A response to Councilwoman Gayle Washburn’s letter:

It bothers me to have to take the time to respond to this completely disingenuous letter. But these self-serving falsehoods and factual dodges should be recognized for what they are.

I’m accused of politicizing the “unfortunate realities of the current economy.” These realities weren’t on the horizon when the disastrous Measures H and I were being promoted by Washburn, Walker, and Brooks, and their merry band of Katzenjammers. What a ridiculous way to attempt to avoid responsibility for the death of so many promising business opportunities in north Fillmore due to Measures H and I.

The fact is H and I wiped-out any value these properties had. An orderly plan had been in place for the development of north Fillmore, including all financing. Even an atomic attack on America would not have changed the fact that these measures made it impossible to develop north Fillmore. Five or ten years from now this will not change. These 350 homes will have to be built here and there in the rest of the city, necessitating very high density housing, the very thing everyone sought to avoid. Someone at city hall must perform a financial feasibility study to determine if 350 units can realistically be built in north Fillmore under the constraints of Measures H and I. That would settle this dispute. The landowners already know the answer.

There will always be defaults in the regular course of business, but very few will be caused by such foolish, short-sightedness as seen in Measures H and I.

Bank Call Reports? Washburn (and Brooks) tried the same stupid, unfair, irrational argument to justify their abandonment of the Business Park. The supporters of H and I were repeatedly told that passage would result in the killing-off of north Fillmore development. It has happened as foretold.

I’m going to ask the Kellers to comment on how H and I affected their once thriving business, in next week’s Gazette. They have already testified at council in person.

Regarding Measure H and I preventing additional infrastructure debt of $18 million: That $18 million was going to be spread over 700 homes at approximately $16,750 per dwelling unit. Measure H and I reduced the number of dwelling units to 350 thus doubling the debt to $33,500 per dwelling unit. The need for the $18 million in additional infrastructure did not magically go away as a result of Measure H and I. It doubled per dwelling unit, guaranteeing that North Fillmore will remain undeveloped. More defaults are to be expected and it is doubtful anyone will be willing to now purchase the foreclosed CFD properties because there is no realistic way to develop in North Fillmore because of Measure H and I.

Again, I regret having to waste time explaining the obvious to Washburn, Walker, and Brooks, since they apparently don’t understand the reality of their gross mistake in promoting H and I.

Gayle Washburn is here attempting to avoid responsibility for the foreclosures in north Fillmore by attributing the whole thing to the poor economy, when this debacle is directly related to her (and Patti Walker’s) sponsorship of Measures H and I.

As they say, we should all remember in November.