My family and I have owned property that is part of the Measure F initiative for 45 years and I have lived on this property for 35 years. I am one of the five landowners supporting Measure F, as I am directly affected by the future planning of this area. It is the main reason I got involved in Measure F.
I would like Brentwood to control this area’s future. A Yes vote on Measure F would secure this area’s future and allow the City of Brentwood to plan its development. I would also like to see Brentwood benefit from building permits and sales tax revenues, property taxes, jobs, sports fields and safe roadways for our schools and community.
At the end of the day, opposition of Measure F is offering none of these benefits. What they are offering you is something they don’t have control of. The opposition of Measure F wants to save “our green hills.” What they’re not telling you is that these hills are privately owned and have been slated for development for over 20 years.
I understand the concept of “saving our green hills,” but I think many people assume these hills are somehow controlled by the City of Brentwood, because it is in the city’s sphere of influence. In reality, these green hills are outside the city limits. Brentwood has no control over them. What you will really be saving these hills for with a No vote on Measure F is the ability for Antioch or the county to acquire to develop these hills as they see fit.
Is that what you really want to save these hills for? Someone else?
If the voters of Brentwood decide not the acquire this property into their city, the voters will have as much control in the future over these “green hills” as they do now – which is zero.
The opposition has taken issue in the development agreement embedded in Measure F. This agreement provides for a very well-thought-out plan consistent with current Brentwood development. It provides many amenities over and above what is normally required for development projects. Proposed densities for this area would be among the lowest in all of Brentwood. If there were no development agreement in the initiative, I am sure the opposition would be screaming even louder about the unknowns and the possibility of high-density condos or apartments consuming the area.
Your voting decision will carry great weight for the future of this area and who ultimately develops it. I urge you to vote Yes on Measure F – for the future of Brentwood.
Mark Harris, Brentwood
How about an initiative with an agreement to follow the General Plan?
Measure F does not pay for the school. Measure F does not pay for any sports fields.
Measure F embeds 1,300 houses, twice the General Plan and 35 acres retail, never mentioned in the General Plan. Where is all that traffic going? The roads will need more improvement than they do now. And how will that money be generated?
The developer fees in Measure F are what is required by Brentwood and no more. Any other cost of amenities will be tacked on the price of the 1,300 houses.
And since Measure F is a pay to play plan for the landowners, maybe that is why you and the other landowners are so desperate for this measure to pass; you may have quite a bit of money already invested in the process.
Maybe Measure F should have been a bit closer to the General Plan.
Vote NO on Measure F on June 8th.