Indentity and transparency for 95368

On Monday, April 20, 2020, Stanislaus County opened it's first free COVID-19 testing site at the Salida Library. Three days later on April 23, I submitted an email request to the county asking for Salida's COVID-19 cases to be broken out of the county numbers just as Alameda County has done for unincorporated Castro Valley. I copied members of Salida MAC on my request and learned they had also requested the same information. (THANK YOU SALIDA MAC!) 

On Monday, April 27, I sent another e-mail request to the county asking for an update and sending a link to a Sacramento Bee article showing that Sacramento breaks their COVID-19 cases down by zip code.

The Modesto Bee Editorial Board joined the call for the breakdown in numbers by zip code in an opinion piece on April 28, which specifically mentioned Salida

"Reporting by ZIP code would greatly increase clarity, for example, in Salida — the county’s largest unincorporated community, and host of the county’s new drive-up testing clinic. With 14,658 people, Salida actually is larger than three of our cities: Waterford (population 8,823), Hughson (7,370) and Newman (11,119). ZIP code-level reporting would do the trick, as Salida has only one ZIP code."

Unfortunately, the county's solution to our request was to break the numbers out by supervisorial district which doesn't tell anything specifically about Salida. That same day, Salida MAC again made the case for the breakdown of Salida's numbers. 

On May 4, the Modesto Bee Op Ed Board announced that the county would soon break down the numbers by zip code. 

"Perhaps people in Modesto soon will know whether their neighborhoods have had COVID clusters. It will be nice seeing 10 different reports for the 10 ZIP codes in Modesto, rather than just one for the entire city.  

The same goes for one-ZIP-code Salida. The unincorporated town has 14,658 residents but no clue whether the coronavirus is active there, despite serving as the county’s only testing site before others were added Monday in Patterson and Keyes.  

On Sunday, Merced County became more transparent by reporting to email alert subscribers its cases in Delhi (population 11,735) and Winton (11,761), both unincorporated like Salida although both are smaller. Salida also has more people that three actual Stanislaus cities: Waterford (population 8,823), Hughson (7,370) and Newman (11,119), all of which have benefited from specific coronavirus reports."

FINALLY! Finally...on Thursday, May 7, 2020, eighteen days after placing the first COVID-19 testing site in Salida, Stanislaus County debuted the COVID-19 numbers by zip code. If the first link doesn't work, click this link and then "Neighborhoods" at the top of the page.

District 3 has 20 cases. Salida has 12 of those cases.

They Know Not What They Do

NOTE: Due to the COVID-19 virus, the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors has offered public comment on agenda items to be submitted via email before 5 pm on Monday and the comments will be distributed to the board. This was emailed to the Clerk of the Board at 1:20 pm on Monday, March 16, 2020

Public Comment Agenda Item.6.B.11 - Valley Home MAC

Supervisors,

I read through the agenda item for changing the Valley Home MAC from elected to appointed, and while I understand and sympathize with some of the points you make and the issues surrounding this, I do not agree with the change. As I have shared with you previously, the MACs in Alameda County are all-appointed and the supervisor will only appoint people to the MAC who follow his views. My nickname for the Castro Valley MAC is "The Stepford Wives MAC". And as I said at your January 2019 workshop during public comment, not being able to choose who represents you is about as un-American as you can get.

I also find it ironic and rather contradictory that Supervisor Olsen said at this same January 2019 meeting that she didn't "understand why the people of (another board) couldn't choose who represents them." I agree with her - the board she was referring to should be chosen by election of the people! And the same goes for Valley Home MAC!  (Also, I DO remember the name of the board she mentioned; just choosing not to throw her under a bus by saying it in public comment.)

I know you are dealing with apathy of getting people to serve - but their time is a valuable commodity. Please consider coming into the 21st century and offering a stipend to serve on MAC boards. The Stanislaus County Planning Commission has a small stipend but it's enough that you never once hear a planning commissioner say, "I'm just a volunteer" as MAC members are. Salida Sanitary District also offers a small stipend and they never lack for board members. Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Katherine Borges

Salida

The due diligence of transparency, taxes, and development

My Public Comment to the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday, March 3, 2020 at 9 am:

"Good morning, just to quickly address the email request I sent you to cease the practice of private meetings with MAC members: while it may be in compliance to the Brown Act, there's no way for the public to independently gauge the County's due diligence if there's no record via public attendance or minutes to record what transpired. I wrote to all of you because I don't know if this is something new or something that you all do, but I only know it because Salida MAC members have told me and my supervisor mentioned it at the last MAC meeting. The solution should not be that the supervisor stops mentioning it because that makes it all the less transparent; it just would be better to cease the practice and shine the light of transparency on all governmental meetings.

