Ryan Jerz :: Reno Blogger

• Home
• About
• Contact
• Archive
• RSS

Other stuff

Connect with me

• Reno Baby!
• ClaimID
• Digg
• Facebook
• del.icio.us
• Tumblr
• LinkedIn
• Twitter
• Flickr
• YouTube
• Shelfari

Link Blog

This is Reno

Videos

Tallcan.tv

Short Book Reviews

Product Reviews

Congratulations. You asked in-depth and well thought out questions. Some follow-up however. Mr. Holland says we should develop the area just north of Sun Valley. Has he spoken with the people who live there now? What is the Tribe’s sentiment on Hungry Valley?
On water. Which water is he trying to protect. The more we grow in the Truckee Meadows, the more water we will use from the Truckee River to the detriment of the folks currently living here. Growth to the north requires that the developers find the water they need.
The “tax” he is saying is being proposed is absolutely false (and he knows it). His figures are taken from a study contracted by the Sun Valley GID and had different options for funding water. He likes to quote one or two but no elected official has EVER endorsed raising taxes as far as I know.

Thanks for taking an interest and raising the public’s awareness but there is more than one side to Mr. Holland’s view.

-dave aiazzi

Thanks for the comment, Councilman. "Congratulations" doesn't seem quite appropriate, but I'll take it. Part of the reason I did the interview is to get more information out there. It's also very cool that you offered up an alternate position. That's a part of the idea, too. The trick here is figuring out a way to have the conversation in a manner that engages the citizens of Reno and elicits feedback. Your appearance here is a fantastic step toward opening some more doors than are open now. You should encourage your fellow councilmembers to do the same. Thanks again, and keep visiting.

Hi Mr. Aiazzi

No, I have not spoken with the people who live in the area that I thought could be developed. But I can tell you that if I was mayor and there were strong concerns, that I would heed them—because my prejudice is not pro-development but pro - quality of life. and pro the people who already live here. My thought on the area north of Sun Valley is an idea - not a done deal—and that is the way it should be!

You show that you agree with me—existing residents are concerned about growth! We need to show them more consideration than was evident in the master plan amendment hearings this spring and summer.

another potential problem with the area north of Sun Valley is it is not contigious to Reno—and I do not support non-contigious annexation

Regarding taxes:

I think the current sales tax on the ballot is a sprawl tax—if I had been mayor, those police stations would have been paid for—or the developments wouldn’t have been built.

And at the current rate of growth, we will run out of water in a decade—and the investors who will lend the money to make water imortation happen want a stable source of revenue to pay back the bills—such as a sales tax or an increase in water user fees

So—-how would you propose to pay for this? Or do you support importing water for more growth? I don’t, and Mayor Cashell says he doesn’t support raising taxes to bring in more water for growth.

So maybe we need to slooooowwww dowwnnn!!!!

We need to find better ways to grow our economy than spreading sprawl all over our region—for example we could lobby for a national park north of town.

That will give people a reason to drive past Thunder Valley. They will play in our casinos, stay in our hotels, eat in our restaurants, leave their money and go home

Thanks, Dave for responding. I do appreciate that you show up and debate the citizens

Erik Holland

*edited by mrjerz to eliminate a double posting*

A couple of clarifications

I mean we will run out of water for new growth in about a decade, according to the Eco:Logic study

And, the reason I suggested the area north of Sun Valley is that I am aware of the need for affordable housing for our kids that is near the jobs.

The proposed development at Winnemucca Ranch is neither. We need to work out a land exchange with them.

Erik

Mr. Holland,

I’m not sure I can address all of the issues with your positions here, but let me begin by asking you this. I constantly hear the phrases “uncontrolled growth”, “unplanned growth”, “rapid growth” etc. What is an acceptable level of growth to you? Taking into account that people DO have children and that those children will not live with their parents the rest of their lives, what is an acceptable level?

Question 2: How many people actually showed up at the public meetings, how many meetings were held, etc? You would think from your comments that there were hundreds of people. There weren’t and they weren’t ignored.

Let’s try to stop scaring the public and having discussions.

-dave aiazzi

A couple of clarifications

Who paid for the EcoLogic Study and what were ALL of their findings (not just the ones that scare people)?

What has the City of Reno aready done for affordable housing? How much was spent on your housing by the taxpayers?

HI Councilman Aiazzi

Re: comment about scaring the public. Please remember that first and formost, I am a member of the public and I am very scared. That’s why I ran.

