Guest View

Open letter to Mayor Steve Tate,On April 30, 2015, an article appeared in the Morgan Hill Times reciting “a lengthy April 28 e-mail blast” outlining various aspects surrounding City Ventures’ approaching acquisition of an existing “Purchase Option” related to 95 East Third Street or, as you all coin it, “The BookSmart Site.”Essentially your remarks provide a diversion from the issues germane, while attempting to do a great job of confusing a general reader. The fact is, the City of Morgan Hill RDA acquired the Purchase Option on the Book Smart Site for $1.7 million and has agreed to sell it to City Ventures (with additional covenants) for $100,000. That’s a $1.6 million dollar loss!Many local residents are very familiar with what they perceive as the past squandering of RDA money (with seemingly no oversight).What is necessary to define upon reflection is: Why the City Council is now willing to throw away $1.6 million of taxpayer money. I really do not believe this is what Governor Brown had in mind when dismantling the RDA statewide.Your email also noted the city “is committed to assisting the impacted businesses” but has “absolutely no obligation” to do so. The $1 million relocation package you describe is funded by leftover RDA cash. Why don’t you let the community know that the “leftover RDA cash” is TAXPAYER MONEY? The City Council seems to treat it as if it is MONOPOLY money!Under the existing agreement, City Ventures will be handed for $2.1 million (option sale price of the site plus the purchase cost of the property) what was once, according to various newspaper accounts and City Council commentary, an asset worth about $3.7 Million.Did anyone—the City Council, staff, or whoever was representing the City of Morgan Hill in this “transaction”—attempt to encourage City Ventures to pay a portion of its net profit from sales proceeds (it is indicated that they will be building “condominiums and townhouses”) up to the $1.7 million original option price? In the Asset Management industry, when we sell a property at a below-market price and/or a “deep discount,” we generally require a percentage of proceeds as a “kicker” in nearly all circumstances.For the Morgan Hill City Council to GIFT City Ventures a $1.6 million dollar equity stake in this property at taxpayer expense is a blatant slap in the face of every taxpaying resident. Add to that an additional $1 MILLION of relocation expense (although you claim it includes tenants of Granada and Downtown Mall as well), the cost for another boondoggle in the downtown now escalates to $2.6 million! And, add to that the proposed repair of Fourth Street, and the rework of Third Street—who knows the total cost.It is the City Council’s fiduciary responsibility that the sale of the Book Smart option to City Ventures be placed in abeyance, or cancelled outright, unless and until the total amount of $1.7 million which the city expended for the purchase option is recoverable under ANY option sale.If the property is appropriate for the planned improvements and the financial feasibility of the project is acceptable to them, then guess what: City Ventures will go along with a participatory agreement.Regardless, the City Council of Morgan Hill must, and I believe is required to safeguard and judiciously protect taxpayer assets.Richard KhanMorgan HillKhan is a banking, mortgage and finance professional who has served in various capacities in commercial finance, commercial real estate lending, asset management and consumer finance.

Dennis Kennedy’s water article listed Santa Clara Valley Water District’s efforts for weathering the drought. The term “weathering” implies that plentiful times will return. I disagree; I and others believe this is not a cyclical weather phenomenon but a rude awakening of our future of climate change. It is so important that we look at this drought with that ominous perspective.Climate change is here. I visited Glacier National Park in August 2014 and the glaciers are gone. Nine of the 10 hottest summers ever were recorded in the last decade. You have to go to the weather extremes to be visually impacted by its effects. Yet what happens outside Morgan Hill can and will affect our needs and it is not limited to just water.At the moment SCVWD relies on 55 percent of its water from sources outside our county. When those resources dry up (literally), you might have to buy water from as far as Canada, and even arctic glaciers under the Golden Gate Bridge. There are even considerations to build a dam under the bridge just to prevent delta salt water incursion as the oceans rise.The City of Morgan Hill is paving over farmlands for housing and considering adding 30,000 new residents in a mega effort of urban sprawl. We will add more residents to Morgan Hill in the upcoming decade than we did in the previous century. Where will you get the water to support that growth and the growth throughout the county when we don’t have water to sustain what we have? Sure you can build salt water desalination plants but those require great amounts of electricity. And where does California get 33 percent of its electricity? We get it from the sierra snowpack in the form of hydroelectric power. That snowpack is gone and unlikely to return to previous levels for any sustainable time.This drought does not mean that we temporarily water our lawns less or import our water from other resources such as Bakersfield as Dennis Kennedy suggests. It requires an entirely new approach to water conservation and management. It is going to require a change in our lifestyles, values, public policies, and a major investment in new projects and infrastructure. It requires a different way of thinking, a new mandate with different people leading that effort.To begin, we need an Adaptation and Mitigation Plan (AMP), which almost no one has or even understands. The AMP identifies how climate change will affect our region and city. It is not just greenhouses gases or a look at higher temperatures but a comprehensive view of all the effects from our economy and jobs to the invasions of insects and diseases which will prey upon heavily distressed flora and fauna. The plan helps us to understand and deal with the devastating effects of climate change. We can’t prevent it but we can adapt and mitigate its effects if we act now.Our elected officials are lost in translation and rely on myopic approaches with pleas of conservation and higher water rates. Doing more of what we are already doing is not going to solve this problem because it is not solvable. It is a new way of life. Adding 30,000 new residents to Morgan Hill in a sprawl approach would only exacerbate the effects of climate change. This is a foolish growth policy by the Morgan Hill City Council. A policy based on hope that rains will return is just as foolish. Hope is not a strategy, and urban sprawl that destabilizes our community is irresponsible leadership. Mark Grzan is a longtime Morgan Hill resident, former City Councilmember and Mayor Pro Tem.