I do think, with much thanks going to Salida MAC, that the County HAS been (with the exception of the closed door meetings) demonstrating appropriate due diligence in regards to the proposed CSA10 tax increase meetings. My honest opinion is that $33 a year is not a big deal, but I am against the tax in principle. The principle being that it seems the County's first solution for any shortfall is to raise taxes on the constituency as opposed to finding another solution. I do know that the County did look at sub-contracting the landscaping work out and that prevailing wage killed that option. However, I don't think the County has exhausted all other options like applying for grants to xeriscape around the developments or reapportioning our property taxes to include more for park maintenance. 

And I take exception to County employees referring to those, like myself, who do not live in CSA 10 tax homes as “freeloaders”. Just because the County decided to raid CSA10 for my neighborhood's storm drain maintenance at some point between 2013 and now, does not turn my neighborhood into “freeloaders”. One of the biggest reasons I chose my house

Some CSA10 Parks & Streetscape budget for 2012-2013

is because it DID'NT have Mello Roos or CSA taxes on it. My realtor didn't say, “Well be prepared because in 27 years, the County is going to put a tax on you that you didn't sign up for, unlike the people in Mello Roos homes. In 2013, I asked Matt Machado what covered my storm drain maintenance and he replied, “the gas tax”. So yes, $33 isn't a big deal right now, but it all adds up in the long run. I think that if anyone deserves a tax increase in Salida, it's our fire department and the County should exhaust every available option including grants before proceeding with this CSA10 increase.

Now onto the topic of Vizcaya: it's appalling to expect the working people of Salida to plan to attend a neighborhood meeting with only 6-8 days notice which is what you are doing to them since you just announced the date yesterday. Why can't you give them two weeks notice at least? What's the rush? The short notice ensures a low attendance and that is poor due diligence for a county which is “striving to be the best in America”. Give them a second meeting at least for the people who cannot make the first one. And perhaps on a Saturday. 

I was reading the Salida Community Plan (SCP) over the weekend and it struck me what a strange limbo Salida is in with it. It says that “...one of the primary purposes of the Amendment Area is to provide for a mix of land uses that can facilitate the Salida Community's financial and fiscal self-sufficiency” but if you allow these two gas stations and other businesses the loophole of a “drafting error” to not be included in the SCP then that hurts the existing community. I believe that Jeff Grover had good intentions for us with the SCP but I one hundred percent disagree that a man who is a building contractor would have allowed a "drafting error" to proceed for 13 years, especially when it affects his cousins' land. Put yourself in the shoes of the people who live in Vizcaya, which also does include County employees: would YOU choose to buy a home by two gas stations and two hotels? What will that do to their homes' resale value? 

I can tell you how the potential of a 4-story hotel impacted MY neighborhood: when a home went up for sale across the street, two buyers backed out just from word that a hotel would be built on the lot behind us and this home didn't even border it! No one wants to walk out of their house and see hotels, or live with the noise, air, and light pollution of gas stations.

I also ask that when Planning does the environmental studies, to do them by a place with at least two gas stations to measure the pollutants that will be influencing the air quality around the homes. Thank you for your consideration."

"I wouldn't have bought a house there" in Salida's Vizcaya neighborhood

My comments during the public comment period at the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors 9 am meeting on February 25, 2020:

”I wouldn't have bought a house there” are words that have haunted me since the January Salida MAC meeting. They were spoken by a county employee; an honest answer to a Salida resident who asked him if he would want to live near the various developments being planned around Hammett and Pirrone.

“I wouldn't have bought a house there” begs the question then – is that because we cannot trust the County to not allow development conducive to homes? Checking what is to be built in empty lots and farmers' fields around your home is not something most people think to do, myself included. When I purchased my home 27 years ago I did not check the county zoning to see what was going to be built in the vacant lot behind my home. I was absolutely horrified last year when plans were circulating for a 4-story hotel and that's not something that would have surfaced either had I checked then.

Several years ago, I had a conversation with Supervisor DeMartini about my neighborhood and he also honestly remarked, “They should never have allowed homes to be built there, it should all be industrial and commercial.” I was surprised when he said it, but the more I think about it, I have to agree. As I've mentioned in recent public comment here, I can hear Freeway 99, even with my windows closed – that's how close I am to it.

