By Robert Haugh
Vice Mayor Suds Jain recently proposed that the City study charging for parking in a lot of places.
At the August 30 City Council meeting, Jain initially proposed a future agenda item to discuss charging for parking at the Convention Center.
But he read a statement that was unclear. So Mayor Lisa Gillmor asked him some questions.
“Parking at the Community Center? Parking at the Library? Parking at the Senior Center? What are you talking about?” said Gillmor. “Please just clarify.”
Jain answered, “It could be anywhere where we have a shortage of parking.”
Wow.
You can watch for the brief discussion here.
Jain didn’t provide many details. He mentioned Sunnyvale Baylands, the Santa Clara Marriot, and Westfield Valley Fair charging for parking, including for their employees.
Gillmor said, “I cannot even imagine charging for parking at City facilities.”
Councilmember Anthony Becker made the motion to add the item to a future agenda.
The motion passed 4-2 with Gillmor and Kathy Watanabe dissenting.
Councilmbers Karen Hardy and Kevin Park voted with Jain and Becker.
Raj Chahal was absent.
Christian Pellecchia and Larry McColloch, running against Hardy and Chahal, respectively, opposed charging for parking in the City.
“At a time when so many ordinary people are struggling to overcome the financial impacts of the pandemic,” wrote Pellecchia.
“This man incessantly seeks to make residents and business owners pay more for everything. He has clearly lost touch with reality.”
“I do not support a parking tax,” wrote McColloch.
“Without hearing the entire proposal or seeing Mr Jain’s full information which I do not 100 percent agree with, until then I can not formulate an educated decision,” wrote Becker.
“We couldn’t have full discussion at last meeting on the matter because it was just to put on the agenda so the item can be discussed in full.”
Hardy and Chahal declined to provide comment last week on Jain’s request.
I remember years ago when I worked in Scotts Valley and the city, or was it county, that wanted to force businesses to charge their employees for parking.
At least Kirk Vartan stated the real reason cities want to charge for parking. The left does everything they can to get us out of our cars and try to make their empty buses successful. We did not start driving cars because the city started charging for parking horses. We preferred cars because they took us where we wanted to go when we wanted to go there. It was the freedom of the open road! Too much freedom for many on the left. They want us to be docile drones and get on their buses when they get here and transfer to another one to get where we want to go. The concept of the last mile in transit came about because transit doesn’t take you where you need to go, not exactly. A transit system that consists of passenger vans that pick up and drop off on demand makes more sense than empty behemoths on major routes. Soon those could be autonomous, and not having a well paid driver would really cut costs.
Y’all know why, right? Because the budget is in bad shape with all the mismanagement that’s been going on, courtesy the 49er 5. So they’re going to have to make up the difference somehow. Higher taxes, paid parking, etc. Losers, all of them.
fyi, I watch stuff on YouTube through a Roku (Creature Features every Sat night!). I saw commercials for Hardy and Chahal on Sat. Losers.
How is this legal for some “officer” of the city to stop the wheels of justice??? What is the legal premise for not continuing to process the complaints? Shall we call the ACLU and see what they think about this? Why do these people ASK for problems instead of solving them??? These people are supposed to be advocating for the people of this city and they’re protecting their own??? FFS!!!!!
NEWS
Steve Ngo. Interim city attorney has issued the following.
Any CPRA requests regarding Anthony Becker will not be fullfilled until after November.
So Becker and Jain cut a deal with Ngo, we keep you, you block cpras on us until after november.
Have the email from ngo
Are Stanford and SCU private campuses? Jain is one of the most naive and silly people on record. No wonder he hates the Public Record Act. He hates the publi.
https://www.millerpoliticallaw.com/attorneys-staff/
Meet Russell Miller
Treasurer of 49ers Major Donor Committee
He is also IS
FRUSTRATED SANTA CLARANS OPPOSED TO LISA GILLMOR
COMMUNITY LEADERS SUPPORTING ANTHONY BECKER FOR MAYOR
NEIGHBORHOOD LEADERS SUPPORTING RAJ CHAHAL
NEIGHBORHOOD LEADERS SUPPORTING KAREN HARDY
Mr. Jain
Please stop, you are only embarrassing yourself…again.