When word of the Morgan Hill/Gilroy neglected horse herd launched on Facebook in response to the mistreatment of more than three dozen horses on two South County ranches (in the summer of 2014), we knew that they needed the help of the equine community, so we stepped in.Since Santa Clara County Animal Care and Control was doing nothing to assist in the seizure, rescue, and placement of these horses, we worked side by side with the Center Horse advocates and San Martin Animal Shelter to ensure each horse found a safe rescue, sanctuary, foster or forever home. The whole thing was a huge debacle because of ACC’s negligence in addressing this case. Horses were taken off of the property, new horses appeared on the property, and most horses did not end up in rescues in Santa Clara County.We decided that with the help of a few friends, we could take on one of the pregnant mares.  That’s when Cinder came into our lives.Cinder and several other horses from this herd used to belong to a local breeder in the performance horse industry. Most of these horses were registered Quarter Horses with outstanding pedigree and careers in the cutting industry. Cinder had a successful career as a cutting horse, but eventually this sport wore her down. They turned her into a broodmare for years, producing foal after foal, year after year.Eventually, they discarded her and that’s how she wound up with the South County herd.  Cinder’s story began the day she was born to a 23-year-old mare, who died after her birth.  Like so many of the horses from this herd, Cin came to us pregnant, her conception date unknown due to the fact that this herd was living with numerous stallions and mares together on a small lot on Center Avenue in Gilroy.Cin got the best care she could get in the months following her departure from Center Avenue. Her board was $315 per month for her to stay at Lakeview Stables in San Jose. The first thing we did was have a vet out to assess her. She was not only pregnant, but had a significant limp that was found to be caused by Navicular, a debilitating syndrome in horses, and fused hocks—most likely the result of the physical demands of being a cutting horse. The extra weight of her foal made her very uncomfortable so we purchased special boots for her to ease some of the pain. Cin adjusted to her new life at Lakeview. The owners agreed to let us build her a stall and a paddock on the hill where she and her new foal would live safely.  All along, we knew Cinder was at risk.Our daily routine included taking her for walks, letting her graze, and feeding and grooming her. She loved to roll in sand arena, but even this was becoming too difficult for her. I still cherish the times I spent braiding her hair as she grazed on the hillside. She loved her life at Lakeview, and we loved her.On April 1, just before midnight, Cinder finally delivered a very large, very healthy filly. The delivery was quick and all seemed well. We were relieved, but this relief did not last long.  Within hours CinCin started showing signs of distress. We rushed her to Steinbeck where she received several transfusions due to a ruptured uterine artery. She was bleeding internally. She fought all day to stay alive, getting up time and time again, calling to her foal. But they couldn’t save her. I can still see the pain and longing in her eyes…she’d fought so hard to deliver her foal despite the neglect and abuse she’d suffered. We decided to name the foal Belle because after all, she was Cinder’s belly.Belle required round the clock care with feedings every two hours. We managed to recruit our Lakeview family to help with the feedings and care of Belle that will go on for several months.  We were able to find an older mare at the ranch to look after her in her stall and teach her how to be a horse. But Belle is still an orphan...no person or horse can replace her mom.Belle is a very healthy young filly who reminds us of her beautiful mother. She will grow up in our care and she will never go hungry. But raising an orphan foal is never easy; she will require a lot of extra time and effort. Her formula alone is averaging over $500 per month.This is the story of just one of the horses from the South County herd. We have spent countless hours rehabilitating and caring for this mare and her foal because we have a broken system that refused to recognize the need for tougher laws and enforcement.  We cannot continue to expect the horse community to pick up the pieces. It has to be controlled at a state and county level.We MUST change the way we manage our horses in this county. We need to have our own county rescue and partnership so that we can take in horses in need sooner. It is time to reform Santa Clara County ACC.Loera will give a presentation on the aftermath of the 2014 South County abused horses case at the May 14 Santa Clara County Animal Advisory Committee meeting, which takes place 6:30 p.m. at the County Government Center, 70 W. Hedding Street, San Jose. Rivas, the owner of the nearly 40 malnourished horses, was convicted of felony animal abuse in January.

