ABAG, supports PBA, 10 minute presentation
18:06 Thomas Rubin, opposes PBA, 10 minute presentation
28:25 Steve Kinsey, Marin County Supervisor, supports PBA, 10 minute presentation
38:10 Randal O'Toole, CATO Institute, opposes PBA, 10 minute presentation
47:04 PUBLIC QUESTIONS
47:25 Should PBA be put to a vote? Liz Manning
47:54 - Luce
49:16 - Rubin
50:52 What are the social implications for minoritys in High Density Housing? Chris Pareja
51:05 - Kinsey
51:58 - O'Toole
56:00 What are the mplications of agreement between Marin County and HUD? Basia Crane
56:23 - Kinsey
57:43 - O'Toole
59:00 Please explain the mistakes in the Rena calculations. Diane Furst, Mayor, Corte Madera
1:00:10 - Luce
1:01:54 - O'Toole
1:03:54 What does PBA do to help solve climate change? Bill Kearney
1:04:32 - O'Toole
1:05:42 - Kinsey
1:06:36 - Luce
1:07:24 - Rubin
1:08:22 Why is "no plan" option off of the table? Meilin Kurtzman
1:08:42 - Kinsey
1:09:41 - O'Toole
1:11:10 Are the financial projections in the plan realistic? Chris Engle
1:11:28 - Rubin
1:11:49 - Kinsey
1:12:51 - Luce
1:13:39 - O'Toole
1:14:42 Why is Marin being zoned urban; what is the rational behind 30 units per acre? Amie itzgeral
1:15:12 - Kinsey
1:15:46 - Luce
1:16:46 - O'Toole
1:18:23 This appears to be an attack on the middle class. Clayton Smith
1:19:36 - Kinsey
1:20:33 - Rubin
1:21:01 - Luce
1:22:14 Mark - what would it take for you to change your position? Herb Smith
1:22:50 - Luce
1:23:29 - Kinsey
1:24:19 Why do you think this plan is good for Marin? Blaine Morris
1:25:11 - Kinsey
1:26:00 - O'Toole
1:27:50 How will a deisel train compete with fuel efficient cars? Scott Erkhart
1:28:26 - Kinsey
1:29:08 - O'Toole
1:31:00 Why can't a city member of ABAG, simply opt out? Dan Ucher
1:31:59 - Luce
1:33:19 - Rubin
1:34:51 We are close to the AB32 standards - do you recognize this?? Stephen Nestel
1:36:13 - Luce
1:36:55 - Kinsey
1:37:35 - Rubin
1:40:10 Closing Statement - O'Toole
1:42:26 Closing Statement - Kinsey
1:44:48 Closing Statement - Rubin
1:47:15 Closing Statement - Luce

__._,_.___

Thursday, January 21, 2016

VIDE0: Will the SMART train be any more efficient than the VTA?

25 years later, VTA light rail among the nation's worst
MercuryNews.com


A quarter of a century ago, Santa Clara County's first light-rail train left the station as excited supporters heralded a new wave of state-of-the-art transportation to match the region's burgeoning high-tech industry.
But there was no grand celebration this month as Silicon Valley marked 25 years of light rail.
Even light rail's supporters concede the train has not lived up to expectations thus far, but they are optimistic that slow and steady increases in rider counts will continue.

"I believe we are ultimately going to realize the (original) vision," said Kevin Connolly, VTA's transportation planning manager. "But I think what's happened is that it wasn't quite as easy or quick as originally conceived of 30 years ago."

So what exactly has gone wrong, and what needs to change to make the next 25 years a smoother ride for Silicon Valley's trolley line?

Bumpy start

The VTA system, which cost $2 billion to build and $66 million per year to operate, is one of the most inefficient light-rail lines in the nation:
  • Compared with the U.S. average, each VTA light-rail vehicle costs 30 percent more to operate and carries 30 percent fewer passengers.
  • The cost to carry one passenger round trip, $11.74, is 83 percent more than the U.S. average and the third worst in the nation, ahead of only trains in Pittsburgh and Dallas.
  • Taxpayers subsidize 85 percent of the service, the second worst rate in the nation.
The network that officials envisioned in the 1970s and '80s wound up being twice the size, more expensive, less efficient and less popular than first thought.

