ALL GUESSES w/out a roundtable with the San Jose City Council Members by (me!) ~topps
but, you might hear them say.. "no clapping or you'll be removed from the chambers"
my recent experiences at open forum are my first experiences with open forum; and i am -fascinated!
i've already written about how i believe open forums should have a set, predictable, reliable time frame for the public to count on. -the guessing game portion.. what working parents have to go through to show up at all.. and then maybe they can have 60 seconds, maybe not.. and as to when you might get to speak.. at 6:30? 7? 7:30? 8? 8:30? 9? it is entirely dictated by the council members
we all know this is wrong.
but, that's not my main point today. my main point today is that without an actual roundtable, in person, conversation with questions and answers
all of us are left to guess.. to project... to interpret to imagine.. to try and figure out on our own, based on our own life experiences, biases, education, etc.
we are left to figure out on our own: HOW ON EARTH NOBLE AVE got put BACK! on the table for consideration as a site for 100 bed tiny home homeless cages. It was found not viable in 2017.
like, everyone! i do mean everyone, except the 8 council members who voted behind the communities back, knows it is a dangerous, negligent, awful idea. the land sits on a treasured neighborhood park, which also serves as a water supply facility; and directly across from an elementary school, library, daycare.. [all of this has already been written about, so let me fast forward]
i have emailed with questions many times to all city council members -and there are a couple occasions i will receive a generic receipt that lets me know my email was received; but i have not received any responses to any questions; no answers, that's for sure.
so, we are all just guessing how it happened. i want to share here some of the guesses from different people
ONE GUESS IS: the city council members are each under a great deal of pressure to fast track and solve for the homeless crisis.. they bought into the propaganda about tiny homes.. were sold on one of the 'mascot' success stories.. hook, line, sinker, and .. now you have to find land -quick! land owned by the city of san jose (vs. county, vs. private or corporate owned) provides the path of least resistance, and so, without actually visiting the perc ponds on noble in person. without realizing the land was a treasured neighborhood park across from an elementary, library, daycare..
-using only a paper or online map, they said, "here!" some flat land owned by the city of san jose. we'll make sure you can build here
that is one guess. -how it happened..
and as to why their vote was behind the communities back, with zero outreach to the families and individuals and teachers that would be directly impacted..
well, they just didn't want to deal with any resistance.
-it is said, by council member cohen, /and it was documented in a san jose spotlight article, that cohen warned his fellow council members.. there would be resistance, based on what happened in 2017..
why cohen himself did not provide his community with a headsup on the direction the other members were headed... also, we'd only be guessing. nothing in his newsletters; no visits to BCAC.. nothing mentioned until after the underhanded vote. -notably/gratefully: regarding the 8-2 vote; cohen and mahan were the 2 opposed to building on NOBLE.
maybe everything was about getting it done; getting it done quickly; avoiding any resistance.
ALL GUESSES.
ANOTHER GUESS.. they did know! they did know, based on 2017 fight back that this would draw a lot of attention, and strategized accordingly. political saints and sinners game of sorts.. some coming out as heroes and accumulating votes; some portrayed as villians..
JUST A GUESS...
PEOPLE ALSO GUESS.. a lot of guesses based on who stands to gain financially.. developers pushing; influencing.. homeless advocates & ambassadors benefiting from... some behind the seens (seens, intentional) commissions people might be receiving attached to the finding of locations; building of tiny home sites.. i mean, we are all like, -really? 15 million to build 100 bed tiny home site -15 million!?! and 3 million to maintain annually!?!
JUST GUESSES...
anyway, i'm going to close with MY GUESS.. and my guess is more like, -born in part from my Christian walk; my own opinion/interpretation/guess, fused with biblical, spiritual, knowledge
so i will call it an interpretation vs. a guess:
we do have a homelessness crisis -this is evident every time my husband and i run an errand in any direction in San Jose/Milpitas and beyond. My first inclination is to look at and learn what is going on with all the current services provided
next.. in regard to tiny home sites.. i think there was some genuine belief that they might be helpful.. get people off the streets, into a fenced (i always say caged) area; with some safety precautions; some outreach.. and the tiny homes will only be a bridge.. temporary.. a few months and then transitioned into subsidized housing.. i believe that some people believed tiny homes would really help
an experiment -an experiment where they seem to build the sites, spending outrageous, unjustifiable amounts of money, - cut the ribbon, take some pix; pat themselves on the back, and never look back to see how things were going -on to taking up more land, and spending more money, destroying more neighborhoods, and placing super dense populations of people down on their luck, into -whatever you want to call it: fenced/secure? caged? tiny home sites.
but as the negative/failing results poured in.. they already had a certain momentum; they already had promised builders.. already signed contracts, made promises.. they had already committed to getting 1000 people off the streets.. they already explained, how building low income/affordable apartments would take way too long and we need something NOW!
and quietly, stealth like.. they succeeded in finding locations for and building 5 different tiny home sites. this became very empowering..
