Clark Pacific resolution appears like a sweet deal
Last Tuesday the Woodland City Council approved a resolution supporting Clark Pacific's plan to locate their company at the former Spreckels Sugar site.
Clark Pacific, founded in 1963, is currently located in West Sacramento. The company serves a unique niche in the building industry as a provider of engineered, architectual precast structures.
According to Lizeth Cazares of the Daily Democrat, several councilmen said they thought the proposed location will be a great benefit to the community. In her article (that can be accessed by clicking the title of this post), councilman Art Pimentel was quoted as saying, "I do support this resolution because, ultimately, this is about economic development."
Yolo County Supervisor Matt Rexroad, who attended the meeting, supports the resolution. He suggested that this was a step to better cooperation between the city and the county.
Brenda Cedarblade, who owns and operates the Historic Nelson Ranch next to the site, noted the zoning change from agricultural to industrial use. "When that area changes to industrial use, there will be a lot of concerns and a lot of unhappy farmers," she was quoted as saying. It was the county who changed the zoning of the 240 acre property.
Matt Morehart, owner of Cache Creek Foods, is also located near the property. He reportedly expressed his concerns about the potential of pollution generated by the concrete company, who uses dry cement and sand-blasting as part of their processing.
On hand at the meeting was Clark Pacific marketing director Thomas Ketron. He said the planned facility will be environmentally sustainable. "We will bring about one to two million gallons of waste water, because six percent of concrete is water, but we don't produce waste water," he said, according to the article.
The council unanimously passed the resolution.
With its passing, councilman Jeff Monroe hopes this isn't the first step to a competitive commercial district right next door to Woodland's commercial district. This was one of the arguments against the urban limit line, he said, that the county would take advantage of the line by placing large commercial districts or housing right outside the line and collect the tax revenue.
Rexroad recently said on rexroad.com: "Some things I am sure of... that is Clark Pacific coming to Woodland. After I heard the plan and met the business owners it just seems obvious that this is what is best for our community. It is not a single. It is not a slash bunt. It is not even a triple. It is a home run for Woodland. A small minority of people will fight this but in the end it needs to happen to bring good jobs to our city. Woodland will end up embracing this."
About Clark Pacific (visit clarkpacific.com)
Clark Pacific specializes in architectural precast systems, design-build parking solutions, seismic technological advances, and custom architectural finishes.
Notable from their product line are parking structures, considering Downtown Woodland is scheduled to include a large parking structure to support the proposed courthoused. The company claims that "owners, developers, architects and contractors all benefit from using precast, prestressed concrete components to design and build parking structures."
They list a few reasons why: Environmental friendliness, safety and security, aesthetic variation, fast, all-weather construction, design flexibility, and quality control. An added benefit of precast construction is the inherent increased durability that minimizes the need for continuous on-site inspections and costly long-term maintenance. Clark Pacific is a PCI-certified plant.
Their awards include:
2007 - PCI Design award: best mixed-use building, St. regis museum tower, San Francisco, CA
2007 - PCI Design award: best multifamily building, 800 J Lofts - Sacramento, CA
2006 - International Parking Institute: Award of Excellence, Sacramento Int'l Airport “Terminal A” Parking Structure
2005 - PCI Design Award: Best Justice Facility/Courthouse, Fresno Courthouse and Federal Building – Fresno, CA
2004 – PCI Design Award: Best Justice Facility/Courthouse, Michael D. Antonovich Antelope Valley Courthouse
2004 – ACI Northern California Chapter Construction Award: Sacramento Int'l Airport
2002 - PCI Design Award: Best Justice Facility/Courthouse, Las Vegas Federal Courthouse
2002 - PCI Design Award: Best Public Facility, San Diego Convention Center Expansion
2001 – Ascent Magazine: Honorable Mention, San Francisco Towers Retirement Housing
2001 – GSA Design Award: Architecture Award, Las Vegas Federal Courthouse
1999 – Ascent Magazine: Best Public Building, Ontario International Airport
1996 – PCI Design Award, Sacramento Municipal Utility District
1993 – Ascent Magazine: Best Public Building, Sacramento Municipal Utility District’s Customer Service Center
Posts
45 comments:
I guess the council is getting their wish. When Ace hardware was considering moving there warehouse here they were concerned of being known as a warehouse community. Well this certainly changes that direction. Or does it ?
Clark Pacific is a national known company in the pre cast concrete business. Woodland/Yolo County should be proud to be the home of Clark Pacific. They will be bringing us civil/mechanical engineers and union worker with high paying jobs. The operation is controled by the Yolo County Air polution board and they are not allowed to create dust that some neighbors are talking about. Its a opportunity for Woodland so let get behind this fine company and support them.