You want to talk about the “High Cost of Free Parking”, fantastic.
I did a quick survey, and I found the Santa Clara residents were more open to other revenue streams. I didn’t have to think too hard to come up with some easy ones for sure.
1. Let’s start with the rent your employer is paying to use the 11 acres next to Levi Stadium.
How many people know about that sweetheart deal that they have for the next 31 years for their office space and practice facility?
Answer is $2,500 a month.
Try renting a studio apartment in Santa Clara for less? Let alone 25 years in the future….
2. Now let’s turn our attention to the fact that your employer has not paid our City any profits for any Non NFL Events in the last 5+ years. Maybe just a coincidence, but that was about the same time your employer lost again in court. That was the time to lower his own rent.
So who defeated your boss in court that last time?
Here are a couple of the names. May sound familiar.
Santa Clara City Attorney Brian Doyle (You remember him, you voted to fire him for No Cause)
Santa Clara City Manager DeAnna Santana (You remember her, you voted to fire her for whatever reason you could think of at that moment)
Santa Clara Mayor Lisa Gillmor (You remember her, she is the one who didn’t sell out our City). She is also the one you have attacked time and time again….
3. How about all the Lawsuits that your employer is laying against my City. When in doubt, “Sue”. Why? Well for many reasons. Here are just a few.
A. Causes Chaos. “Chaos” isn’t always bad. Especially if you planned the Chaos.
B. Your employer has money to burn.
C. It buys your employer time.
D. It makes my City use up its resources, money, time and energy.
E. When time has run it course, suddenly an offer to settle “Out of Court” appears… from who, your employer? Believe it or not, it’s the same party who started the litigation. That’s actually normally a rare situation.
Why you ask?
They never intended to go to court in the first place.
Going 0-7, may have educated them just a bit.
The cost of litigation is well… costly. Not only are you going to have to pay your legal fee’s, but in the settlement of the court case, you are also on the hook for the legal fee’s of the person you sued. That’s how that works in real life.
Somehow our City is getting that part of the settlement. So we end up taking it in the shorts time and again.
The most current example. The 49ers used the Santa Clara Golf Course to park cars on. They were allowed to charge whatever they wanted to charge, but in the end would pay the City $700,000. Good deal for both parties for the first two years of the three year deal. Final year, now not so good for the 49ers. So they sued the City. Why? No idea. Pick point A, B, C, D, or E.
They then hold onto all the money they collected. Never giving us even one dime. Make us wait over a year as they sue us, and make us spend $350,000 in attorney cost. Then and only then do they offer us $250,000 to settle out of court.
Wait, here is where the 49er 5 come into play. They counter not at $1.05 Million, our fee’s plus attorney cost, nope, they counter at $500,000. and then settle on $350,000.
Maybe my math is wrong here, but that would have paid for a lot of Free Parking Spaces, and not had to make our Mayor dip into our Reserves.
This is just one example…
Or am I being Obtuse here.
If so, “Mr. So Much Smarter than anyone else in the Room” explain to me what I am missing. I am curious what your handlers are going to have you say next.
So far all I see them have you on, is a long walk on a short pier.
Burt Field
burt.field@gmail.com.
❤❤Burt Field you are a true hero fighting for Santa Clara. Thank You!!
I can not formulate an educated decision,” wrote Becker.