"It is an unmitigated disaster and a waste of taxpayer money," said VTA critic Tom Rubin, a transportation consultant based in Oakland. "I think the original concept was very seriously flawed."

Still, light-rail supporters argue the trains have put a dent in Silicon Valley's notoriously nasty freeway traffic, providing more than 32,000 one-way trips each day. For perspective, if all those riders drove on Highway 101 in the South Bay, traffic would increase more than 6 percent.

"If we didn't have the current system, we would have terminal gridlock," said the train's godfather, Rod Diridon, a transit advocate who pushed for the network as a county supervisor decades ago.

Reasons are clear

Still, VTA light rail has struggled -- and it's mostly because of the valley's sprawl, transportation experts and agency officials say.

Connolly noted that the South Bay's first light-rail line was built along onion fields, where planners had expected homes and businesses to pop up along the route. That contrasted with the strategy in most other cities, which is to put light rail along existing, dense corridors.

For the most part, the density never materialized in Silicon Valley. As Connolly spoke at VTA headquarters along its main light-rail line on First Street, he noted the orange groves across the street.

"In our case we tried to graft a big-city transit type of mode onto a suburban environment, and it's still kind of a work in progress," Connolly said.

San Francisco's Muni light-rail system, which carries five times as many passengers as VTA, features dense housing and jobs near stations that riders can walk to, avoiding traffic jams and the huge parking costs.
More commuters in the South Bay, on the other hand, stomach awful traffic and record gas prices because the region offers plenty of free parking, and its businesses and homes are spread out. And that's not changing any time soon.

Riding the rails

Many riders say they use light rail because they don't have any other way to get around -- and they like that it's clean, affordable and consistent.

But their main complaint is speed, which is often less than 10 mph in downtown San Jose.

"It just takes a while to get through downtown," said Sabrina Baca, 17, as she sat on the train with 18-year-old Fernando Fernandez and their 7-month-old daughter. Asked why they and most people ride the train, the couple said, in unison: "Because they have to."

Light rail is generally less economically efficient than long-haul heavy train service such as BART or Caltrain, though San Jose's system is especially feeble.

Light-rail agencies in Minneapolis, Houston, Newark, N.J., and Phoenix each run less service than VTA yet carry more passengers than the South Bay's network. Several cities that are much smaller than San Jose -- from St. Louis to Salt Lake City to Portland, Ore. -- also feature light-rail systems with more riders than VTA.

Sacramento -- which also opened its light-rail network in 1987, operates with approximately the same level of service and runs through a similarly sprawled-out region -- carries nearly 40 percent more passengers per day than VTA.

Connolly pointed out that the Sacramento line has a built-in customer base of state workers who take the line, at a 75 percent discount, to their jobs. The closest VTA has to that: San Jose State students, who make up a large chunk of VTA's riders largely because the line carries students to the university for no additional charge, a cost built into their tuition.

Another issue is that San Jose's downtown -- while denser than most parts of Silicon Valley -- is still not the jobs destination seen in the urban cores of other cities. For many riders, it's a place to get through, not to.

Future changes coming?

Acknowledging the need to improve, the VTA is undergoing a $27 million project to make the service more attractive, largely by adding tracks to launch express trains. VTA is also kicking off an efficiency effort to cut service costs 5 percent, which could help land new grants from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the Bay Area's transportation agency.

Expansions to Los Gatos and East San Jose are also proposed, but those, too, are forecast to attract very few riders and carry large, unfunded capital costs.

"In general, we can't lose sight of the fact that we have to do the basics better," Connolly said. "We have to be faster, we have to connect with better destinations."

Sunday, September 13, 2015

Will parking near Marinwood Village look like this?


Editor's Note: The meeting on April 25th with Supervisor Adams, Department of Public Works, and the California Highway Patrol revealed to the public that Miller Creek Avenue median strip is being narrowed to make room for a bike lane and parking. This is most likely for overflow street parking from the proposed Marinwood Village low income housing.  We bring you this quick clip of the Canal district to show you what parking on may look like Miller Creek Avenue between 101 Freeway and Las Gallinas in the future.

