Posted by CDSI Research Fellowship, a resident of another community, on Sep 27, 2011 at 7:46 am
In discussions of actions available to residents of Danville to make a mostly appointed government more responsive to residents and their neighborhoods in planning, history illustrated that the current government, and especially its mayor, has a history of disconnect from the resident stakeholders in our region. Mayor Stepper was part of a SRVUSD Board removed by recall some twenty years ago for lack of representation of the will and interests of district residents. Thus, regional counsel committee recommended broader actions that focus federal and state actions on city government of Danville with specific focus on the mostly appointed council.
In the past 10 years, Danville’s government has declined into a self-serving, self-sustaining organization without commitment to the will and interests of a majority of residents. They are supported in such selfish actions by Contra Costa aggregated politics and the overall role of developers in all Contra Costa Governments. Rightfully, Mary Piepho should be aggressively protecting the residents of Diablo and Blackhawk from the imposition of traffic on those communities by an illegitimate approval of the Magee and Weber Ranch Projects. Instead, Mary as solely the political voice for development in the former and new CCC District 3 has refused actions, via staff, and stayed silent on the need for a broader county and state study of traffic imposition by Danville’s illegitimate approvals.
Gayle Uilkema should be concerned about the imposition of Diablo Road traffic on the Green Valley/Stone Valley and calling for county traffic studies to address impact on Monte Vista High School student safety, Alamo’s current and new fire houses, and the Stone Valley/Danville Blvd intersection. As Chair of the Board of Supervisors, she can bring the discussion to the board and demand CCC-PW Transportation Division’s study of such impact.
Mark DeSaulnier, as member of the State Senate Local Government Committee, can institute review of the illegitimate approval by Danville’s government and determine the self-serving, self-perpetuating nature of these approvals and related fees in supporting government salaries going forward. Joan Buchanan, in her history of remedying the SRVUSD Board disservice during Karen Stepper’s recall, should be using her state government connections with traffic management organizations to bring Danville’s government under legitimate control.
But mostly, the actions belong to regional residents that suffer the impositions of a self-serving and self sustaining Danville government. Clearly, Danville neighborhoods need to take the next step in establishing an active neighborhoods forum and improvement association to be the independent voice of the majority of Danville residents. Such a forum and improvement association should engage resident counsel to fully enforce neighborhoods political disobedience to a self-serving, self-sustaining government. Such a forum should sponsor campaigns against a mostly appointed council and recall for those not subject to election in 2012.
Danville’s government was the glaring example of government out of resident control that served as a model to defeat incorporation in Alamo. Likely, Danville residents need to use that example to consider reversing incorporation for Danville if a government cannot be established to serve the will and interests of Danville residents and their neighborhoods. Regionally, we must all expect Danville to be a good neighbor and its government recognize the will and interests of our regional neighborhoods.
As a CDSI Research Courtesy,
Harald A. Bailey