Okay Matt
Sorry its not Matt
Dino:
Thank you for the article. Clark Pacific will be a great addition to Woodland.
The comments on the Urban Limit Line are way off the mark. If Mr. Monroe looks at the County General Plan proposal that is currently in environmental review he will see that the Spreckles site is a unique one within the county.
If Mr. Monroe was concerned about that he could have made comments during the Board of Supervisors meetings on the General Plan or even sent an e-mail or written a letter. We did not hear anything from Mr. Monroe on this topic at all.
It is not very complicated.
In the end Clark Pacific will end up bringing jobs to Woodland that will help our community.
Matt Rexroad
662-5184
I don't believe this is a homerun for Woodland, more like a single.
This is not going to be a Woodland plant. Some people are trumpeting all the good it will do for Woodland but the reality is that it will do very little for our community. What we are hearing is the spin.
My concerns are we spent four years chasing Clark Pacific (mostly staff time). We wanted them them locate in the Woodland Industrial area so we would have actual industry instead of warehouses.
Suddenly, from out of left field, we were told the soil is not solid enough in Woodland and they were going to the Spreckles plant.
The negative for Woodland is this will be a loss of very significant property tax and a little sales tax that would have gone to Woodland's general fund. We have been counting on this revenue and anyone that really knows our budget must know this is going to hurt, especially now.
Most of the jobs that come from Clark Pacific are coming with it from WSac (they are not going to fire their current employees). I seriously doubt any of these employees will move to Woodland (the commute is nothing). There are going to be a few new jobs generated from the relocation-mostly labor type jobs (10-12 at most).
Don't get me wrong, if Clark Pacific cannot come to Woodland then the Spreckles plant is a second best alternative for them as long as they clean up the site. Their plant in W.Sac is next to residential area and I have been told they receive no complaints from their operation.
The real concern for me is that the County now wants to change the zoning at Spreckles from Ag to Industrial, which is going to create an Commercial district of more than 200 acres just north of Woodland's ULL. Clark Pacific only needs 40 acres. There is at least one other business in the pipeline for this commercial disrict already. Our city cannot annex the area to it because of the ULL but we will still get the traffic, smog, etc that comes from a large commercial district.
There are two ways this could benefit Woodland:
1. Our Supervisors could work out a revenue sharing agreement with the city to help mitigate the loss to Woodland but I will not hold my breath.
2. Tear the old Spreckles plant down and return it to farmland. The current structures are almost useless. Imagine, Yolo County would be at the forefront of reclaiming farmland for farming-now that would be a switch. Returning it to farmland forces Clark Pacific back to the Woodland Industrial area. They would just have to spend some money on the site to make it workable but we could help them.
On the council, I am in the minority on this opinion but then I have never marched to the beat of the drummer:)
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all.
JM
Thank you Adrienne.
Rexroad passes ULL using developer money.
Rexroad runs for supervisor using developer money.
Rexroad spurs massive new growth outside Woodland's ULL.
Interesting progression. Wonder how it will end.
Thank you Brenda
BC and JM are teamed up again. Good combination but poor for Woodland
JM I have been told one reason Clark Pacific isn't locating in your Indusrial park is because of your Planning Department. Maybe you should check it out.
I have been told Rexroad and Stallard are teaming up again, bad for Woodland, good for their special interest.
Left out Rexroad's go to boy Pimentel. Pimentel follows the master whereever he leads.
5:35 anon Good comment Art Pimentel.
I hear that Anons. 11:16, 1:09, 5:33, 5:35, 7:58, 7:59 and 8:02 are starting a club. Good for them, boring for everyone else.
Good call Dino.
I think I stepped on some toes by expressing my concern, so just to clarify my earlier rambles;
Clark Pacific is good for Yolo County - big property tax and some sales tax.
I just want to know how the relocation of this plant is good for Woodland?
Clark Pacific is relocating its existing plant not creating a new second plant. The important jobs are coming with the company. I have no idea why those people would relocate their homes to Woodland because of a ten mile commute. I would be willing to bet the new 10-12 "labor type" jobs are all about the relocation of the plant. Again, where is the benefit to Woodland? Unless there has been some other deal put together behind closed doors that I have not been informed about there appears to be no benefit to our city.
My overiding concern is the creation of a new competitive commercial district right on our door step. Woodland has a difficult time balancing our budget now.
JM
How do you join the Good for Woodland Club. Do you have application. Sign me up.
Once again Mr. Monroe makes a point long after the fact.
If Mr. Monroe really cared about the county setting up a "commercial district right on our doorstep" he would have said something during the General Plan discussions.
Did he? Of course not.