Take a quick trip to the Canal District and try to find a parking space with us.   You'll find no matter where you drive, you'll find bumper to bumper cars parked on every street.  Even though the apartments have parking, the streets are always packed with additional cars. 

Bridge Housing argues that low income residents don't need as much parking because they prefer public transportation.  The reality is they need cars as much as anyone else.  Because they often live several families per apartment, they typically have MORE cars per household.

If Marinwood Village is built, it is a reasonable to expect the surrounding neighborhoods will be packed with parked cars. Miller Creek Avenue from Marinwood Ave. to Las Gallinas is being widened to allow for more street parking and a bike path. 

Do you want Marinwood to become another urban neighborhood, with Big Box apartments and wall to wall cars? 

Join us to stop the supervisors from turning us into Marinwood City.


Monday, December 22, 2014

Supervisors Kinsey and BOS unanimously support Marinwood Village without hearing from the people

Get Microsoft Silverlight


The Marin Board of Supervisors unequivocally support Marinwood Village without consulting Marinwood.

See Steve Kinsey explain that 100% of the  Board of Supervisors support the Marinwood Village Site,  unequivocally    at the November 29, 2012 TAM meeting before ALL THE FACTS are IN.

The have all ready given Marinwood Village project $460,000 in HIPE funds and are seeking another $696,000 or roughly $1.02 million dollars to steal part of Marinwood Ave to make parking for affordable developer Bridge Housing' plans for 85 low income housing units.

Gee,  it's great to be an affordable housing developer,  isn't it?

Our entire Marinwood CSD budget is $4.2 million dollar and the Board of Supervisors is giving over a million dollars to aid Bridge Housing before a shovel hits the dirt on the housing development. 

Some people get rich. Some people get subsidized rents. We get taxed.

How dare they rip off the only asset that our community will have to build a vibrant commercial hub.  Once our neighbor's move their families into the "stack and pack" housing moves into their tiny apartments,  we will have to build more class rooms, hire more teachers, cops and firefighters.

The Marinwood Village development won't begin to pay it's fair share to the community .  In addition, we may also have to upgrade our fire station and water and sewer. Higher taxes for us. Free stuff for them.

How many of us moved into the neighborhood to have our community stolen from us by bureaucrats and politicians?

Even our new neighbors have to eat.  Do you think they will be picking up $7.32 cent  a gallon organic milk at the market? What will happen when the market's rent subsidy disappears?

If you are sick and tired of all this crony capitalism and silly land use,  I urge you to join us in fighting the Marinwood Plaza project. 

If  you are sick of secret planning sessions behind closed doors with hand picked "neighborhood leaders" I urge you to join us.

If you are sick of hearing the lie that "the community decided" on a mixed use project in 2006 and your vote doesn't count, I urge you to join us.  

The first and only "public" meeting on the Marinwood Village project was on October 27th, 2012.  Over 43% of us are new to the community since 2007. The 2006 project was a private development that actually would have contributed to our tax base.

The "leaders" must know that we will not follow the destuction of our community to fulfill their vain ambitions.  Let the crony developers know, that they will only be welcome if they come through the front door and reveal their intentions first.

We are not opposed to all affordable housing.  We are opposed to the taking of our rights to manage our own community. 




Friday, November 14, 2014

VIDEO: Why Affordable Housing Fails to help the Needy circa 1978



The Above video is from a lecture given by noted economist Milton Friedman to students at Cornell University.  In the late seventies, the large public housing of the 1960s were widely acknowledged to be failures for various reasons Professor Friedman lists.
.
Up until a few years ago affordable housing has been integrated  with market rate housing.  It has been  determined to be the best approach for both the families living in affordable housing and the landlords to minimize the problems associated with isolated communities of low income people.

Marinwood Lucas  (5.68 square miles) is targeted for 71% of all Affordable Housing in unincorporated Marin with large 100% affordable housing complexes!

We must not only ask ourselves,  "Is this the best we can do for our community?" but also ask "Is this the best we can do for the hundreds of low income families that will live among us?" 

Wouldn't a strategy to integrate low income housing in ALL NEIGHBORHOODS in Marin be better for them?

