Laserfiche WebLink
From:K DM <br />To:GRP-City Council <br />Subject:Redwood Life Alternative 2 is NOT supported <br />Date:Sunday, March 30, 2025 6:12:10 PM <br />You don't often get email from tokdm@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important <br />Dear Councilmembers, <br />The Redwood Life applicant, and your staff, are not being totally truthful with you. Please delay your <br />choice of study alternatives until all the facts are disclosed and the community has a real opportunity for <br />input. <br />Fictional Community Support: The applicant’s claim to have arrived at a community supported alterative is <br />specious. I attended multiple workshops sponsored by the applicant where public comments <br />overwhelmingly opposed the intensification of development, citing concerns based on emerging science <br />and regulatory agency data. Instead of addressing this opposition, the applicant privately courted select <br />special-interest shills (Unions and Chamber of Commerce) by promising jobs. <br />Alternative 2 more than triples the pressure on this already rickety dump. After starting with a totally <br />infeasible initial proposal, they offer a mere 10% (do the math yourself) reduction, and staff is pretending <br />this has community support. It does not. The community that I heard was pleading for less but the <br />applicant never responded to resident input. <br />Embellished “Community Benefits”. The owner is already legally obligated to maintain the levee and <br />dump – this promise is not a “benefit”. Adding 6,000 workers, while providing just 800 hypothetical <br />housing units, is not a benefit. A vague promise to offset a small percent of increased traffic is not a net <br />benefit. A community center where one is not needed is not a benefit. I suspect an honest cost-benefit <br />analysis will show the public cost of infrastructure, police, city services, congestion impacts and housing <br />deficits will outweigh the speculated tax revenue. And in 40 years, when the environmental impacts <br />become evident, the public will be on the hook to fix the whole mess. <br />Residents waited over a year for the sensitivity analysis, then just 6 weeks later staff want to rush ahead <br />with decisions. Please delay your selection of alternatives and give the broader public (not the chosen <br />shills) a chance to respond. <br />KD Mercer