The county has been in the process of updating the General Plan for years now. Spreckles has been designated for industrial use for more than a year yet we have not heard a single objection from Mr. Monroe or anyone else for that matter.
Although it could be a legitimate position to oppose the land being zoned industrial.... the complete lack of any kind of communication over the past three years shows that it can't be of much concern.
Is it too much to ask that a letter be written, a statement be made that is timely, or public comment be made at a hearing? I would think that if you can post a comment on this blog you would have the ability to write a letter for the public record.
The timing is fascinating. Actions speak louder than words ...especially when they are two years after the fact and the result of the outcry by Brenda Cedarblade. (I have written previously on this.)
Matt Rexroad
662-5184
Why do I picture Frank Sieferman in a Don Quixote outfit with Brenda leading the donkey?
Okay Calvin useless rambling again hasn't posted in awhile and now comes to defend Rexroad. Blah Blah Blah
What funny comments...First off...it's not a home run I agree with Jeff that it's more of a single. Regardless, everyone knew that site was being marketed for many years and that some quasi-industrial use would go there. This is hardly a surprise. Let's face it, calling Spreckles a pure "ag" site was more than a stretch. However Jeff should be mindful that the County is also looking at large-scale commercial development at Elkhorn and not one councilmember has said "boo" about it. New hotels, restaurants, and gas stations at Elkhorn will have a marked impact, far in excess of this project, on city revenues. We've really moved past councilmembers who had more of a long range and wider view. Today's group seems to be totally focused on what happens within the city's borders, a view that will come to haunt us soon.
The comments trying to personalize this strikes me as ridiculous. Can we for once reach a decision that is not colored by who is for and who is against? Brenda's non-stop opposition to everything that doesn't benefit her personally is a tired old song. Heard it before. Don't need or want to hear it again.
Frankly, relations between the County and the City reached a low point during the Frank years and are only now beginning to recover. There is much more that could be done with joint planning but I'm not optimistic.
I love how the "Historic Nelson Ranch" gets trotted back out. Has anyone looked at how that property is maintained?
Anon. 9:28
Great points. Personally, I think the Elkhorn project would be good for both the city and the county - if it's done right. Hopfully it won't be done half-assed.
The first I heard about a large scale industrial/commercial district next door to Woodland is when I spoke to our economic devlopment director. Matt loves to bring up BC to explain all opposition to his plans but BC and I are on different pages here.
I was under the assumption that Spreckles was being marketed for Ag related reasons (big surprise when Clark Pacific switched sides).
Again, Clark Pacific's relocation to Spreckles is good for the county(I think BC would disagree with me). My hackles were raised when the spin started on how great the relocation was for Woodland (we lose property and sales tax, how does that equal a good thing).
The second step which has caught everyone on the council by surprise (not just me) is a larger Industrial/Commercial district, not just Clark Pacific. This will have severe impacts upon our future budget.
Interesting Matt's desire to have me write him. I have in the past and always been sent something flippant back or been brushed off. I guess the question is if I had written about my concerns Matt would you have done anything about them...rhetorical question, we both know the answer;)
JM
MATT THE SPIN DOCTOR GETS BUSY
As a professional political consultant, Mr. Rexroad knows when to throw out totally irrelevant tabloid-speak to re-direct the focus away from his foul play.
Childish comments about Mr. Monroe taking orders from Brenda C. are meant to do one thing, re-direct the subject away from legitimate concerns about his proposal.
When Mr. Rexroad was elected, he had to spend about 5 times more money for his votes than Brenda or Frank did, and even then he barely won it. (He knows this.)
Brenda is a watchdog for Woodland on many issues, not just those that concern her properties. 9(Though isn't it odd that she keeps HAVING to defend her properties?)She gets involved and encourages others to do the same. GOOD FOR HER.
Wasn't it Mr. Rexroad that helped bring the Farm/Tractor Supply store just down the street from Brenda's tack shop? Now he wants to put a noisey plant next door to her her home! SOUNDS LIKE REVENGE / SCARE TACTICS TO ME. No wonder some councilmembers are afraid to say what they really think about Mr. Rexroad's proposals.
What's next? I bet Mr. Rexroad will try to bring the Flood Wall proposal back.
Concerned Woman Voter
I have to say to "Concerned Woman Voter" that you are wrong about BC. She takes on issues that personally affect her and only those issues. In addition she engages in vicious and under-handed tactics campaign tactics. These are matters of fact not just opinion. BC bought her property knowing that the Spreckles plant was next door. It was there first just as she bought her downtown store knowing that the Wayfarer was a block away and once again it's location preceeded her purchase. She is not a watchdog for Woodland. Ask any number of good local residents who have had their motives questioned, their businesses attacked and the worst kind of personal slander launched toward them all for having the temerity to oppose Ms. B.C.