Have we not learned from the failures of the past?


GET INVOLVED.  CONTACT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. TELL THEM REVISE THE HOUSING ELEMENT.

Join us!

Wednesday, November 12, 2014

Living close to the Freeway is not healthy for Children and other Living Things



The Sierra Club and the Environmental Law and Policy Center issue severe warnings about high density housing near freeways is unhealthy for people. 

see WSJ Autism linked to environmental Factors

SAN SEBASTIÁN, Spain—Researchers at an international conference on autism Friday presented three new studies lending strength to the notion that environmental influences before birth play a role in the risk for the condition.
In one study, pregnant women who were exposed to certain levels of air pollution were at increased risk of having a child with autism. Another presentation suggested that iron supplements before and early in pregnancy may lower the risk, and a third suggested some association between use of various household insecticides and a higher risk of autism.

Agence France Presse/Getty Images
A new study finds that a pregnant woman's exposure to certain levels of air pollution may contribute to an increased risk of autism in her child. Here, an early morning photo shows poor air quality in Los Angeles.
The causes of autism, a developmental disorder that involves social-skill problems, among other symptoms, aren't well understood but are thought to be multifaceted. Genetics likely account for about 35% to 60% of the risk, many researchers say. But some experts and parents believe that nutrition and other environmental factors may also play a role, especially as the rate of autism in the U.S. appears to have climbed sharply over the past decade.


The new studies showed only associations and couldn't prove causality, and each factor itself likely accounts for a small portion of the risk for autism, researchers say. But the results, taken together with previous work—showing an association with factors like the flu and the use of certain medicines in pregnant women, for instance—provide more evidence that environmental factors affecting the womb, including what we eat and where we live, are meaningful in terms of autism risk.
"The exciting thing about looking at environment, or environment and genes in conjunction with each other, is this provides the possibility of intervention," said Irva Hertz-Picciotto, an environmental epidemiologist at the University of California, Davis, who presented the study on insecticides.



Related Video


A 2-foot-tall robot therapist may help kids with autism learn to be more social, according to an intriguing new study. Photo: Laura McGuire.

Speaking in a packed auditorium at the International Society for Autism Research annual conference here, Marc Weisskopf of the Harvard School of Public Health presented results from a large national study, known as the Nurses' Health Study II. The research suggested that a mother's exposure to high levels of certain types of air pollutants, such as metals and diesel particles, increased the risk of autism by an average of 30% to 50%, compared with women who were exposed to the lowest levels.
Dr. Weisskopf and his colleagues examined levels of some particles and pollutants that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has measured and studied across the country in the locations where the approximately 330 women from the study who reported having a child with autism lived. They compared the levels with 22,000 women who didn't have a child with autism, focusing on 14 pollutants that had been previously reported in the literature as possibly linked to autism.
The results mimicked those of previously published work on traffic pollution and autism risk in California. The consistency of findings across studies "certainly makes me start to feel much more certain that we're on a path to finding something environmental that's playing a role here," said Dr. Weisskopf, a professor of environmental health and epidemiology. "At this stage it does seem there's something related to air pollution."

image
Data from another large study, known as the Charge study, also presented Friday, found for the first time that mothers who reported that they had taken iron supplements just before or early on in pregnancy had a 40% decrease in associated risk of having a child with autism, an effect similar in magnitude to that of folic-acid supplementation and its reduction of certain birth defects, said Rebecca Schmidt, a professor of public-health sciences UC Davis.
Her team compared the mothers of 510 kids with an autism-spectrum disorder to mothers of 341 kids without autism. Mothers completed a phone survey that included questions on many types of environmental exposures, including supplements like prenatal vitamins, multivitamins and nutrient-specific vitamins, cereal and protein bars, which are often fortified with iron and other nutrients. They weren't asked about other dietary sources of iron, such as red meat and leafy green vegetables.
Dr. Schmidt cautioned that women shouldn't boost iron intake without getting their levels checked by a doctor, because too much iron can lead to toxicity. "It's much easier to change your diet or supplemental intake than it is to change your exposure to many other toxins," said Dr. Schmidt.
In a separate analysis of the Charge data, UC Davis researchers also found a relationship between exposure to some insecticides in the household, such as bug foggers, and features of autism, but more research is needed to understand why there is a potential link, said Dr. Hertz-Picciotto.