Santa Clara County is one of the fastest growing counties in the state and is projected to add more than 500,000 new residents in the next 25 years.What is the best way to accommodate this growth and build communities in ways that allow local governments to provide cost effective services while ensuring that valuable natural resources such as open space and agricultural lands are preserved?This is a major challenge for local government—and a core concern for the Local Agency Formation Commission of Santa Clara County, more commonly known as LAFCO.LAFCO is a state-mandated, independent local agency whose purpose is to discourage urban sprawl, preserve open space and agricultural lands and encourage efficient delivery of services.LAFCO fulfills these goals by regulating the boundaries of cities and special districts and by conducting studies to inform its regulatory duties.Santa Clara County’s LAFCO has seven members, including two county supervisors, one San Jose City Council member, one council member from any of the other 14 cities in the county, two special district board members and one public member selected by the other six. As LAFCO members, they must act on behalf of the countywide public interest, consistent with locally adopted LAFCO policies and the state mandate.In the 1950s, California experienced dramatic population growth and economic development. Demand for housing, jobs and services triggered rampant, unplanned, sprawling development that resulted in inefficient public service delivery systems and massive conversion of agricultural and open space to urban use. In response, the State Legislature created LAFCOs in 1963 and gave them responsibility for encouraging orderly growth and development in each county.Early in the 1970s, Santa Clara LAFCO, the 15 cities and the county jointly adopted policies that call for urban development to occur only within cities. Cities proposed urban service area boundaries that identified lands each intended to annex for future development. Those boundaries were adopted by LAFCO and future expansions became subject to its approval.Since urban service areas are key to where and when future growth will occur and services will be provided, LAFCO reviews each expansion request very carefully.One of LAFCO’s first considerations in reviewing an expansion proposal is whether there are infill development opportunities and whether the city has used or underused its existing supply of vacant land before seeking expansion.Among many other factors, LAFCO also will consider whether the expansion would result in conversion of agricultural or open space lands, whether the services and infrastructure needed to support the proposed growth can be financed and provided without negatively impacting current city services, and whether there is an adequate water supply available.  The creation of LAFCO and implementation of its policies has slowed the outward spread of urban development in Santa Clara County. This has, in turn, allowed for the preservation of an informal “greenbelt” around the urbanized area that consists of protected open space lands, farmlands and scenic hillsides. Consequently, despite experiencing significant growth over the years, our county remains a very desirable place to live and work.Today, LAFCO continues to play a vital role in promoting sustainable growth and good governance in Santa Clara County. Through its actions to curb sprawl and preserve open space and agricultural lands, LAFCO can play a key role in addressing emerging issues such as the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.Neelima Palacherla is Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission of Santa Clara County. For more information about LAFCO, visit,www.santaclaralafco.org.

