|
The questions were prepared by the League of Women Voters of Fremont, Newark, and Union City and asked of all candidates for this office.
See below for questions on
Development in Area 4,
Fireworks
Click on a name for candidate information. See also more information about this contest.
 |
1. Do you support development in Newark Area 4? Why or why not?
|
Answer from Jack Dane:
Yes I support development that benefits the community and contributes to the quality of life in Newark. More development will increase revenue for the city.
Answer from Elisabeth Reid-Gonzalez, MPA, CPHQ:
The City of Newark has been working on the "in-fill" of Newark for several years. As part of this plan, the City declared Area 2 as "blighted" for 40 years - despite property owner outcry. This amounts to 581 acres and more than 700 homes (including newly built homes) of Newark as now wrongly labeled as an area that has "serious physical or economic deterioration (i.e.: dilapidated buildings, increased crime, disease) which cannot reasonably be reversed without governmental action". See my article about the issue: Http://www.insidebayarea.com/ci_16033253
Area 4 is adjacent to Area 2.
Development is a wonderful thing if it is done in a quality fashion, however, like in Area 2, the citizens have voiced concerns about the impacts on the surrounding neighborhoods that are currently being considered as apart of the Area 3 & 4 EIR. The EIR raises serious concerns for the development of that areas. The overall plan is an addition of 2,500 new homes that will bring 5,000-9,000 new residents to our small area. With new residents come new cars, traffic, waiting lines. These plans will change Newark. It has also been discussed to expand further into the wetlands.
The real question that needs to be asked: Is development of Area 4 what the citizens of Newark want?
As Councilwoman, I will ensure that question is asked.
Answer from Francisco Preciado, Jr.:
First I would like to explain my values in assessing a development proposal. I believe that it is imperative to protect our wetlands and natural resources. Newark is in a unique position to take a proactive role in protecting our environment. I also believe that in order for Newark to thrive economically, it must continually search for ways to create economic development. Currently, there are plenty of opportunities throughout the city to promote economic development projects. My priority is to focus on revitalizing those areas before even thinking about development close to our wetlands. I do not support development in the Area 4 land that is directly adjacent to the wetlands. However, I do support development in Area 4 that is adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad.
|
2. Should the City of Newark ban the sale of "safe and sane" fireworks?
|
Answer from Elisabeth Reid-Gonzalez, MPA, CPHQ:
I was born on July 4th, 1976 - I am a bicentennial baby (born on the 200 year anniversary of this country). I enjoy fireworks and would like to see the Bay Area City's work together to provide safe entertainment on our national holiday. Citizens want a safe 4th of July for their families and the environment. Banning "safe and sane" will not prevent individuals from accessing the illegal fireworks. Additionally, it will only hurt funding for local not for profit organizations who count on the sales.
Answer from Jack Dane:
No, several charitable organizations depend on the proceeds from these sale keep their programs operating.
Answer from Francisco Preciado, Jr.:
The sale of fireworks in Newark are instrumental in sustaining community organizations, schools, and sports programs. I think it is important to continue supporting these essential community programs.
Responses to questions asked of each candidate
are reproduced as submitted to the League.
Candidates' statements are presented as
submitted. References to opponents are not permitted.
The order of the candidates is random and changes daily. Candidates who did not respond are not listed on this page.
| 
League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