The Tractor Supply store would have located here regardless and it's been a good addition to the town. Similarly Clark-Pacific found a site that suits their needs. Don't blame Mr. Rexroad for this, to the contrary if you were really an advocate for Woodland and not just B.C. you would be more fair-minded and better informed. Remember, just because someone is your personal friend it doesn't meant that they are a good person.
Amen (Anonymous 10;00 AM) You know the facts and right on point. Thanks
It is probably instructive to note that many of the individuals who live near the former Spreckles plant probably moved there after it closed or they have forgotten what a massive impact it had when it was operational. In season there were many trucks in and out of the place 24 hours a day, plus many employees, noise and lights. It was a busy vibrant place. Frankly, the current activity will probably not equal that use level. Still, the plant was there first even though it was closed down and the folks who now want it to be a nature park or something equally quiet may be suffering from "airport runway syndrome" where an individual buys a house in the flight path of a busy airport and then complains about noise.
Um, small point, but do any of you folks remember when the sugar mill was in full swing? There were a lot of trucks and train cars going in and out of there and the ubiquitous stink to accompany the operation. It was a full on ag-industrial operation. From what I understand, Clark Pacific's operation is clean and in fact isn't noisy or polluting in any way... Come on, they're just pouring concrete, people... Brenda's lame gritching notwithstanding, does anyone really think having a healthy company come into the area, regardless of whether within city limits or just outside, isn't a good thing for us? How much longer do you want an empty eyesore sitting there?
Oh, and Brenda, your blathering on about concrete dust is ridiculous. Have you ever been to a home depot and walked down the aisle where the ready-mix is sold? Talk about a lot of concrete dust... But I don't see you outside with a sign and your picture of some chemical burn victim trying to shut down Home Depot. I think we do know that deep down, it's all about you...and not really about the issue at hand.
Great points and well said! Yes, it will be a great thing. While I understand the concerns of neighbors who have to live near it they knew when they moved there that a factory was across the street.
I also wish we could move beyond approved/disapproving of a project based on which elected official is aligned/non-aligned with it. Shouldn't we grow up just a little and stop playing everything like it's a zero sum game with winners and losers? The reality is that the City will benefit from some ancillary aspects of the operation and the County needs to have some form of econ. development besides just ag (our voluntary vow of poverty). The fact of the matter is that all our separate economies - city vs. county, Woodland vs Davis are much more inter-connected than most of the parochial partisans want to admit. I commend both Rexroad and Monroe for backing this important project. I suspect EVERYONE but a chosed select few (insert name here) will benefit in the long run. Thanks!
Christmas eve.
Here's a thought for all of you. Do we REALLY need more shopping/commecial on the outskirts of Woodland? Shame on you who coudn't care less about the quality of life of those "few" folks out in the county. Some of those elderly people have just a handful of years left to live out their lives and all you can say is, "Well, you should have known when you bought the place that the potential was there." I've got news for all of you - the potential is there for you too. It could be a noisey bar or a sexual predator on your street. The moment you stop caring about "quality of life" and "peaceful enjoyment" of your fellow Woodlanders/Yoloans - you have become ...a REXROAD MACHINE.
Christmas eve.
To the poster above...please calm down. I do care and have worked to stop commercial industrial development on Woodland's outskirts where it wasn't zoned properly or was the result of a developer shoe-horning in something just to make more money. I also do care about the elderly and don't wish anyone any harm or discomfort but given the traditional uses of that property they either learned to live with Spreckels and its huge, impactful use or failed to exercise proper due diligence in purchasing property after the factory closed. After all, I live in town because I cannot afford a spread in the country regardless of where it is. I don't understand what this issue has to do with Mr. Rexroad. I am certainly not part of his machine. Nor anyone's machine for that matter. Let's stop personalizing these issues. It makes us all look like hillbillies. Thanks!
This is just and FYI for everyone. This has nothing to do with a for or against.
I do have a concern at the bottom however that should be considered after reading this.
Historic Package of California Flood Bills Becomes Law
Governor Schwarzenegger said at the early morning ceremony in signing these bills: "California's Central Valley has thousands of miles of levees protecting millions of residents and we expect millions more in the coming decades. We want to make sure the tragedies of Hurricane Katrina do not happen here if there is an earthquake or other natural disaster. That is why we will establish 200-year flood protection as the standard for urban developments in the Central Valley so our growth will be safe growth."