But it is what it is and there are thousands of homes on the east side of Salida. We've been pretty fortunate as long as I've lived there with one or two exceptions, the businesses built along Pirrone have been pretty quiet and not a nuisance to their neighbors.

But that will all change now if you approve the planned developments at Pirrone and Hammett. And here's why you should not: It is a stupid use of that land. The developer does not even have a gas station committed – he's trying to sell it to 7/11 or Circle K. There are gas stations at Pelandale, Kiernan and Ripon, we do not need one there too that will cause noise, light and air pollution on the Vizcaya neighborhood. The other projects include a fast food type restaurant, two hotels, and a mini-storage. I don't know how close the hotels are to the homes, but if they are close, that's a permanent invasion of the homeowners privacy. And a mini-storage on that prime freeway frontage location is an insane waste of land! We already have two mini-storage businesses in Salida and one is a ½ mile down on Pirrone.

Modesto has been complaining for years that they don't have anywhere to build a business park on 99 and here's this beautiful pristine area that would be perfect for that or even better, my husband's idea that he wrote to you in an e-mail about – create tourism with a San Antonio River Walk-type development. If you haven't already heard, Madera County is building one along the San Joaquin River. A San Antonio River Walk in Salida would bring much more tourism to the county than shooting pumpkins out of catapults or the Frank Raines ATV billboard currently up in Salida.

And that's nonsense that it was a “drafting error” and not included in the Salida Community Plan. Jeff Grover would not have been able to vote on the Plan if his cousin's land was included and oh, they just all of sudden call it a drafting error when after 13 years they haven't complained nor was it corrected in the County's recent General Plan update.

To sum it up, the buck stops with you – you are the ones with the binding votes. Put yourselves in our shoes and don't vote to make Salida just another ho hum gas station exit next to a neighborhood where you or your employees wouldn't buy a house there."

SALIDA CSA 10 TAX INCREASE

If you live in Salida and have Mello Roos taxes on your bill, you need to read this. Not only is the board that governs your Mello Roos bond looking to refinance, but Stanislaus County also wants to raise your CSA taxes! CSA is the acronym for "Community Service Assessment" and Salida has two CSA districts: CSA 4 which applies to the Amberwood neighborhood (Finney and Bacon area) and CSA 10 which applies to all the homes built since 1990 (i.e. Gold Valley, Murphy's Ferry) and ALL neighborhoods on the east side of 99 with the exception of Clarendon Woods and Morgan Glen Estates (the homes off Kiernan and Sisk up to Wallasey Way). Mello Roos applies to approximately 2,800 homes in Salida. 

The CSA 10 taxes (and it is a tax, but "assessment" sounds more PC to the County) is a tax you will ALWAYS have to pay. It does not end in 2030 like the Mello Roos does (or is supposed to if the board does not mess with it again.) 

Stanislaus County wants to increase your CSA 10 tax primarily because they nearly wiped it out when they used it to replace the trees and sidewalks on Pirrone. Whomever put the trees in front of the developments on Pirrone did not put in root boxes to train the roots to grow down and they lifted the sidewalks. So they want ALL of the CSA taxpayers to pay for that and raise your taxes. 

Fresno xeriscaping

Currently, the CSA assessment primarily goes to pay the County to do the landscaping around the developments, and maintaining every park in Salida except for Salida Park. Why should you pay more for the County to mow the grass around the neighborhoods when they could install xeriscaping that's drought tolerant and does not create green waste from having to be mowed? It's not like children play on the grass; it mostly gets used by dogs to relieve themselves. The City of Fresno used a grant to install xeriscaping on some of their landscaped center islands. Stanislaus County should do the same for Salida.

Again, have a say in the matter of your taxes and what they are used on. Look at the County's PowerPoint they shared at the October Salida Municipal Advisory Council meeting. They put a flashing sign on Sisk Road to notify people of the meeting, but I thought I'd do this post to let people know because really now, who actually knows what "CSA 10" means when they see that sign? And God forbid they spend any money to send you notices - geez!



Attend the upcoming meetings at the Salida Library Community Room to have a say before this tax gets increased on you.

Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 7 pm for a special CSA 10 presentation
Tuesday, December 3, 2019 at 7 pm at the Salida MAC meeting
Tuesday, January 28, 2020 at 7 pm (last chance to give input at Salida MAC)

When the past comes back to haunt you

According to Lowell H. Beachler's book, "Wood Colony District", the first Grovers to settle in Wood Colony were Ira and Maggie Grover, who moved to the area in 1918. They bought a farm on Shoemake and are buried in the Wood Colony Cemetery. Several Grover families descended from Ira and Maggie's four children still live in Wood Colony today. 