Write to Shirley S. Wang at shirley.wang@wsj.com

Sunday, November 9, 2014

VIDEO: Saratoga Says "No!" to ABAG






Here is a quiet argument calling for sanity in the Housing Element in the small town of Saratoga.  The speaker calls for commonsense reflection of the affordable housing demands and cites the unholy alliance with ABAG, non profit advocates and developers.



Communities everywhere are standing up against ABAG

Friday, October 10, 2014

Local Government Contractor Cyane Dandridge helped select affordable housing locations for Marinwood-Lucas Valley

Cyane Dandridge,  former CSD Director, served on the Housing Element Task force that recommended 78% of all affordable housing for Marinwood-Lucas Valley.  We think she failed to meet an ethical obligation by failing to publicize her involvement and subsequently share her reasons for approval.

Final Report of the Housing Element Task Force June 2011


Why was she allowed to participate in this forum when she appears to have a conflict of interest?  We note that the week after she resigned from the CSD in October 2012, she was unanimously was approved for a large "no bid" solar consulting contract for the CSD.  Former CSD Directors, Bruce Anderson, Tarey Reed, Leah Green-Kleinman and  Bill Hansell are responsible for this this contract made and approved without a public review or hearing. They signed one contract that was found illegal and modified it AFTER she resigned without a public meeting. This is a violation of the Brown act and Fair Political Practices.   CSD  Director Michael Dudasko was appointed to fill out Cyane's remaining term and had no part in it's approval.
Cyane Dandridge




Get Microsoft Silverlight
Cyane Dandridge, former CSD Board Member and owner of Strategic Energy Innovations that performs energy consulting work for government agencies, housing and schools throughout Marin. They recently announced a partnership with EAH Housing, one of the largest affordable housing developers in Marin.

Please note that the former guiding principles were for 20% affordable 80% market rate housing. She was also on the committee that chose 70% of all affordable housing in unincorporated Marin County for Marinwood-Lucas Valley.

"There probably is more money for affordable housing than regular housing now" says Dandridge.

By her own admission, these developments are good for business. 

Sunday, June 8, 2014

Video: How much taxes will Bridge Housing Pay !?


A quick clip of  Bridge Housing meeting on October 27, 2013, featuring Brad Wilban, VP,  He explains the proposed Marinwood Village low income housing and skeptical residents ask about their tax contribution for the estimated 30-40 million dollar project.  

Bridge Housing is a "non-profit" developer and pays minimal taxes.  A similar "for profit" developer would be estimated to pay $300-400,000 per year in addition to parcel taxes.  Bridge Housing will only pay $10,000 per year for the full development.  

Our little community of 6000 will pay millions of dollars over the course of the next 55 years for infrastructure improvements, educating hundreds of school children and the use of associated government services and aid to host this "non profit" development.






Saturday, May 3, 2014

China's Ghost Cities- A warning for One Bay Area Plan?

All over China, massive cities are being developed without current market demand. They are speculating on future economic growth,  much like the One Bay Area Plan speculating the growth of the Bay Area market demand.
 The above video is a clip about China's ghost cities.   There are massive developments all over China which are being fueled by central government controlled "planners" who are ignoring fundamental laws of supply and demand.  The supply of housing is being created far in advance of actual demand and is unaffordable by the ordinary Chinese worker.   Because of the industrial economic growth,  Chinese are awash in capital.  Government central planners mandate real estate development so that they can claim growth for the country's GDP 
Like China,  the One Bay Area Plan is pure government speculation.  Big Box apartment developments over small shops near public transit are not in demand.  The only way these developments can guarantee occupancy is with government subsidized apartments.   Unfortunately, the only way they can be supported is with massive taxpayer support. 
Both the One Bay Area Plan and China's Ghost Cities are examples of central government trying to speculate on the future instead of allowing the laws of supply and demand determine growth. 
With history of sensitive land use policies and private investment,  Marin has become the very definition of a livable suburb that Smart Growth planners strive for.  How ironic that they now want to raze our Marin suburbs to build their "new and improved" Smart Growth cities of tomorrow.

