Editorials

At this time, we’re housing our children in school buildings where their own parents attended classes 30 or 40 years ago. The average age of schools in the Gilroy Unified School District is 30 years old and five schools are more than 50 years old. The District has taken great care of the schools but they need to be renovated and rebuilt.

Trickle down doesn’t work, but trickle up does.

In the land of endless regulation, higher taxes and more fees, California seems to have declared all-out war on small businesses. The $15 per hour minimum wage increase is just one assault that will cause businesses to re-evaluate how they operate in unfriendly territory. Those workers the state intended to help may be the ones hit the hardest when businesses are forced to decide whether they can pass the increased labor costs along to the consumer our cut back their labor force.

A proposal to put a gun shop downtown in the building that used to house the Pinnacle newspaper has gotten mixed reviews from the community.Some say we need all the merchants we can get downtown. Anything is better than the vacant and boarded up buildings we have now.Others worry about the image it would make in a downtown that is striving to match those of Morgan Hill or Los Gatos, as a place to bring families, with a mix of retail, restaurants and entertainment that would entice out-of-towners to what should be one of the most quaint and authentic downtowns in the Bay Area.It’s funny that we get tourists from Los Angeles who think of Gilroy as a must-see. Garbo’s, the successful antique store, started out advertising down south and got a huge response from travelers looking to venture into a town that still has a historical, agrarian feel. They liked what they found here, even as they thumbed their noses at some of their own small towns.“I found out that when you mentioned Gilroy in San Francisco, people went, ‘eww,’ but in L.A., they think Gilroy is charming. Of course, they don’t like Pomona,” said Bruce Dane, Garbo’s owner.So, some might argue, a gun shop could bring more authenticity and a Wild West feel. We buy that, to an extent. Something about it just makes us bristle.Is that really the best location for a heavily secured store where people are going to buy weapons? Is that the image you want people to take away from Gilroy? Do we want to be the weapons capital of the South Valley?There’s Predator’s Archery on the right, a nice gun shop on the left and over there down the street is a nuclear warhead shop. And, as wag Jack Foley said, we could turn the carpet store into a carpet bomb store.We don’t want to come off as radically anti-gun. There are plenty of local hunters and there are an estimated 270 million guns in this country, or 89 for every 100 residents, based on a Swiss study. They aren’t going away anytime soon. There are also already eight permitted places in Gilroy you can buy a gun. These are home businesses and most people are unaware of them.We know that a gun store goes through strict permitting processes. Police are involved to make sure the place is safe. Despite that, nationwide, there are plenty of shooting incidents in gun stores, even one in 2011 at Watsonville’s Big 5.All that said, it comes down to a question of image and perception. Mayor Perry Woodward—a hunter—says the store could bring shoppers here who now have to travel to other cities to buy their rifles and handguns. But Woodward also says he wants to see a time when people in Morgan Hill, which keeps getting more and more upscale, envy Gilroy’s downtown.Is a gun store, rather than, say, an Apple store, something that would make our downtown sizzle, especially across the street from what the mayor hopes will be a family plaza for entertainment?Gilroyans have said no to downtown adult bookstores and marijuana shops, even though they are legal in other cities. They don’t want children looking in store windows and getting the wrong messages. We think they should apply the same standards to weapons. Keep them safe and tucked away, not glorified downtown near the parades and concerts and the ceramics studios and sewing stores.

Four out of every five people you see in Gilroy work somewhere else. Even the majority of the City Council—including the mayor and vice mayor—commute to San Jose or further for work.

No library in the Santa Clara County Library system is required to recognize Black History Month or share its meaning and goals with patrons. So when Sandy Haro walked into the Gilroy Library in February and saw no BHM display, she asked questions.

A year ago, the city and the Gilroy General Plan Advisory Committee invited the public to “to help choose a future growth plan for Gilroy.”

Being unique can sometimes be a source of pride, but when it comes to a plastic bag ordinance, Gilroy’s failure to act is a bit embarrassing. Every city of any consequence in Santa Clara County has clamped down on single-use plastic bags. Milpitas, one of the last holdouts, passed a ban that went into effect on Jan. 1.

When I came to Gilroy in 1980, the Gilroy Dispatch was filled with letters about rampant growth. The development at the time was the Northwest Quadrant. The claims were that Gilroy was sprawling, we were becoming another San Jose and we were losing our small town charm.

The bungled attempt to slide the largest development in Gilroy’s history through the county Local Agency Formation Commission came off the rails this week when LAFCO sued the city in Santa Clara County Superior Court. It’s unprecedented for a city to be dragged into court by the very agency whose approval it needs, and the mayor and council members who voted to submit the half-baked application for a highly unpopular project should be embarrassed about the way this all was handled.Citizens elect leaders to make wise and cautious decisions that reflect the will of their constituents, and the North Gilroy Neighborhood District initiative reflected none of those qualities.Mayor Perry Woodward, especially, displayed poor judgment. He makes money litigating as a profession—he has sued the city of Gilroy and this newspaper in the past—and just signed on to work for a big San Jose law firm. He, more than anyone, should understand the need to follow procedures and keep the city out of court. Litigation between taxpayer-funded entities is a game that no one wins.Luckily, landowner Jeff Martin made a sound decision to withdraw the application, promptly and without fuss. He has been a part of the community long enough to know which way the wind’s blowing, and he wants to do the right thing.In our view, a project this big should undergo a community visioning period, or charette, otherwise the nice watercolors, elegant website and new name—Rancho Los Olivos—are just lip gloss on a boar. It should have widespread community buy-in before it is handed off to regional agencies for approval. The process should not simply move from a small political in-group clumsily and arrogantly telling Gilroyans what’s best for them to a slick PR campaign by an out-of-county agency hired to sell the plan. Instead, if it’s to move forward, there has to be a genuine willingness to listen to a community that has spoken up loud and clear.“I asked the applicant to please rescind their application to allow for time for the city and greater community to better understand the proposal, the benefits to our community, how it gains local control and fits within the collective long-term vision of Gilroy’s future,” Woodward said in the developer’s press release. First off, why was the mayor of Gilroy’s position expressed through the project publicist’s press release, rather than in a city announcement? Does the mayor work for the city, or the developer? Second, should the mayor, after two weeks on the job, be using the personal pronoun and instructing a private applicant how to conduct his business affairs? And, third, is the problem really that the citizens of this community are too uneducated about the project’s fabulous benefits to “understand”?If Woodward really wants to bring the community around on this defining issue, he can start by creating an inclusive city leadership, which means not hand-picking ideological soulmates for mayor pro-tempore and council appointee. If he goes ahead with Peter Leroe-Muñoz as his second-in-command and then engineers Bob Dillon’s appointment—many City Hall watchers believe that that backroom deal’s already been cut—Woodward will have a de facto four-member voting block to accelerate Gilroy’s expansion over the objections of a large number, if not a majority of residents. And because a new general plan is in the works, Gilroy will live with the results of this political gamesmanship for decades to come.We hope Woodward’s colleagues on the council will realize that a mayor who’s crashing into walls should not be followed blindly. Being aggressive and taking initiative can sometimes be confused with leadership.A proclivity for action, to be sure, can be a very good thing when accompanied by sound judgment and a consensus of support. But when a moral compass is spinning freely and ambition charts the direction, what appears to be a march forward can really be just a bunch of lemmings sprinting to the cliff’s edge, dazzled by the brilliance of a $3 billion payday.