We know this Becker!!🤣😂😂🤣🤣😂😂🤣😂
If you assess the value Kirk Vartan has added to the community it is relatively high and I am a well known critic of some of his views. Mr. Vartan has been a well known business OWNER for decades. That means he has EMPLOYED dozens of people. You can use the word ACTIVIST to describe Mr. Vartan and it is absolutely true. The community has been improved with his presence. He has his own views. To read Becker’s and Jain’s little girl jammer about Vartan is enlighteninVartag considering Vartan has had good things to say about both over the years. Considering Vartan’s business record, I think he deserved any grant he received and again, I have been very critical of his opinions.
I really think Jain has a mental issue. He votes in favor of a $10 million dollar discount for the 49ers and lieu of the Santa Clara taxpayers. Then wants us to pay for parking. The downtown and Santa Clara square are both difficult to find an enjoyable time, paying for parking is just another reason not to go.
Hyper focused Jain just wants more cash for his pet projects. I sometimes wonder if he remembers he represents District 5..
You see Vartan can present a case of paid parking and do it fairly. It might encourage public transit. He reminds that Jain is a badly behaved brat.
No no no!
More nonsense from Gillmor backed Robert Haugh today. Gillmor has put Santa Clara into a huge deficit by handing out favors to her supporters like her advisor and businesses that support her like Related. Her only ideas about keeping the City running are to dig deeper into reserves which are now down from 25% to 15%. She opposes Measure H which would cut our $27 million deficit by $6 million. It’s reckless spending for high salaries and favors that has put Santa Clara in our current position. Fremont and Mountain View don’t have deficits even though they got hit by the pandemic like Santa Clara.
Robert Haugh claims to be a “journalist” but he didn’t call me for this opinion piece. If he were a real journalist he would have actually done some research like reading esteemed UCLA professor Donald Shoup’s book: “The High Cost of Free Parking” . Redwood City charges for parking in their highly successful downtown. San Francisco has a very successful congestion pricing model for parking. San Jose, Stanford, SCU. An all day parking permit in Palo Alto costs $25. Do your research Robert? Educate your readers rather than misleading.
I am actually a fan of paid parking, since free parking subsidies auto travel. Same as requiring parking minimums in residential and office buildings. I think a study would be good, but more importantly, I do think paid parking is the right approach. I am not sure if everywhere it should be done (like the senior center or the library), but where commerce is done (Convention Center or downtown areas), I do think it should be in place.
What makes the discussion so unpleasant is Suds. He continually stirs up crap, insults people, and displays his contempt for people openly. He tries to put a veil of even-keeled tone in his communication, but it really comes off as talking down to people. I am incredibly disappointed in his performance on council, using the council to execute his personal agenda. And the majority disruptors on the council support it. That too is sad. This council demonstrates the same behavior the council of 15 years ago did. And back then, Suds, Kevin, Karen and I were fighting along side to make change, fight the good fight for the community. I guess the statement is true: “power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.” What a shame.
Please recall this inconsiderate elected asap.
He really is embarrassing.
Suds, you are a worthless POS
Sudsjain@49ers.com
Councilman Jain,
Aside from objecting to the bias of this site and its primary writer everything else you have written leads me to question your fitness for City Council.
It does not make sense to blame the City’s deficit on Mayor Gillmor. Not to all of us who understand that Santa Clara has a weak mayor and a stronger City Manager and City Council. If any elected officials are to be held responsible it is you and your fellow 49er Five City Council coalition. You, Becker, Chahal, Hardy, and Park have more collective power than Mayor Gillmor.
What did YOU do to prevent the deficit? Did Mayor Gillmor or Councilwoman Watanabe prevent you from preventing the deficit? What WOULD you have done differently than Mayor Gillmor? We have seen the 49er Five blame Gillmor for the deficit but we have not seen any of your propose solutions that would have been different.
At least Mayor Gillmor fought against 49ers requested rent reduction and won in arbitration, getting the city many millions of dollars it would have lost otherwise. And at least Mayor Gillmor understands that the 49ers cannot be trusted to manage the stadium if the City has not earned anything from non-football events going back before the pandemic.