Perhaps the key to the package is SB5 by Senator Mike Machado, who represents the Stockton area and hails from the tiny community of Linden (population 1,103 in 2000) that establishes a comprehensive set of policies that coordinate state and local efforts to connect land-use decisions and flood management planning. It was similar to AB 5 by Wolk, who began working on this legislation 3 years ago, introducing the first bill to restrict development in the floodplain. She worked closely with Machado.
SB5 represents a major policy shift for the state. It:
• Requires the state to develop a plan for flood protection by 2012;
• Once the state plan takes effect, prohibits cities and counties in the Central Valley from entering into development agreements, approving permits, entitlements or subdivision maps in a flood zone unless there is an appropriate level of flood protection or the local flood management agency has determined that adequate progress towards that flood protection has been made;
• Once the plan takes effect, requires 200-year flood protection for proposed projects in urban and urbanizing areas (10,000 residents or more);
• Authorizes cities and counties to develop and adopt local plans of flood protection that include a strategy to meet 200-year level of flood protection, an emergency response plan, and a long-term funding strategy for improvement, maintenance and operation of flood protection facilities; and
• Requires Department of Water Resources (DWR) to provide cities and counties within the Central Valley with preliminary floodplain maps by 2008.
The second land-use bill in the package is Wolk’s AB 162, which requires cities and counties in California to incorporate flood hazards in their general plans in order to minimize risk in flood-prone areas, just as local governments are required under current law to consider the risk posed in areas prone to fire and earthquake.
The third, SB 17 by Senator Dean Florez (D-Shafter), will increase the level of accountability and professional expertise on the board charged with maintaining the state’s levee system.
Prior to the passage of SB 17, all seven members of the state’s Reclamation Board were appointed by and served at the pleasure of the Governor. This arrangement raised concerns in late 2005 when, less than a month after Hurricane Katrina ravaged the Gulf Coast and flooded New Orleans, the entire board was replaced by Schwarzenegger as they began to take a more critical look at the rate of development behind our state’s aging levees.
Under SB 17, the Board will be renamed the Central Valley Flood Protection Board, and its membership will increase from seven to nine. Seven members will still be appointed by the Governor, but their appointment is subject to Senate confirmation. The additional two public members will be appointed by the Senate Rules Committee and the Speaker of the Assembly. Four members of the Board must now have expertise in the areas of flood control, engineering, and either hydrology or geology.
The package of flood protection bills also includes AB 156 by Assemblymember John Laird (D-Santa Cruz), which directs the Department of Water Resources and the State Reclamation Board to perform a number of duties integral to the state flood protection plan under SB 5. Among those responsibilities: AB 156 requires the state to develop and maintain floodplain maps, inspect state project levees, and notify landowners if their property is determined to be at risk of flooding.
Another bill in the package, AB 70 by Assemblymember Dave Jones (D-Sacramento), provides a fair means of distributing responsibility for flood control damage among state and local entities. Specifically, the bill requires local governments to contribute their fair share to a flood's price tag when—and only when—they make unreasonable development decisions. It will have a big impact on local governments willy nilly caving in to the pressures of developers and others to build in areas that should not be built in.
Immediately after being sworn in as a new AssemblymemberJones worked very hard on the predecessor to AB 70 in 1995 and 1996, only to see it fail in the final days of that year's session. Despite his efforts to accommodate the objections of many to the bill throughout this three year process, it was heavily lobbied by the opposition and Governor Schwarzenegger's signature was not certain until yesterday.
AB 70 was the last of these bills to pass and will lessen the state's liability for what are usually local decisions on where to build. It will save the California state treasury big time in the event of a major catastrophe.
At the signing, Wolk said: "We worked diligently with the administration to produce this package, bringing environmentalists and builders together to stand behind these reforms. Everyone came to realize that the status quo was unacceptable. Business as usual wasn’t working—and delaying action was no longer an option. This package moves us forward.” She complimented the Governor, his Director of Water Resources, Lester Snow, as well as his Deputy Les Harder, and her fellow legislators.
Finally, AB 5 by Wolk prevented a train wreck in the parts of the package passed within hours and day of each other at the end of the session. It synchronized all of these bills so that they would not repeal provisions of other bills in the package and makes clarifying and technical changes to keep all in order.
All of these bills were authored by Democratic legislators. They were passed with few votes from Republican legislators, receiving a handful of Republican votes, sometimes only one in each house, and in the case of AB 70 by Jones, receiving not a single Republican vote in the Assembly.
The 30 out of 32 Republican Assemblymembers who voted against AB 5 were basically voting to doom the entire package because it was needed to make them work together. AB 5 passed without a vote to spare in the Senate, 21 to 15, and he same goes for the 14 Republican State Senators and Democrat Lou Correa from Orange County who voted against it.