The City of Morgan Hill is set on selling an option they own, “Depot Center/BookSmart,” to City Ventures, a developer from Southern California. The company has developed many great projects but this one will not be good for Morgan Hill. This project will be a net loss for the community. A small group has offered to match the offer from City Ventures for the option and keep Depot Center as it is. If this happens the owners of Depot Center have agreed to do major repairs to the property and do everything they can to keep the present tenants intact.Several years ago the city bought this option for about $1.7 million. Today they are offering that same option to a developer for $100,000 dollars. So the price is set at $100,000. What will the community get for $100,000? You will get some townhomes and a small amount of retail space. Here is how I see it:Morgan Hill will only get 8 to 10 percent more property tax from the new project than they are receiving now on the property.Sales tax will be far less than what the city is getting now because they are only building 3,000 square feet of retail space. The property currently holds about 25,000 square feet of retail space.Existing tenants draw many more people downtown than the proposed project.Occupants of the residential component of the project will be gone all day at work, so that is a loss to downtown.Very few retail businesses will be able to afford the rents that need to be charged for new construction.There are more employees working at the current site than what is being proposed.Seven or 8 long-time businesses, which have supported the downtown for more than 100 years collectively, will be displaced. The City of Morgan Hill will spend up to $1 million in relocation funds (already earmarked by the city council).The city has developed a relocation plan that may help some of the tenants but will be onerous for others.They have no plan to keep these businesses downtown during redevelopment or to bring them back after. The downtown needs businesses just as much as it needs housing (maybe more!).The City Ventures plan for the Depot Center property is very nearly the same type of project (townhouses and a little retail) that was denied last year for the property adjacent to Depot Center and the new parking garage. If this type of development is not right for one, why is it OK for the other?I appreciate that the city has a lot to do and in a short matter of time but they shouldn’t cave in and put a bad plan into action just because time is short.Contact your elected officials directly, not through social media. Directly speaking them to them pulls more weight than sniping on Facebook.Cities need to keep older buildings for the reason Jane Jacobs said in her book, “The Life and Death of Great American Cities.”The following is an excerpt from Jane Jacobs on old cities:“If a city area has only new buildings, the enterprises that can exist there are automatically limited to those that can support the high costs of new construction...Enterprises that support the cost of new construction must be capable of paying a relatively high overhead—high in comparison to that necessarily required by old buildings.”Brad Jones is co-owner of BookSmart, 80 East Second Street in downtown Morgan Hill.

We have a place here in Morgan Hill where more than 70 kids go when school gets out, where they can do their homework and get help if needed, where they can get exercise and “Play 60,” where they can do fun projects and socialize with other kids. It’s a place where they thrive and take great steps toward attaining their full potential. It is the Lori Escobar El Toro Clubhouse on Crest Avenue, and it needs your help!Last July, the Boys and Girls Club of Silicon Valley (BGC) took over the operation and oversight of the Clubhouse from Catholic Charities and revamped the programming by adding staff and proven BGC programs. Catholic Charities did a great job of keeping the old center going with minimal resources. BGC brings a much more comprehensive and a proven program, so it is a great, successful upgrade for the Clubhouse.  If you get a chance, please drop by some afternoon and witness the enthusiasm and positive spirit of the kids there. They will capture your heart.Boys and Girls Club took over the operation with the understanding that the Morgan Hill community would continue to support the Clubhouse financially. Amigos de El Toro is an organization of volunteers that do whatever is needed to support the Clubhouse, and fundraising is one of our basic missions.While the annual budget for the Clubhouse is well over $200,000, BGC asks that the Amigos raise about $100,000 locally. Almost $40,000 of that comes from identified, sustainable sources. So the Amigos need to raise a little more than $60,000 annually and are working hard to identify potential generous contributors and establish sustainable sources for that local share. We welcome ideas, suggestions and of course contributions to help us achieve it, for we may very well lose this precious asset if we are unable to do our share.Of course one way to raise funds is by having a fundraiser, and the Amigos put on an outstanding event that we hope you will support. Now in its fourth year, our “Building Futures” event will be at Mama Mia’s restaurant, 275 E. Dunne Ave., 6 to 9 p.m. May 15. The cost is only $15 with plenty of hors d’oeuvres and a no-host bar. We’ll have exciting raffle and auction items including a private dinner for eight served by the Pirate of Morgan Hill at his Cove. Also, we will have some very special art prepared by El Toro kids—and some of those kids will be on hand to tell you about what they do at the Clubhouse.It is a fun event where our great community comes out to support a very good cause and has a ball doing it.  Tickets are available from BookSmart, 80 E. Second Street, or from the event committee (Laura Gonzalez-Escoto, Melissa Santos, Cecelia Ponzini or Steve Tate) and will also be available at the door. I sure hope to see you there.Contact the mayor at (408) 621-7377 or [email protected].

