Dear Editor,
On Wednesday, the Council considered item #40 which seeks approval and authorization to execute a letter of intent to purchase 21 acres of prime Santa Clara County agricultural land for ballfields. The item should be tabled for the following reasons.
1. The lands in question are within the jurisdiction of the county and part of the SEQ project. That project along with its annexation has yet to be approved, so intent to purchae is premature;
2. The lands to be purchased are to be included in the Environmental Impact Report. That report is not finished, has not been released to the public, nor approved by Council and may have conditions that would affect this proposal;
3. The lands to be purchased are prime agricultural lands and are subject to mitigation. The City has yet to release or approve its Agricultural Mitigation Policy. It is premature to purchase agricultural lands until this policy is approved;
4. The staff report indicates that there would be recreational and economic benefit, however there is neither data nor analysis to indicate how this project was to meet recreational needs nor does it state its economic benefit;
5. The staff report does not indicate whether this is the best site for such development. Missing from the report is the consideration of existing lands within the city limits, with an existing infrastructure that may be more appropriate and fiscally responsible;
6. The proposal indicates that a purchase will be made in a specific amount. However missing from the report is funding for the construction of the recreation facilities, its infrastructure and how is it going to be maintained;
7. Further, there is a concern that if the city is to follow its current model of an Outdoor Recreation Complex whereby the city commits its short- and long-term resources to build a complex whereas the majority of users will not be Morgan Hill residents, and that the facility would have to be rented to a as yet to be defined concessionaire may not be the best use of limited resources. The commitment of a concessionaire is critical to the project’s approval.
8. There is a concern that the seller speculated on the annexation of the said property and is now selling it to the city at a great profit.
There is no need to proceed with this letter of intent at this time. The item should be tabled and the Council should act fiscally responsible on behalf of the residents of Morgan Hill.
Mark Grzan, Morgan Hill