I am not even going to get into the monstrosity on the national level—I am going to keep it local.

But, yes, I am also a politician ( one of the worst things I have ever been called ) j/k :)

And as a politician trying to earn your vote, I should be and am in the process of answering your questions.

What is an acceptable level of growth for me? It isn’t just about the level of growth, it is also about the manner. The size of the urban footprint matters to me. I prefer the urban footprint small and compact to large and sprawling. I used to live in Fairbanks, Alaska, and now I live here and what I like about both places is that you can be out of town in a hurry. But that attribute of Reno is going away in a hurry and I am upset about it. I liked the language in the regional master plan that stated,” Growth will be directed away from the suburban fringe toward the urban core.” I was and am very angry that was taken out of the master plan. We need to restore that language.

I need to do more research on the level or rate of growth I would support, and I am in the process of doing that. I recognize that Reno is only one player in the regional mix and is not necessarily responsible for all the sprawl we see. But Reno is the main water boy ( if you will) for the Winnemucca Ranch development, which does nothing for affordable housing for our children—that development is geared to a different market. And while I think it is a proper function of municipal government to encourage and create incentives for affordable housing for our kids and grandkids, I disagree with changing our master plan to accommodate a development geared largely to second home buyers. Let’s work harder on getting people into their first home!

Why is Winnemucca Ranch so desperate to be annexed by someone? Why can’t they do it on their own?

Not that I would support the project even then—lets leave that area for the antelope to play and find a place for the developers to play closer in.

I strongly support what you and the other incumbents are doing re infill and maximizing use of lands within the McCarran loop. I like the transit corridors. I am disturbed by the use of Star Bonds to encourage retail on the fringes—would prefer to see it downtown and within the older urban core.

The hearings this spring:

There were three hearings in February attended
by perhaps 150 different individuals, most of whom urged rolling the hundred year plan into an ongoing update of our regional master plan.

I agree with you that is not a huge number—but a high proportion of them were thinking individuals who have been involved in issues like this for years. And notice: out of that has sprung several candidates who are concerned and I can assure you we are not going away regardless of what happens this election cycle.

On March 8th, the Regional Planning commission, after taking into account the public testimony given, voted to roll the hundred year update into an ongoing public process. That is not too much to ask for a 100 year plan, now is it?

Within two days, councilman Dwight Dortch had asked the developer of the Winnemucca Ranch to appeal the decision, and within a week, ( I believe it was March 16th) the Regional Planning Governing Board had convened in another well attended hearing (perhaps 80 people) and ordered the RPC to either say yes or no—but don’t delay. The developer of the Winnemucca Ranch area stated in his appeal that “ they were suffering financial impacts”

Excuse me. Why is it that they invested so much.? Did they assume that the land was necessarily going to be upzoned, our master plan changed and state law changed to serve them? That shouldn’t be. Zoning laws, master plans, and state law, need to be respected and enforced—not changed everytime a developer requests it.

During the next three months, three members of the Regional Planning commission suddendly developed an urge to spend more time with family, and resigned. Fred Lokken (the third) resigned the day before the critical votes to protest the resignation of the director of the Regional Planning Agency. I am told this level of turnover on the RPC is not the norm. The “amended” planning commission voted to move forward with the 100 year plan and amendments to our regional master plan.

So “consensus” was achieved—amidst a sea of rolling heads. Sorry-not my kind of consensus and not a pretty process.

a sidenote about the local press: after a promising start, the Reno Gazette Journal has basically dropped the ball—and the Reno News and Review has done no real reporting on it at all!!!!! In what amounts to a press blackout, is it any wonder people are not up in arms? They don’t know what is going on.

When I go door to door, only one in ten have heard about the Winnemcucca Ranch fiasco.

Yesterday I spoke at a Toastmaster’s breakfast—only four out of 16 or so had heard about it.

Anyway, that’s a start to answering your questions. The Eco:Logic study was commissioned by the purveyers ( Sun Valley Water District, TMWA and others affected by the SJC 26 legislation carried by Amodei. ) The report is being mailed to me so I can read the entirety.

I’m told the lofts were paid for with tax credits. It’s complicated and I am in process of learning more. I just wanted to let you know, Councilman Aiazzi, that I am not ignoring you, and I am doing my duty to answer a constituent’s questions.

By the way, I met your cousin while going door to door on Keystone. He has a good idea regarding an existing rail line out towards Cold Springs

Erik