Still unsure about the Common Core State Standards? Local schools are now actively teaching the new standards, but there remains some confusion about exactly what that means.Here are five things all parents should know about the Common Core State Standards:1. Common Core is not curriculum. The CCSS is simply a list of skills students should have by the end of each grade level. The standards tell educators what students need to know, not how to teach the skills. Curricular programs are still local decisions. Schools and districts choose methods for teaching and programs to use in classrooms. If a lesson feels wrong or confusing, ask your teacher, principal or curriculum director to explain. The problem you have could be with the program that is being used, not the standards themselves.2.Common Core is not a test. The Common Core State Standards do not require any assessments. Standardized tests are designed by large organizations, often for profit. States adopt and mandate these tests. Most current state tests were designed after the CCSS were imposed and attempt to assess whether students know the skills in the standards. Other assessments may be designed or selected by schools or districts.3.Common Core is easily accessible to the public. Go directly to the source. Read the standards before formulating an opinion about them, because your opinion may be about the chosen curriculum or the methodology your school is using, not the standards themselves. Don’t assume something is “in the standards” unless you can find it there. The official (parent-friendly) website is corestandards.org.4.Successful interpretation and implementation of the Common Core depends on training. The standards can be interpreted in many ways. Teachers need both time and quality training to successfully implement them, and schools and districts must provide this training. Training may come from employees of the district or from consultants outside the district. If you don’t already know, ask your local school to explain how its teachers are being trained to ensure your child’s success with the standards.5.  Educators have used standards for many years. While the Common Core State Standards are new, the concept of standards is not. Educators have depended on pre-set lists of skills for decades and have used the standards to assist them in deciding what subjects to cover. Before the Common Core State Standards unified the educational landscape in the U.S., all states had different lists. Some were more rigorous than others. Now, continuity is guaranteed from state to state. Also, educators across the country can now collaborate about best practices, lesson ideas, differentiated support, and tools and resources.There are many rumors and opinions swirling about the Common Core. Reading the CCSS and understanding the differences between standards, curriculum and instruction can help you be an informed participant in the debate.Debbie Lera is a national consultant, author and literacy specialist.  She is also a teacher and Common Core Liason at The Charter School of Morgan Hill.

John McKay in a recent column said the city must grow. But how do you define growth?  He mentions the good work of General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC), but does not mention the 30,000 additional residents the GPAC is considering adding to the 40,000 already here. Such numbers would overwhelm our community, change it and put it at risk.Thirty thousand new residents will place overwhelming demands upon municipal services and infrastructure. You would think that the city will gain from the new property tax but the city receives very little of that as the state, county and school districts siphon most of it. Cities that relied on a residential tax base suffer and are at risk of becoming insolvent.This city struggles to meet its current demands. It has difficulty in maintaining what we have. The city has deferred millions in needed street and other projects but it does not have resources to address them. We spend millions on property for ball fields we don’t need for which we have no resources to build. Point being we cannot grow without revenue to support such growth. We have to grow with all other considerations, including our quality of life. It must be a planned and balanced approach.Realtors and developers have been engaged, and are salivating at paving over precious farmlands and open space. I attended a number of the public meetings of the GPAC and attendance was few in number and always the same people: property consultants and developers. But that is not public engagement.  If you want to gather information from the community, you also scientifically survey and/or present the projects for municipal vote, neither of which has happened. At the moment, county landowners and developers run this city and gave the council an ultimatum last week to which this weak council yielded. So who is running this city?When you start addressing interest in the downtown, John, I would expect you would have many business owners interested as the effects are immediate and close by. But many consider the Southeast Quadrant, where most of the growth will occur, as a distant project and cannot fathom the impacts of traffic, crime, noise, pollution, sewage and the need for higher taxes to support a massive new population.The City has thousands of acres of land within its existing city limits. There is plenty of land to grow up, if not out. Building within the existing city limits/framework is the most cost effective and efficient means of growth—no ifs, ands or buts. Annexing county land and paving over farmlands in light of climate change without a mitigation and adaptation plan and a constrained city budget is irresponsible leadership.John McKay, if you want to discuss the future and growth of Morgan Hill, I would surely like that conversation. Your perspective in my opinion is not aligned with what I believe the residents of Morgan Hill really want and more importantly the protections they absolutely need.—Mark Grzan is a former Morgan Hill City Councilmember/Vice Mayor.

It’s the end of the year and that usually means that we all look back and reflect on what we have done and what stands out that we have witnessed over the last 12 months. Then we might think about what we want to make happen next year or call it good and rest on laurels. My guess is that not many will do the latter.