One of their descendants, Jeff Grover, served on the very first Salida Municipal Advisory Council (MAC) board when it was formed in 1984. He was then elected to represent our community on the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors. In 2007, Jeff Grover pulled the Salida Now initiative off the ballot and was one of three "yes" votes needed to pass it into the new Salida Community Plan. 

The Grovers in Salida and Wood Colony are related. Jeff's cousin owns a landscaping business with locations in Salida and Modesto. And the Grover family owns a large tract of property off of Pirrone near Hammett.

And this is where the past has come to haunt us in the present and future.

I honestly believe that Jeff Grover tried to improve Salida by replacing the old Salida Community Plan (SCP) with the Salida Now initiative because it expanded Salida's boundaries and called for more beneficial aspects for the community like a recreational riverfront parkway along the Stanislaus River. He didn't know the economic recession was coming that caused the developer to pull out of the project and would result in Salida being frozen in time (2007) ever since.

But here's the rub: Jeff Grover would have been conflicted out of voting on the Salida Community Plan if his family was named anywhere in the SCP document - if they derived benefit - if they signed a Developer Agreement (DA). Oh, they most certainly would benefit if the SCP were activated - they own land in both areas of Salida - by Hammett and the landscaping business on Ladd and Stoddard. So now this is why the Stanislaus County Planning Department is saying it was "draftman's error" that the Grover Family Properties land was included in the SCP map. It's no accident it's there, it's a matter of convenience to now remove it because the Grover family wishes to develop it. It's a free country, so a landowner can sell their land at any time. But the benefit is derived when they can sell their land for commercial land prices, as it's now zoned in the SCP rather than selling for agricultural land prices.

And what they plan to sell their land for will create the tenth level of Hades for Salida. The truck stop/travel plaza they propose to put there will be a magnet for crime and

Grover Family Properties land with Vizcaya neighborhood
in background. Salida, California - November 2019

vagrancy that Salida does not have the law enforcement coverage to handle. In neighboring Ripon, the police told a Salida resident that 84% of their crime calls result from the truck stops located at Jack Tone Road. 

Even worse than the horrendous criminal impact upon Salida is the fact that the truck stop/travel plaza will be located just feet from the Vizcaya residential neighborhood. There is NO BUFFER that could be installed to protect this neighborhood from the 24-hour onslaught of light pollution, noise pollution and air pollution, let alone the criminal element just beyond a cinder block wall with no gate to the neighborhood. 

Additionally, the water well in Vizcaya was shut down several years ago due to being over the allowed level of arsenic contaminates. The way the well system was explained to me is the water for Vizcaya will be drawn from the next closest well. The only time it brings in surface water from the City of Modesto system is when there is high usage (like during the summer months). A truck stop is generally a high water user so will draw more from the system to the business in addition to creating the possibility of contaminating the water for the Vizcaya neighborhood. I say this because it is already happening at the truck stop in Ripon. 

Which brings up another glaring point on why allowing this project would be the epitome of bad planning: NOWHERE DO YOU FIND TRUCK STOPS BUILT NEXT TO NEIGHBORHOODS!  Just look at existing truck stops: Ripon, Madera, everywhere between here and Montana (as a Salida resident pointed out from a recent road trip), municipalities DO NOT build truck stops by neighborhoods for all the aforementioned reasons given. They know to provide the natural buffer of distance to protect the residents from the various pollutants and the criminal elements. 

Our community needs to continue to oppose this planned atrocity. Sign the petition, write letters in opposition and send to the Stanislaus County Planning Department.

Grover Family, I implore you - don't do this to Salida. Don't do this to your longtime neighbors. Develop your land for something quiet that will buffer the Vizcaya neighborhood just like all the other businesses currently on Pirrone.

Stanislaus County plans to rip democracy away from residents

On Tuesday, November 27, 2018, Patrick Cavanah, who works in Stanislaus County's Chief Executive Office, sent a letter to all of Stanislaus County's Municipal Advisory Councils (MACs) stating that the county planned to make an "administrative change" which will remove the freedom to choose who represents the people living in the county's unincorporated communities served by MAC councils. (Read the letter here).

The first Municipal Advisory Council (MAC) to be established in Stanislaus County was in Knights Ferry in 1983. The second MAC established was Salida in 1984. Salida MAC was founded due to rapid growth and development occurring in Salida in the 1980's. The purpose of the MAC as outlined by state law is to represent the community to the county's Board of Supervisors. At that time, the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors had the forethought and vision to establish our county's MACs as elected, as opposed to appointed. 