Just think about a few facts when considering the magnitude of what has been accomplished. Sacramento's risk is ranked first, ahead of all other metropolitan areas in the country for risk of flooding. There is about a one in four chance of a home within the 100 year floodplain being flooded within the term of a 30 year mortgage. There are 2600 miles of levees in the Central Valley--1600 miles of them state levees for which the state and California taxpayers are financially liable for any failures and flooding. In 2005, taxpayers paid half a billion dollars due to a levee failure in rural Northern California.
This is the part that I wonder if it affects us from above
Another bill in the package, AB 70 by Assemblymember Dave Jones (D-Sacramento), provides a fair means of distributing responsibility for flood control damage among state and local entities. Specifically, the bill requires local governments to contribute their fair share to a flood's price tag when—and only when—they make unreasonable development decisions. It will have a big impact on local governments willy nilly caving in to the pressures of developers and others to build in areas that should not be built in.
THIS IS A REXROAD ISSUE
Mr.Rexroad knew that the City of Woodland staff had been courting Clark Pacific for nearly 3 years. Mr. Rexroad is no longer on the City of Woodland team. Now he answers to the County of Yolo and his political resume needs only to brag about what he accomlishes for the County while in office there. He does not care that he steals the sales and property taxes that could have helped Woodland. Nor does he care about the Sternes Family and others out there have been around since before Matt was born.
You people speak of these families as if they deserve the noise, since "they should have known." To say that Clark Pacific and Spreckles are the exact same nuisance is not only uneducated, but it's unfair. Hours of operation, level of noise and air quality are all very different. It is my understanding that Mr. Rexroad sought out Clark Pacific and took them away from the City of Woodland. His poll on his own website confirms that 90+% of people think it should have been within the City of Woodland. Not the County of Yolo.
He will spin this poll and tell people that everyone want themt o come to Woodland. MAKE NO MISTAKE - THEY ARE BEING TSKEN AWAY FROM WOODLAND. Matt Rexroad is stealing business from the City of Woodland's tax base.
He claims he has improved realtions between the City and the County. Frank Sieferman never took deals from the City. In fact, wasn't it Matt Rexroad who came unglued when they Coutny tried to take over use of commercial property...where K-Mart used to be? Yep - I think it was MATT REXROAD.
Now he's flip-flopped on the same exact issue of taking $$$ away from the City of Woodland's tax base. Only this time, he's OK with it. THIS IS NOT GOOD FOR WOODLAND.
IT IS VERY GOOD FOR THE COUNTY OF YOLO. Woodland loses and the families that live out there lose the peaceful enjoyment...of their lifelong HOMES.
Supervisor Rexroad, do you deny any of these facts?
Ok. I will respond to some of this nonsense. Many of th stuff you state as facts are far from it.
Clark Pacific contacted me. I did not contact them. Until just a few weeks ago I had never met anyone from Clark Pacific.
Within a few hours of Clark Pacific telling me about their plans I personally spoke to four members of the City Council and the City Manager.
Clark Pacific does not do much for the county financially. Little sales tax, property tax, and no TOT is produced. It is about jobs for Woodland.
Clark Pacific had decided not to locate on the other land they purchased prior to talking to me at all.
Part of the reason I wanted the resolution from the City Council was to show that they felt Clark Pacific was a good fit for a parcel right outside the Woodland city limits. In the end they all voted in favor of it.
Having Clark Pacific operational by April 2008 is good for Woodland. Very good for Woodland.
Matt Rexroad
662-5184
Don Quixote is off the meds....windmill....sugarmill I guess it's all the same.
To "THIS IS A REXROAD ISSUE":
Get real. You should educated yourself. Spreckles was a much larger operation than this will ever be so in terms of hours of operation, air quality and noise its impact will be less.
Secondly, I am sorry that people will be affected. I wish people did not speed down my street and that they would drop litter in the street but I have to live with it.
Finally, I believe Mr. Rexroad's account has the ring of truth to it. Generally these firms do not contact elected officials until they are sure they are coming. This is done because "electeds" are such notorious information leakers. Matt Rexroad is someone with whom I have major differences of opinion but this demonization of him by a small group of people is off base. Something was bound to go on that site. If it had been a bio-tech firm we would have heard about germ warfare, if it had been a cannery we would have heard about noise and light pollution, if Spreckles themselves came back and tried to resume operations we would hear protests.
Let's move on and stop the whining and finger pointing and absurd conspiracy theories. Frank Sieferman never took deals from the City because Frank never accomplished anything for either entity.
QUESTION FOR REXROAD
Ok. Thank you for clearing up at least a couple of things. (Though I find it hard to believe that if the City was courting Clark Pacific for 3 years, that you as the former Mayor knew nothing about that.)
