The price of TRAQC’s as-of-now successful lawsuit against the city of Tracy and The Surland Cos. might, in the short term, be a swim center. But it’s not TRAQC’s fault the developer agreement was struck down in a court of law. Lay that blame, if you must, on the city.
Because it was Tracy, not TRAQC or Surland (which was just trying to get its project off the ground), that gave away too much while negotiating with a developer in hopes of getting land, money or some other amenity. In this case, a swim center.
The tentative decision by Judge Lesley Holland that ruled invalid the agreement between the city of Tracy and Surland — which paved the way for the Ellis development and an aquatics park — seems convincing and well-reasoned.
Holland explains clearly how, in agreeing to give Surland rights to residential growth allotments good for land anywhere around Tracy and not just in the Ellis specific area, the city was simply outside the law.
Barring an appeal of Holland’s decision, or a new Ellis deal, it looks like the city wasted staff time, money and effort for an agreement that was not going to withstand a legal challenge.
The upside is, Tracy has a chance to make a fresh decision about its growth priorities and how it goes about trading building rights for amenities, as well as what those sought-after amenities are.
Right now, that focus should be on helping businesses and the local economy grow, not residential building.
And when the time is ripe to build single-family homes again, we hope elected leaders and city officials will more carefully toe the legal line in trying to build a better place for residents to call home.
"We are not going to build more homes that we don't need, and we are not going to build a water park that we can't afford to run and maintain."
Does your statement address Ellis specifically or new housing overall?
Sounds more like a fresh STOP. A win-win all around.
Seems to me more like a dog chasing his tail?
Seems to me like the TP always complains they want a roadmap then they want a fresh start then they want a roadmap then they want a fresh start they want a roadmap then they want a fresh start they want a roadmap then they want a fresh start they want a roadmap then they want a fresh start they want a roadmap then they want a fresh start they want a roadmap then they want a fresh start they want a roadmap then they want a fresh start they want a roadmap then they want a fresh start ....
Did we miss something TP?
So.
You are saying that every time there's a TRAQC lawsuit, we get a "fresh start"?
So tell me.
How many decades do you want to continue these "fresh starts" ?
This is an has been th practice since Bob took over th Masthead an has been confirmed by him on several occasions when his guard was down an he didn't realize who might be standin around ta overhear his comments.
No I didn't eavesdrop but overheard it in th coffee shop across th street when I was in thair an he came in talkin with one of his associates.
Secondly, th association between Bob an Mark dates back to thair high school days. While they didn't go ta th same school they did hang around tagether at times as teenagers.
Now perhaps ya can understand why in TPs eyes Mark is always right an anythang th city has done since Bob took over th Masthead is wrong.
I once inquired why th City prints public notices in TP as public notices are required by law. The City considers TP ta be th only local paper. Actually th Harold does a fine job in our community an shows less political bias than Bob's TP.
Since TP rarely has anythang positive ta say about th City if I were runnin that part of th show I'd take my mandatory public notices an print em in th Harold an take that revenue away frum TP in th process. No point in aidin yer enemies is thair?
Lenders are only a part of the problem. The Mark to Market Rule coming in 2012 will address that part.
The media is a major problem trying to get story together without injecting it's bias or worse, being clueless or even overtly lying about facts. Opinions belong on the opinion page not throughout the rest of the reporting.
Politicians like Swarzenegger, Brown, Frank, Dodd, Obama, Bush, McNerney, Galgiani, Steinburg, Reid, Pelosi etc. are another problem. Thank you to you politicians for ensuring my kid's generation will pay for our crap.
Politicians did not get elected without voter approvals. Uninformed voters are playing their part.
... and then there are those who voted in a local version of the 1930 Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act know as Measure A. It has the same effect. Restrict growth (read imports), increasing prices by restricting competition (raising tariffs). So far a lose-lose all around. Less new housing, less jobs, less new businesses, less new infrastructure, less existing infrastructure replacement. Of course one benefit is less traffic... less new vehicles purchased, less vehicles repaired due to lack of dollars (though more expensive due to the destruction of cars from Cash for Clunkers, higher fuel prices from lack of processing capabilities and Middle East instability. We strangle growth at our peril.
We, by our actions or inactions, choose to prolong or shorten our misery.
Once again thank you for your clarification of the issue. We can only hope the lenders begin to realize that their efforts to keep the market inflated are just going to prolong the current misery.
"...Mark Connolly and Tracy Region Alliance for a Quality Community have done Tracy residents a sincere service (more than once) by calling out the city when it has violated local and California law regarding growth."
"more than acquantences"
Makes sense to me.
I have just one question.
What kind of brandy did they drink to celebrate?
Bankrupt Paper's Editorial Staff offers thoughtful though useless financial advice.
While we're painting people, Mark Connelly and Bob Matthews are more than acquaintances. Is this relationship unknown to the Editorial Board?
Last year, 18 new home permits were taken out in Tracy. 346 were issued in Manteca, more than all other jurisdictions in entire county combined. Opening a new business, where would the most likely future business growth and opportunity be?
Some say no more new construction until such time as a recovery comes and the housing market stabilizes. The Construction and Development industry recently drove one-third of the U.S. economy. You apparently want your home to increase in valuation while denying those in construction, job opportunities to buy available properties. Makes as much sense as anything else today, why not.
Now that new homes and their buyer's are an endangered species. will the rest of us volunteer to make capital improvement expenditures part of our new financial lives, or will we let infrastructure deteriorate at an increasing pace?
Under current Washington and Sacramento spending policies we are digging a deeper hole. A recovery might take place in 2014-2015 if the out-of-control spending gets reigned in.
