Editor,
In his Dec. 11 opinion piece, county Supervisor Warren Slocum suggests Millbraens are haters, and probably racist. We aren’t. Our opposition to the La Quinta project, and the city’s lawsuit involving Article 34, is about voter rights.
Editor,
In his Dec. 11 opinion piece, county Supervisor Warren Slocum suggests Millbraens are haters, and probably racist. We aren’t. Our opposition to the La Quinta project, and the city’s lawsuit involving Article 34, is about voter rights.
We dislike that San Mateo County wants to kill off a long-term Millbrae business, eliminating a key Millbrae tax revenue stream for 55 years. Shouldn’t local residents have a say in tax revenue losses, which may necessitate local tax increases, or reductions in services?
We dislike that Millbrae is expected to fund 55 years of city services ($250,000+ annually) for more than 100 county-placed residents. Shouldn’t city voters have a say in this expenditure, if county or state aid is not being used?Â
We also dislike that hotel and restaurant workers will lose their jobs and lose paychecks they spend locally. Aren’t Democrats supposed to support jobs and labor?
Lastly, we dislike that the Board of Supervisors was lazy and unimaginative in its approach to supportive housing. Had it come up with a more reasonable idea, as some counties and cities have, its housing project would not have met so much resistance. County supervisors are to blame for this lawsuit. Now, we simply want the right to vote on a county-proposed project that impacts our community.Â
Laura and Ken Smith
Millbrae
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.
Already a subscriber? Login Here
Sorry, an error occurred.
Already Subscribed!
Cancel anytime
Thank you .
Your account has been registered, and you are now logged in.
Check your email for details.
Submitting this form below will send a message to your email with a link to change your password.
An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
No promotional rates found.
Secure & Encrypted
Thank you.
Your gift purchase was successful! Your purchase was successful, and you are now logged in.
| Rate: | |
| Begins: | |
| Transaction ID: |
A receipt was sent to your email.
(6) comments
Hello Laura and Ken,
I have not taken a hard look at the situation you mention although I agree that I don’t want to see hotel and restaurant workers jobs go away. One thing often mentioned by folks when discussing such situations as the taking over of the La Quinta hotel is that other counties and cities have taken a more imaginative approach to similar situations. As I stated earlier, I have not followed it closely but I am curious as to what examples you can share about these other cities and counties are doing. It’s easy to say there’s a better way to do something but without a suggestion or example it is just talk.
The county is not killing off a business or putting people out of work. The hotel owners were willing to sell the business, and the county included privisions for the employees in their offer. This will be permanent housing for families and seniors, and that is a good thing for both the city and the county. The hate and misinformation coming out of Millbrae deserves condemnation.
Cathy - don't dismiss concerns as hate. Why in the world would Millbrae want to give up a lucrative hotel that employs many and provides taxable income? Instead, the supervisors decided to yank that away and now provide for free housing and an economic burden on the city. There is no hate here but we need to scratch our heads and wonder what is going on? Are you inviting these seniors and indigents into your house or back yard? It is easy to push for such programs if they don't affect you personally. Why not house them in a remote, abandoned military base? Why in a fancy hotel? They would live more comfortably than many low income, working poor.
Since I listened to all the comments in the supervisors’ meeting, I do feel justified in characterizing the concerns as hate, which I acknowledge is a cousin of fear. This housing is not free. Tenants will pay 30% of their income as rent. It would be much more costly to house people as remotely as you suggest, far from jobs, schools, grocery stores, and transportation. I am quite willing to welcome people into my neighborhood. You know very well that the suggestion you make repeatedly of inviting people into one’s home would not house many.
Cathy, please answer Dirk's question, how many of these harmless people are you inviting into your home? And my question, are you building an ADU so you can house a homeless family and will you charge 30% below market and subsidize their utilities, food etc....?
Cathy - thanks for your measured response. I still believe that hate is a very strong word to describe the opponents of this hotel purchase and repurpose. Hate is now normalized in our daily lexicon and it is troubling. Perhaps it has lost its true meaning.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.