MAIN STREET: Share the wealth

In last week¹s column, I wrote that the Saggio Hills developers
should pay a higher portion of the costs of developing a community
park in that area when it gets built out. Since then, I¹ve been
lectured about the concept of ³risk and reward² and told that we
should get out of the way and let these poor folks get their
project built. Uh-huh, right.
For the record, I¹m not advocating that we stop Saggio Hills. I
still feel that if you polled the community, most folks would
prefer to see the land left alone than to become a wealthy enclave,
but the time for that decision is past. The folks at City Hall see
this project as The Next Big Thing, so we can assume it¹s close to
a done deal, and what¹s left is quibbling about the details.
So, let¹s quibble. According to a financial impact analysis
provided by the developers, homes in Saggio Hills will be in the
range of 3,000 square feet each. The report further states that the
homes will cost somewhere between $500,000 and $1 million each to
build, and will sell for about $1,000 a square foot, or in the
neighborhood of $3 million each. Obviously, land, access, planning
and lobbying will add to the upfront costs, but we¹re still talking
about a nine-figure profit.
Wow. If they build 70 homes, and the profit on the residential
portion of the project is around $100 million, doesn¹t it seem
reasonable that they can pay for a higher share of the park
costs?
Speaking of important projects, don¹t forget to let the
Healdsburg City Council know how you feel about the ugly gazebo in
Plaza Park. We have an opportunity to replace it. The park is torn
up anyway, and use is limited during the winter, why not knock the
darn thing down and take the time to design and build a proper
structure in time for our Sesquicentennial Celebration next summer?
The City Council will be talking about it Monday night. If you
agree with me, let them know. If you disagree, let them know that,
too.
It¹s hard not to sharpen our knives when we hear that Santa Rosa
business leaders are casting about for a new slogan for the county
seat. A marketing consultant will be hired, focus groups will be
held, and presumably, some modern version of ³The City Designed For
Living,² the insipid 1940s-era slogan that¹s still being used, will
be adopted.
Given that Santa Rosa is throwing around building permits like a
drunken sailor tucking dollar bills into waistbands, that it¹s
once-great downtown is still a ghost of itself, that it claims to
be environmentally-aware while exporting its growth impacts
elsewhere Š well, Main Street couldn¹t resist coming up with a few
slogan suggestions. How about these?
In honor of the plan to send wastewater upstream ‹ ³Flush Twice,
It¹s a Long Way to the River.²
Recognizing that having a lot of wealthy pals helps get your
projects approved ­ ³Got Influence? Step Up to the Trough!²
An homage to the downtown, ruined by urban development ‹ ³More
Charming Than Fresno!²
Looking to invest your capital gains and then get bought out?
Try this ‹ ³A Great Place to Start a New Bank!²
Shouldn¹t Santa Rosa get credit for one of its largest
employers? ‹ ³The Biggest Jail North of the Bay!²
Let¹s remember the good old days ‹ ³The County Seat, Ever Since
We Stole it From Petaluma.²
Or, what the heck Š the whole place seems crazy about the work
of a dead cartoonist. Maybe the winner will be ‹ ³Good Grief,
Charlie Brown. It¹s Santa Rosa!²
Ray Holley thinks Santa Rosa should be more like Healdsburg, a
great town that doesn¹t have to pretend to be. He can be reached at


ra*******@gm***.com











.