How many of you are buying foreclosures, refurbishing and renting it out, or selling the property? How many only speculate on the blogs about how something should or should not work. Want to find out how it really works?
Put your money up and see how your financial life decisions work out.
fantasyfootball wrote:
"The only way to sell those homes is to create jobs in the Silicon Valley or in Tracy.
We are NOT going to sit here and find solutions to sell homes in Tracy with Measure A.
We are NOT going to sit here and find solutions to bring jobs to Tracy.
What we can do is sit here and blame others for our problems."
The above about sums it up. Measure did not create the meltdown. Measure A has done nothing to help Tracy. It can stifle growth in an up market while doing little but warding off entrepreneurs and new businesses in any market, the very thing the Press wants the City to get going on.
Bird_Man wrote:
"Why not start a civilized discussion on what Tracy Growth should look like when Measure A expires in 2012?"
Measure A does not expire. It is an ordinance (law). While a civil discussion may take place, the market dictates growth, stagnation, or devaluation.
"We have a boat load of empty - or soon-to-be-empty - homes. Seems to me that those homes should be addressed before building others."
For instance?
"Seems that the next growth initiative should have some plan for dictating investor activity as well - or is that going too far and killing capitalism?"
You've answered your question. Opportunity is where you make it, not where someone dictates it.
"Sure, there are tons for the young people and it certainly gives them something to do between Memorial and Labor Days but it is just a security job the rest of the year."
Seen the teen unemployment rate lately? Which jobs hire the young to start out at the middle or the top?
http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2010/05/art2exc.htm
tommybahama wrote: "I also agree with your comment about the investors swooping in and buying up all the vacant houses. My guess would be they'll end up as rentals rather than get flipped, especially in this real estate market, which has its pros and cons."
Your guess is wrong. 1st, the lenders decide what the property is worth. Some are still carrying foreclosed properties at their originally booked values. Lenders are only now quickening the pace of their decision making. An occupied property, rental or homeowner, has way more value than one unoccupied. People, companies etc. bought property as rentals. Some still do though, it ties up a lot capital. Without additional financing available (which is now limited by our Washington DC Brainiacs), you run out of money. Selling generates money by putting the house in a buyer's name, freeing up borrowing capacity.
Employment discussion and data from the Associated General Contractors here:
http://newsletters.agc.org/datadigest/2010/10/28/metropolitan-area-construction-employment-september-2/#more-1108
The only way to sell those homes is to create jobs in the Silicon Valley or in Tracy.
We are NOT going to sit here and find solutions to sell homes in Tracy with Measure A.
We are NOT going to sit here and find solutions to bring jobs to Tracy.
What we can do is sit here and blame others for our problems.
The way I see it, we were responsible for voting for Measure A and the economic collapse occured because the voters let people make laws that led to their own demise.
Seemed like a good idea at the time.
I agree that solutions would be in good order at this time. I also agree with your comment about the investors swooping in and buying up all the vacant houses. My guess would be they'll end up as rentals rather than get flipped, especially in this real estate market, which has its pros and cons.
Less expensive housing costs for renters vs. non-responsive absentee owners is frequently the problem when this happens. If the non-responsive absentee owners are not kept in-check then you end up with more transitory residents, which in turn reduced property values as well.
I think we need to mobilize the local realtors associations to help us find a way to address this problem. They may have access to resources that we're not familiar with to address this matter, and we all know they would certainly benefit by better property values.
Why not start a civilized discussion on what Tracy Growth should look like when Measure A expires in 2012? I have gone back and read the original Measure and it would appear that folks (yes, Mr. Connolly and Ms. Garamendi) had the intention of slowing down growth for Tracy. The measure itself doesn't say what they thought when they created it so I won't even speculate. I imagine that there were good intentions and most of us know a saying or two about good intentions.
Well... the recession has had a heckuva impact on Tracy's growth. Can we all agree on that?
So, instead of bickering about what has been or currently is... Why don't we begin talking about where it is going and what Tracy growth SHOULD look like?
I would say that growth for the sake of growth is a mistake.
How do we draw businesses? Seriously, what tools does the city have at its disposal? Is it legal to offer temporary tax incentives for a long term commitment of some sort from a business? What can we do to help them build that will be attractive to the businesses and the taxpayers? I'm sorry gang but having worked at a waterpark, I am not seeing quality professional jobs there. Sure, there are tons for the young people and it certainly gives them something to do between Memorial and Labor Days but it is just a security job the rest of the year. It is a great amenity but is it necessary? Call up the Brown family that ran Oakwood Lake and see if they want to get back into the waterpark business.
We also have a healthy start at logistics companies with the physical location of the city and the infrastructure (highway access and trains). What else do we have going for us? There is likely a healthy pool of qualified - and available - workers...?
We have a boat load of empty - or soon-to-be-empty - homes. Seems to me that those homes should be addressed before building others. I am not saying that they should all be sold first but there should be a plan. From personal experience, I had a tough time buying a house as the investors are swooping in and paying all cash. Hard to compete with. I appreciate the entrepreneurial spirit of investors but this sometimes keeps qualified local buyers out of a home in town. IF investors are snapping up homes, are they flipping or renting? Seems that the next growth initiative should have some plan for dictating investor activity as well - or is that going too far and killing capitalism?
I love reading the comments but we could try proposing solutions instead of reporting problems or challenges.
Thoughts?
When I read the article I think it childish to giving away RGA's.
"The upside is, Tracy has a chance to make a fresh decision about its growth priorities and how it goes about trading building rights for amenities, as well as what those sought-after amenities are."
First, we already know what the ammenity is.
Second why would the TP want the city to leave money on the table?
CN
???
Where on earth is this paper's priorities?