I am curious who was the fifth City Council member that you did not speak to and why? Did you not call them, or did they did not call you back? Did you just figure all you needed was 3 or 4 votes?
Since some people (the last post)are professing to be EIR experts now, will there be an actual EIR (Environmental Impact Report)to study the noise, traffic and air quality difference between Sprekles and Clark Pacific?
This, (and not ridiculous comparison by some blogger about speeders or litterbugs - duuuh)would be important and useful information if we truly care about our fellow Yoloans who live out there.
Also, Mr. Rexroad, why id you fight so hard against the County taking even a litte tax money away from the City when they were attempting to buy the K mart building and now you say it's OK because it's just a "Little sales tax, property tax, and no TOT is produced."
Exactly how many jobs will go to Woodland residents? I thought the Clark Pacifc representative testified that most of the employees were either union laborers members already working there, and most of the others were not going to be fired but rather they would move with the company from West Sac?
Signed,
Just the Facts
Fez,
You raise a good point about development in the floodplain... however, the risk of locating at the former Spreckels site is being taken by Clark Pacific. What will Yolo County need to do if the business does flood? I'm guessing nothing. Since it's outside Woodland, I'm also guessing the city is off the hook.
The article you provided reads like a press release from Lois Wolk's office. Since she authored legislation to take rights from Cache Creek ranchers, I would question every move she makes. She also does not respond to questions from her constituents.
Just the facts,
The K-Mart buiding is in a strip mall. That is a spot for retail. Look at the location of the current school district building to see an example of what would happen... it looks like a slice of Linda.
And before anyone takes this out of context... I'm not suggesting that government buildings cannot be part of downtown. They already are. But some specific sites are simply not appropriate for government use. Putting this in with the issue about Clark Pacific locating in the county, or not, is yet another apples and oranges comparison that seems to be common practice with some bloggers.
Let's stick to the posted topic... city council voted unanimously to support the location of Clark Pacific. There can be full support of an issue with some remaining concerns... a few of which were voiced by Councilman Monroe. There is nothing wrong with that.
I was amused at 6:18's comment, "Let's move on and stop the whining and finger pointing" yet concludes by saying "Frank never accomplished anything for either entity." Classic.
Gee willikers, "Just the Facts":
EIR experts and "absurd comparisons to speeding and litter?" Excuse me? Just what do you think the "E" in EIR stands for? It's Environmental. You apparently think it stands for "Emotional." Environmental includes traffic and items like litter. Come on. Stop foaming at the mouth and start thinking.
How long Clark Pacific was courting the city is irrelvant. I doubt that they did since they wanted to locate in the County and the County does not need the city's permission. So the question about who knew what and when and who was the fifth councilmember is meant to accomplish what exactly?
Also, the concern with County offices in the K-Mart building was less sales tax than the County occupying viable commercial property on Main St. Secondly, it was the other tenants that put the kabosh on that deal, not the City and not Rexroad. The leases that the other tenants signed gave them veto power over "non-compatible" uses (Oh, here I go sound liking an expert again...forgive me!). Thank God they did because that shopping center is now fully leased.
As for the stop whining and finger pointing and then the slam on Frank, I too had to laugh when I thought about it. I was simply responding to the vociferous attacks on Rexroad. They invoked Frank's name, not I. I simply responded with what most people would agree was a factual observation. Sometimes I even crack myself up!
I was amused at 6:18's comment, "Let's move on and stop the whining and finger pointing" yet concludes by saying "Frank never accomplished anything for either entity." Classic.
12/27/07 9:50 AM
Anon 9:50 Thank you. You are absolutely correct. I only meant to put this on peoples radar screens and voice a few concerns.
The last couple of days I have been buried with putting toys together. Egads! Lego monstrosities, hydrogen rockets, rainbow making machines and barbie castles to name a few. Now that would make a good blog topic. I am sure I am not the only parent that is put this this "wonderful" ordeal every year:)
JM
Best holiday wishes, JM!
Happy New Year Everyone.
So if we continue to allow building in this designated flood plain area. Is the city/county doing so with the intent that they would then be forced to do some sort of flood protection measure in the future to protect more jobs and therefore get more money from these industrial companies.
If you remember that was what the city was claiming that companies will leave.
This is not a position of for or against this is to get in out for debate.
But it certainly does make one wonder.
Hello All.
The preserving Yolo County agricultural land ideology is gone.
1. The Urban Limit Line took in Churchill Downs area for industrial expansion. Matt Rexroad as Mayor of Woodland - touted the ULL will protect our ag. land from urbanization. It is a short distance to run the water adn sewer. Well Matt here you go urbanizing the county, your district.
