Don’t complain, be more active

The San Mateo Daily Journal has written 16 stories about the city of San Mateo’s General Plan update process. Though it has been referenced plenty of additional times, this is the number of stories we have dedicated to the process and various meetings on it. That’s a lot. Believe me.

In addition, we have run guest perspective pieces, letters to the editor and I even wrote a couple of columns about the need for more input from a broad array of the community.

We will continue to follow this process as it goes along. Though land use is fascinating to me, it’s not always that way with the general populace. But the stories are important since the General Plan process is what will make the blueprint for what the city will become in the future — how high buildings will be, where more housing should be, what areas should be rezoned, etc. Aside from passing budgets, it is the most essential work a City Council can do.

The city staff is doing its best to get the word out, and to garner participation, but we cover these meetings because they are important and we want people to know about it and get involved. It’s better for the community if more people participate.

So, I was a bit taken aback when I received some feedback from someone immersed in neighborhood issues who took issue with our coverage and actually suggested that a story we wrote “came out too early” and that it read as if “this one meeting is conclusive.” We talked it out, and I respect and appreciate the outreach. There may be some ways we can flesh out our future reporting.

The article in question had the following headline: “Workshop: Residents want housing, car alternatives” and mentioned clearly this discussion took place at a Jan. 22 workshop. The article also spelled out the process for the General Plan that will conclude in 2023. It also reflected the viewpoint of those who participated in the meeting. Generally speaking, the input at the meeting was that most of them, nearly all in fact, wanted more housing and car alternatives. Thus the headline. We didn’t make it up.

Granted, if you think more housing and car alternatives are bad ideas, you may take issue with the sentiment conveyed by those participating in the meeting. But it doesn’t mean that the article is inaccurate or misleading. What it should tell you is that if you have a different point of view, you should start speaking up and attending these meetings. In our 16 stories, we’ve done our part in conveying plenty of information on the content of the city’s General Plan meetings.

If you think the city is on the wrong track or if the discussions at these meetings are not to your liking, get active and get your neighbors who feel the same way active and involved. The adage is “don’t shoot the messenger” but we are simply reporting the content of a public workshop in an accurate way. I understand that getting involved takes time and energy and many are already overextended, but making sure your city is what you want it to be should be a priority. Heck, those who agree completely or maybe halfway should get involved.

As far as the story coming out too early, I understand the thinking of waiting to get all the information before reporting, but then it would be too late in the process. It might be true that a citywide poll would have more of a split on housing and car infrastructure, but there is no citywide poll, there are only these meetings, and that is on what we are reporting. If there was a citywide poll, we would report on it.

To put it simply: We report on what’s happening. If you don’t like what’s happening, do what you can to get involved. Reaching out to us is great, but it’s just one way.

Now to the immediate next steps, there was a General Plan Subcommittee meeting last night and another one Thursday, March 3. After that, on March 22, the Planning Commission will review the input from the committee and the public and provide a recommendation to the City Council. The council will meet April 18 to review input from the community, the committee and the Planning Commission and provide direction on the preferred scenario, the content of which was also outlined in our article. We will also explain again in future stories about the process, the plans, the opinions and the direction. So you can also follow along on our pages and maybe, if you start participating in the process, you may even see yourself quoted in one of them.

Jon Mays is the editor in chief of the Daily Journal. He can be reached at jon@smdailyjournal.com. Follow Jon on Twitter @jonmays.