HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-07-2017 Item 6, SchmidtCOUNCIL MEETING
ITEM NO.:
From: Richard Schmidt [
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 12:32 PM
To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocitv.ore>
Subject: 22 Chorro
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
So Jan Marx wants you to follow her flawed logic/political lunacy and approve this project that
undercuts everything that's been great about SLOCity's planning policies for the last 40 years?
What a hoot!
Marx seems the only person in the room not understanding that the ONLY reason she's not still
mayor is because she voted for this atrocity, then published a bunch of garbage on Nextdoor about
how the governor made her do it. Now she wants to drag y'all down with her. She voted as she did
after being manipulated by the city attorney — but of course, Jan's unwilling to admit she's
manipulated by anyone.
Let's look at the bright side of her recommendation: If you approve this project, you'll provide those
who think city hall is a corrupt cesspool the physical means they've been seeking to convince huge
numbers of voters of their point of view, for unlike the little confection over on out-of-the-way Taft
Street, this monster will be at one of the busiest intersections in town and will stand as a symbolic
upraised middle finger in the faces of the multitudes. At last, a means to get Dietrick/Lichtig fired by
electing new council members who value our community's magic specialness and see things the way
residents see them.
So, you have a choice: protect the values valued by residents by rejecting this awful project in its
current form and gaining their favor, or erect the monument that will get yourselves unelected and
Dietrick/Lichtig fired.
Seems, for fed -up residents, like a win-win agenda item. For you guys, maybe not.
Sincerely,
Richard Schmidt
PS. It's also a hoot that Marx professes to be worried about a lawsuit if you do the right thing. When I
spoke with her not too long ago about a possible lawsuit threat, she waved away all concern saying
the city gets sued several times a week — no big deal, just part of being a city. Well, well. Nice reverse
rationale for doing the wrong thing in this case.
PPS. And don't forget that Marx's insistence the council had to vote against the appeal because of
legal advice flies in the face of a simple fact she chooses to ignore: the same legal advisor had
prepared a resolution, certified by said legal advisor to be legally adequate, for upholding the
appeal and denying the project. Double talk, double talk.
PPPS. Really just two questions: Do y'all have any guts — to do the right thing? And whose side
are you on? People will be watching to find out.
Richard Schmidt