An elected MAC gives the community the right to chose who represents them, just as we vote for county supervisor, school and fire board members, state senators and representatives, federal senators and house congress reps, and even the president. It is the democratic way so why should local representation be any different?

Stanislaus County is seeking to change that and rip the democratic process from county residents who have the least amount of local representation already. 

Former Salida MAC Chairman, Don Murphy, described the issue succinctly in his Next Door post:

"When full term openings occur however, it is the basis for democracy that we get to pick our representatives. Even though the vote of the MAC is only advisory, the discussions and the actions of the MAC have engendered thoughtful discussion."

As a former Salida MAC member and chairman, I could not agree more with Mr. Murphy. So let's address the reasons why our county would want to make an "administrative change" to remove our right to vote. Mr. Cavanah states the following reasons in his letter:

"First, since 2003, there has been only one instance where there were enough candidates to force the election onto the ballot. This occurred in 2007 when five candidates ran for three open seats on the Keyes MAC. Second, MACs occasionally face issues with reaching a quorum due to a lack of members and/or attendance issues. Having an appointed body will provide a more flexible timeline to appoint members to vacant seats and allow MACs to implement attendance requirements. In addition, staff surveyed 20 counties in California, of which 12 use MACs. Of these 12 counties, 11 appoint members. Appointing members to MACs is in alignment with the long-standing practice of the Board appointing members to advisory boards and commissions."

Regarding the perceived apathy of the lack of people applying to serve on a MAC board, I think the fault for this lies with the county. The county does next to nothing to communicate to the communities served by MACs, what a MACs functions are, and how

people can apply to serve on it. I have lived in the unincorporated community of Salida for 25 years and NOT ONCE in a quarter of a century, has my household ever received from the county a single piece of mail or even an e-mail to educate the community about Salida MAC. Now are all communities treated equally? A resounding "NO!" Because the MAC next door to Salida - Wood Colony MAC - has had the county send snail mail to inform their residents of their MAC. Multiple letters too, the most recent letter was sent to households in May 2018 (see image at left). Do Keyes MAC residents also get letters sent? How about Denair MAC? South Modesto MAC? I don't know but I do know that Salida MAC does not. So how do people know what a MAC is, if there are openings, or that it even exists if it's not communicated to them?

Back to Salida MAC for a moment. Salida MAC has had an opening on their MAC board since August 2018 due to a resignation. The current chairman has announced the board opening at the last several meetings, but it has not been announced on social media or the Salida MAC reminder e-mails that are sent out. And the county has certainly not communicated to the community that there's an opening. Why? I don't know but since I seem to be the only one communicating this outside of the meeting, if you'd like to apply for the open Salida MAC seat, you must be a Salida resident and fill out this application. Follow the instructions and turn it in to our District 3 Supervisor's office. 

Facebook profile pic frame

The second reason Mr. Cavanah cites for the "administrative change" is his survey of MACs in other counties that are all-appointed. But what he fails to mention is how the residents in those counties feel about it. There's a whole movement including a Change.org petition and Facebook frames to change Alameda County's Castro Valley MAC from all-appointed to elected. All appointed MACs can serve as a crystal-ball-turned-cautionary-tale in that they tend to end up being made up of the appointing supervisor's campaign donors as noted in this article by the East Bay Citizen. Castro Valley has been battling for more representation for years and transparency in how their MAC council members are selected. Their supervisor finally allowed members of the public to view the interviews which is not something that occurs in Stanislaus County when board openings are filled mid-term by appointment. As you will see if you read these articles, their residents feel "failed" by the whole process.

Perhaps Mr. Cavanah received some objections to his dictatorial "administrative change" because he sent the following e-mail to the MAC councils on Monday, December 3, 2018:

"I appreciate all of the feedback regarding the proposed switch.  In light of this feedback, I am requesting all MACs vote to either support or oppose the proposal at your January meetings.  This vote will help inform me how to move forward.  Consequently, the resolution requesting the Board of Supervisors switch membership from elected to appointed will no longer be on the Board’s December 18th meeting agenda.

I will work with all MAC chairs and/or secretaries on what information should be included on the January agenda."

It would also be helpful if the people responsible, meaning the County and the MAC board members, communicated with the community regarding this change. The county should send letters to ALL RESIDENTS in a MAC district's boundary, just as they do for Wood Colony MAC -AND- the current MAC board members should use e-mail and social media to get the topic out and ask for feedback from their community.