The Morgan Hill Times Aug. 17 editorial supporting the Condit Road outdoor recreation complex is misleading and misinformed. The complex, wonderful in its concept and design, in my opinion will not serve the Redevelopment Agency (RDA). It is funded by RDA dollars but does not fulfill the intent and mission of the RDA and that is a concern. The primary purpose of the complex as stated in the authorizing resolution as approved by the City Council is to bring jobs, new development, reduce crime and blight within the RDA project area. The new sports complex does not do that.
The RDA established by law is a specific area within the downtown. The RDA project area is to be the prime beneficiary of any RDA-funded activity. This is a concept missed by the Times and many others. The new outdoor sports complex is well outside the RDA project area and due to distance can not measurably contribute to the RDA project area. The hotels which the Times say will benefit from the complex are also outside the project area. Whatever income is received from them will have little if any benefit to businesses and residents within the defined area. The amount has never been clearly stated or even verified.
Stating that there will be a reduction in crime within the downtown and project area as result of the newly constructed complex is an exaggerated outcome. There is no method to track crime as it relates to the complex. Baseline data and goals were never established. It is an overstatement that is and was not intended be measured or evaluated.
This complex is funded to bring new jobs to the project area. It is difficult to ascertain how it is going to accomplish that since it is geographically located well outside the area to be served. There is no current method to evaluate or measure. There is not a stated goal. It is unlikely that any new jobs in any number of significance will be created in the project area as a result of the new complex because of distance and disparate activities. Remember the investment is $10 million (not with standing annual maintenance) and our return should be significant.
The complex is to bring new development within the downtown. I really don’t see how it can do that. I would be amazed if anyone would come forth and invest tens of thousands and millions within the RDA project area because of the new complex. I don’t see the connection and have no study, memo or even a napkin scribble stating it would even be considered by any developer or investor.
To think our children will have exclusive use of the facility, think again. The use of this facility is being contracted out to an outside agency that retains rights on use for regional tournaments and events. It is intended to be a regional facility, not an exclusive Morgan Hill facility and in conflict with our Recreation Master Plan which discourages such facilities. I believe whenever we build a facility it should be built for the exclusive use of residents who paid for it and run by the city which built it. Otherwise, I question the reason and rationale to build it at all.
Regional facilities should be left to large metropolitan centers for which we are not. When you consider what San Jose and Gilroy are doing in constructing their own outdoor facilities along our borders, it is difficult to visualize how much regional income will be able to generate. The economic benefits of regional facilities remain unfounded and unproven supposition and it is unrelated to the RDA project area.
Regional aspects aside, the RDA project area, our focus, will not benefit from this facility, and the finding that the lack of recreation facilities within the project area is why we have blight within the downtown is a unconvincing and tenuous finding for which I can find no supportive justification or study.
The RDA project area would have clearly benefited if the $10 million where invested directly into the project area. The merchants, businesses and residents would have appreciated this resource, which could have lead to the construction of new plazas, parks, wider sidewalks, enhanced street and tree lighting, new above and underground parking, enhanced utility infrastructure and other resources that really could have been used to leverage and to “incentivize” revitalization. Instead you have a new outdoor sports complex which will not accomplish any of the stated outcomes as listed in the authorizing resolution and will likely be used significantly by those who do not live in the city and did not pay one dime for its construction. The question remains is this a prudent method for RDA funding?
Though I like the complex, and supported artificial fields in a decision on its programmatic aspects however the premises for its construction and the supporting policy statements in my opinion are a misuse of the RDA. To support it personally would be a compromise and would lead others to think that I accept the precepts for which it was built. I can not do that and be straightforward with the residents that I serve. It would be difficult to celebrate its construction and remain silent on issues of funding, purpose and intent. My obligation is to bring this information to the forward so that government remains transparent in how it administrates the public’s good. Honesty, integrity and accountability are the values which must always be the hallmark of good government. That includes even small municipal governments like Morgan Hill.
Mark Grzan is a 13-year Morgan Hill resident. He’s been serving on the Morgan Hill City Council for two years. He’s a computer applications teacher at Gavilan and Foothill colleges and an administrator at San Jose State University. Reach him at
gr******@ch*****.net
.
