Santa Clara - McDougal Trade (Failed)

New Search

TABLE 40V 97405 1 don't think the city should be expanding its borders. I moved to a small town and if it becomes a big town, I'm leaving. The City needs to address the depressed economy, support small business, etc. Because it is financial greed from the developers and it hurts the farmers. Expanding the urban growth into agricultural land is a detriment to the state. I don't want agricultural land developed and I want the urban growth boundary to stay where it is. I think the urban growth boundary and parks and recreation are important, but destroying open land is not the way to do it. 1 don't want the urban growth boundary to be expanded over farm land and I want to see more in-fill happen. I'm not in favor of lining the pockets of some developers; there are plenty of places closer to the city center where they can develop. I support multi -use hi- density housing- not sprawl. Because of the questions I would have to assume that it would increase the urban growth boundary. I think the city will do whatever they want regardless of citizen input. 97408 No expanding of urban growth boundary. Budaet/monev/tax issue 97401 I don't think the city needs to acquire any more park land with tax payer dollars. I'm not paying more taxes for more property, and we would be taxed. No matter which way it goes, we will be paying more taxes. The city has no money to maintain the park after purchase and needs to repair infrastructure we currently have, not build new roads to the park site. 97402 They would find some way of getting money out of taxpayers. Too much sprawl, too fast of growth, too much pressure on the schools and infrastructures, most important, the destruction of farm land. There would be too much of an increase in traffic. It's probably going to cost the taxpayers something somewhere along the tine. The city says they have no money for maintenance of parks they now have. If the city has a million to buy parks, why do they want more money, because they can't maintain what they have? This area doesn't need more houses with the limited amount of roads available. I don't know that much about it but it sounds like it's going to cost me money one way or another. There would be too much traffic in an area that already has too much. We need the money for parks to be put in schools. The roads out here can't handle all the increased traffic. Some way will be found to increase taxes. There is enough traffic in this area as it is. There are plenty of houses all over the area for sale without building more. It will cost money that could be used elsewhere. They need to spend the money elsewhere. We need the farmland for food.