2. This is tied to a larger one of Matt's projects - to expand the Industrial area into the County. In the proposed Yolo County General Plan Update it calls for an additional 146 acres to go Industrial here. This is major encroachment on the rich agricultural ground and open space.
3. What happened to Yolo's commitment to protect ag land? This is a cancer that will only spread. Developers have lots of time. It may not happen today but it will lead to water and sewer being brought out, after all its less than a mile away. This land and the surrounding land in between will be forced to go Industrial. The land is cheap out there. I heard farm bureau board members bought 246 acres if Sprecekels for 1.2 Mill. Clark is paying around 9 Mill. They can sell it for $5 a square foot. Meaning they get their portion free and make $23 mill off the deal. Good for the developers and corrupt politicians taking their money - bad for Yolo Farmers and the future of this land.
4. Matt said there are other Industrial operations ready to locate there. This project is backed by Ramos Oil. There is also another fertilizer company and bio fuel company, similar to the Biomass operation. Yipee- Smelly Air Polluting Nasty Stuff. South San Franciso is the "Industrial" area. The operations are ugly, the area is ugly and blighted not the vision I had for Yolo. Maybe South SF will also move their stuff to Woodland to re-develop as well. Once it stops where does it end?
Do the good people of Woodland remember the STINK issue and comission under Supervisor Rosenberg to shut down the Spreckels ponds because it stunk all the way to Davis? It is the north wind/Delta Breeze. Just think of what another 146 acres can create and how about all those homes now in Springlake.
5. This is a re-location of industrial sites in West Sac. Who wants to live there? Not me. Yuck. So Woodland is now the Industrial dumping ground for West Sac. Great. More low wage workers coming here from West Sac. Well, if property values drop, I guess they can afford to buy homes in Woodland.
6. Wasn't this the area in the Floodwall battle (Also- under the direction of Matt) ? So if it is going to flood, why would you put workers and families living in the county at risk of flooding. The County knows the roads are below grade and they surface food on a mild day of rain. Now take in the Cace Creek Levee- It is at 13 year level of protection. This is the area determined by the Corp and FEMA to fail. So are we just creating an Industrial version of Natomas. Is New Orleans a distant memory? When will we learn? Is this just another ploy by Matt to get back at the neighbors that shot down the Floodwall? I feel sorry for them and all they have been through to protect their land the past years. It does not seem fair.
7. The end result of our precious ag. land is concrete, asphalt and houses. This company builds large buildings and parking garages and ships them all over the country for projects that do not want the on site impact of this sort. Making Yolo County Ag. land the dumping ground for projects they do not want on their site. Nice.
It would make more sense if they cannot get a greenhouse or some agriculturla use to Spreckeles to tear down the asbestos/lead toxic Sprecekels and remediate the land. There is no reason we have to make the land owners rich at the expense of the farmers and put the surrounding land at risk for future development.
8. The existing site Clark site is Dirty/Dusty according to our own Woodland officials. There is a difference between cement that fine dust that gets in your lungs and forms plaques just like asbestos only called Silicosis. I do not think this is good for the land preservation or workers to be breathing. This is a project that belongs by the Biomass plant in the Industrial area, not county.
9. It is not like they do not have any where else to go. Clark already was part of the re-zone 700 acres. They own 78 acres in the Woodland Industrial zone that is zoned Industrial. The county wrote against the re-zone and the cost to the county and ag. preservation. So why are we now sprawling onto the land in the County? Woodland won't just be warehouses anymore. No its much worse. This land is destined to be parceled and sold for heavy industrial a much more intensive use than warehouses. This is an ultimatly land grab, the foot in the door that will just lead to more.
A few acres a time, Yolo County farmland gives way to houses, industrial ... Loss of farmland hampers efforts to protect air quality, less oportunites for farm workers. Pressure to sell other ag. land. When we see the reality of development from the ULL as the City moves out to meet the country, our land will be gone.
Seems like land developers and demand for cheap ag. land is playing a significant role in Yolo County political decisions. The loss of farmland to developers is disappearing fast as Sacramento and other areas are built up and they turn their sites to Yolo.
From the Senior Center encroaching on agricultual land, Springlake and location of Costco the future of the surrounding land is development.
True farmers, not land farmers always get the short end of the stick.
Sorry to see this coming down from the County. Farming used to be an important part of the county. Yolo was a leader across the US. The writing is on the wall. Sadly, farms and families and deep roots are becoming a vision of Yolo's past. Values, love of the land, protecting the heartland have really changed since Charlie Rominger died.
Jeff and the flood "fez" posts were right on the money. Matt and his motives are very transparent to the rest of us.
Post a Comment