Tuesday, April 15, 2014

VIDEO: Bridge Housing "We have given Dixie Schools an estimate of 1.8 students per apartment" (150 students)



On October 27, 2012 Bridge Housing VP, Brad Wilban explains to skeptical residents how many school children he expects in the Dixie school districts.

Here is the transcript:

Brad Wilban (BW): "I think a month from now, when we come back, we're going to tell you exactly what we are going to do."

Audience  (A):  "When you come back, can you tell us about the impact on our schools?"

BW:  (Surprised puts up his hand in Stop gesture and looks away to address the other side of the room).  "We have given Dixie our projections of what we expect the school impacts to be (motions a sweeping gesture) from toddlers to high school."

"We have a large universe (round gesture) of our properties will similar demographics and so we know that about 1.8 students per unit on average is generated from this kind of housing"

Whole audience: (gasps )

A: "Wow, that's 160 kids, 150 kids!"

BW: (Gesture "stop")  "So that's infants through high school so next month when we come, we will bring a break down, zero through five, elementary,  middle school and high school.  Not what we know will happen but what we think will happen based on our experience and that way, you can say 30 kids in high school and there is going to be 20 kids in middle school or what ever it is.  So we will come back with that (pointing gesture)"
=======================================

Editor's note:  We note that 30 kids in high school and 20 kids in middle school will leave 100 kids for the elementary school.  We believe, Mr Wilban realizing the controversial nature of school impacts intentionally changed his remarks mid sentence.  The following month, he offered an unbelievable estimate of .8 children per household to give the appearance of a minor impact on our schools. This is not a credible estimate and easily can be disproven with actual enrollment statistics from family affordable housing complexes available from San Rafael and neighboring school districts.

I doubt there is a family affordable housing complex in Marin that has .8 children per household anywhere. When the city of Pleasanton, projected 1.2 children per house hold, they had a rude awakening when 3.1 children per household arrived and they had to build new schools.  It is highly likely that local taxpayers will be forced to adapt new parcel taxes and bond issues to accommodate the Marinwood Village proposal as it is currently presented.

We can consider senior affordable housing in Marinwood-Lucas Valley but SHOULD NOT ALLOW ANY FAMILY SUBSIDIZED HOUSING that does not have strong financial support for the education of the children who will be coming into our community.  This support could come from a commercial project such as the Farm to Table market which will generate millions in sales taxes or it could come from the non profit developers themselves who may provide realistic financial support for our schools.

We hope that Bridge housing will not force their unsustainable plans on our community without providing for it's tenants and the community that will host them.

We are asking our school board and administrators for unbiased student enrollment data from the San Rafael and neighboring school districts from affordable housing complexes owned by Bridge Housing and EAH Housing.

The community has a right to know of the full impacts of "non profit" subsidized housing projects before they are approved.

Sunday, March 16, 2014

VIDEO: Susan Adams "Marinwood PDA was recommended by locals".



See Supervisor Susan Adams at 42:59  explains to the audience at the Association of Bay Area Governments  that all PDA have been submitted by the local communities before submitting it to ABAG.  This is quite odd. 

We do not know of any public meetings in Marinwood by Ms. Adams or anyone else discussing the Marinwood Priority Development Area for urbanization.

It is all land East of Las Gallinas to the 101 Freeway.  Our neighbor Supervisor Adams lives in this area.

WHO SUBMITTED MARINWOOD for Priority Development?  We deserve to know.

Also, the Executive Director, Kevin Kirkey admits at the end of the exchange with Ms. Adams(44:40), that housing allocations are high in Unincorporated Marin (and since 71% of all housing is in Marinwood-Lucas Valley that means us).  He said it was a problem to be addressed later.  What could he be referring to?

Do you feel like you are in the dark about the massive changes underway in our neighborhood?

Why won't Supervisor Adam's answer simple questions about the Marinwood Priority Development Area that was submitted in 2007?


We have a right to know.  Get active.  Demand answers. 

Did you ever attend a meeting for the Marinwood Priority Development Area?