so empowering, that, (my interpretation only; not facts.. ) -so empowering that they believed they could just keep steamrolling their tiny home agenda without checking results; and bypass the legal requirements for community input; bypass, ignore, legal requirements for environmental reports; skip research.. avoid resistance by not mentioning, only whispering.. i believe they got lazy, or were in such a hurry, that they didn't go "see" Noble Ave, the library, the perc ponds, the water facility, the wildlife; indigenous and migratory, the daycare, the proximity to another middle school, a daycare, another elementary, a residential neighborhood -they didn't "see" for themselves the distance from services, transportation, on and on, etc. they did not see a park area, which is DEFINITELY not suited for such a dense population! no regard for zoning ordinances or why they exist -i believe they just looked at a map, on paper, online, -saw, owned by city of san jose, and then underhandly voted.. maybe there was some power/dictator empowerment that caused a lapse of democratic judgement. -don't know.. as to financial gains, or gains of position or power, that may also motivate their decision.. i don't pretend to know and won't guess
my biblical, spiritual interpretation is this: God wanted this revealed. Ephesians 5:11 -have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.
they were steamrolling their agenda.. and had they kept placing tiny home sites in more industrial areas, -they would still be building them; quietly, slowly.. encroaching..
empowered by the building of the first few sites -they felt empowered to put them anywhere they wanted; when they wanted; at any cost and against many laws.
by voting underhandly to place them on Noble, even though the site was found not viable in 2017..
well,
THIS BROUGHT THE TINY HOME EXPERIMENT INTO THE LIGHT; for a much larger public to see..
the public can better see now.. what is happening in district 4 is relevant to everyone who calls San Jose home. Without our protest, their destructive momentum would continue
If they succeeded on Noble, it would set precedent; and any and every school and park becomes a potential caged site for a very dense population of homeless.
With this in the public light.. now the public can know, the tiny home sites, do nothing to address the homeless encampments; the public can research and learn the cost and the RESULTS of the experiment which is failing in many different cities and states
The public can see how important it is to get back to the drawing board, with a larger problem solving panel, with more voices in more disciplines..
the public can see tiny homes create more problem than they solve, and we can't let city council fast track us into a worse mess than we currently have; and which would end up ten times harder to correct
my other biblical/spiritual interpretations: GOD can use all things for good. We have met many more neighbors and made new friends as a result of the NOTonNOBLE protest..
when we were deceived into believing there would not be seats for us in the chambers; -as a result, i learned about and fell in love with the sonic runway..
as we've been censored, discouraged and faced obstacles in the protest, -we've gathered more concerned citizens into the protest; we've continued to make incremental progress..
city council censors.. the media shares.. the protest grows
and i'll close with the reminder.. unless city council members share their individual truth with their public
we all just guess, wonder, scratch our heads, exchange our ideas/interpretations, use our imaginations
my prayer, is that this topic stays in the light for more people to see, research
so more people can help STOP THE FAILING TINY HOME TREND and contribute toward a more comprehensive and long term solution.
In Jesus name, amen & amen.
*****
LEADERSHIP CRISIS -mentioning here the numerous times we have been warned not to agitate, irritate city council members because they will retaliate by building on Noble
my response is always the same: if we have city council members who make decisions based on spite, then they are not qualified to lead anyone anywhere. they should be immediately removed from office.
****
FAIRGROUNDS is the best EIH site in my opinion. Emphasis on INTERIM.. while a larger panel problem solves in a more comprehensive way. Rather than remaining on the costly, dangerous tiny home path
a temporary shelter on the Santa Clara County Fairgrounds -150 acres? to work with...
and there is the "can't put them all in one place" mentality, but i really want to know -why not?
it's all temporary; -write. no reason the 'safe' unhoused can't transition in 2 to 6 months from the Santa Clara County Fairgrounds, -write. And this spares the unnecessary building/encroachment into neighborhoods, on parks, near schools, libraries, etc. -all in one place for 'safe' unhoused, prevents districts from being pitted against district; neighbor being pitted against neighbor; san jose citizens being pitted against city council members; all in one place on the fairgrounds prevents parents from having to worry about their children on school campuses while they are at work..
because, also, what sounds, initially so -fair- equal distribution of tiny home sites; one in each district.
that's utterly unfair. it would only be genuinely fair if each district started out equal: each with the same amount of schools, parks, open land... -the fact is no one wants these densely populated tiny home sites in their district or neighborhood
what are the reasons we cannot place EIH -temporary shelters at the Santa Clara County Fairgrounds?
-certainly there is a lot more open land to work with.. (150 acres?)
do those reasons outweigh the reasons we should not place $15 million dollar dense populations of caged tiny homes sites on parks, in neighborhoods, near schools, libraries, nature reserves?
let me email that question to the city council members... santa clara county officials... email into the digital abyss
anyone there? .... can you please answer....
*****
posted by SANDRA HARRISON KAY @ 11:48 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home