Editorial: No substance to Cargill charge

Posted by Kristopher Crawley
a resident of Menlo Park: Allied Arts/Stanford Park
on Feb 9, 2010 at 12:28 pm

I don't care if you call it a 'backroom deal' or 'unmasking discussions of a city councilwoman to bribe another city to drop a project by offering someting of value." Or, let's try this one from Redwood City's perspective, "Councilwoman involved in plot to trick impoverished Redwood City out of once in a lifetime economic and job development opportunity."

I think what Redwood City is doing is just fine. They are evaluating a very innovative project that restores half of the Cargill property back to historic tidal marshes while the other half, the half that will be paying for the restoration, will generate millions of dollars in new tax revenue, thousands of JOBS, a huge economic boost for the south bay, lots of housing options closer to the city than many people travel everyday, the list goes on.

Give it some thought. If Redwood doesn't go forward with Cargill's plan the site will remain as an eyesore and it won't be restored at all. If the Save the Bay people were serious about RESTORING the bay, they would work out a compromise that makes sense. Ignoring that reality shows their lack of credibility.

Influencing politicians is well within Save the Bay's rights, but the people in Redwood City have the right to decide for themselves how much game playing they will allow Save the Bay and adjacent jurisdictions to do. If it were me I would reject petty antics and focus on what is best for my city.