You have voted time and time again to block us from getting what we deserve from the competent management of the stadium. And now you want to make up for the deficit by taxing local businesses and requiring paid parking on city properties?
You should study parking more. And also business and common sense. You should personally study the viability of charging for parking in Santa Clara before making us all pay for someone to do it. It is a joke for you to compare Santa Clara’s ability to charge for parking with San Francisco’s, or San Jose in Downtown, or Stanford, or SCU, or Palo Alto in commercial areas with high demand for parking, or Valley Fair. These are all places that have much higher demand for parking than supply.
Where do you think that Santa Clara can viably charge for parking? In the historic downtown near Franklin Mall? This area is not Union Square, or University Avenue, or even Downtown San Jose. If Santa Clara charges for parking there, nobody will go there.
Do you need to make all of us pay for a study to learn how De Anza College in Cupertino can charge for parking for their campus and the Flint Center, but the City of Cupertino does not charge for parking at any of its properties? Do you need to make all of us pay for a study to understand why Valley Fair can charge for parking and why those reasons do not apply to any where in Santa Clara where parking is currently free?
Where do you think we can charge for parking where it is currently free? Charge Santa Clarans to drive their cars and park to visit the Central Library or enjoy Central Park? Charge Santa Clarans for parking to do official business as citizens or businesses at City Hall? What significant revenue streams do you think Santa Clara is passing up by not charging for parking on City owned lots or on public streets? What chance do you think the City truly has in changing car culture?
I am a business owner and to be honest with you we can easily afford the Measure H tax. It will not change our business and it will not make me want to move my business.
But what I do not like is being nickel and dimed with a head tax or parking charges by a Councilman who does the 49ers bidding and allows them to continue to cheat our City of many more millions of dollars through their incompetence or fraud.
You have sent a clear message to Santa Clara, Councilman Jain. You want all the businesses of Santa Clara to pay up to make a few million while you let the 49ers weasel out of paying many more millions of dollars.
We all know why the 49ers will spend millions to get the 49ers Five in office and stay in office. Those few million they have spent are an investment to save tens of millions of dollars that Santa Clara taxpayers would get otherwise.
We see them trying to cheat us. And we see you helping them.
You seem to be the kind of guy who is always looking in the other side of the fence and comparing SC to other cities. Do us all a favor. Just move. This world is not a one size fits all.
The downtown you lied (I’m sorry, misled) about being able to vote about?
What about Campbell? Or Los Gatos? No pay parking there. I could care less what Palo Alto does.
Suds, are you really arguing for paid parking citing San Francisco and Redwood City? First, San Francisco is a major urban city with over 800,000 residents that does not compare whatsoever to Santa Clara with a little over 100,000 residents. Second, Redwood City HAS a downtown — and all of their council members can vote on issues regarding their downtown.
Like someone mentioned earlier, we are in an unprecedented global pandemic that has led to inflation and high costs of living, making it extremely difficult for many average Americans to sustain a lifestyle without struggling financially. How dare you propose this foolish idea while many of your constituents are struggling to put food on the table. Also, for someone who complains and states that no one reads the Santa Clara News Online, your name is ALWAYS in the comments. ALWAYS.
You want to get us out of our deficit? How about you and your council colleagues find our city a permanent City Attorney and Manager, who are capable of their work and appropriately compensated (like the ones you fired). As a city, we are simply paying too much money (over 3X) for interim employees who are frankly mediocre and unfit for the job.
All that time spent at MIT and you still lack common sense… what a waste.
Jain only really cares about charging for parking at the city lots for Franklin Sq. He has tried to raise fees on the Frankiln Sq small business owners numerous times and faield, now he’s going after parking. Why? because Lisa Gillmor owns property in Franklin Sq, and he hates Lisa Gillmor, Jain is willing to hurt all of the small business owners in Franklin Sq just to get to Gillmor. What a very vindictive small little man Jain is.