Dissent based on principles or …

Blogging Bayport Alameda has an update on the proposed Oak to 9th project in neighboring Oakland. The project is slated to revitalize a particularly blighted part of Oakland’s waterfront and has the potential to create 8,000 jobs and nearly $1bn in property tax revenues. As with any project of this scope, there are bound to be disagreements over the proposed changes. Such principle-based dissent is a “good thing” and is encouraged.

Unfortunately, as is all too often the case, we’re seeing the emergence of dissent based on the “just because” factor (a.k.a NIMBY or dissent for the sake of dissent). Folks who fall into this category often resort to innuendo and FUD to make their point. Any middle of the road compromises are shot down without any valid reason or facts. Worse, any alternatives are summarily dismissed because “they won’t work here”.

Alameda has seen its share of FUD in the debate over Measure A. It is now Oakland’s turn to have a similar experience as the opponents of Oak to 9th have gathered enough signatures to force a referendum on the issue. Having every major redevelopment issue addressed at the ballot box seems like a waste of time and resources. Why have a city planning board if you can’t trust their decisions or work with them towards a compromise? It’s either your way or the highway, eh?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: