Jeff Pelline's Sierra Foothills Report

Editor’s note: A letter in the agenda packet for Wednesday’s Nevada City Council meetings shows the precarious state of keeping the courthouse in the historic downtown. It exemplifies how government agencies work in “silos,” focusing on their own special interests, rather than collaborate.

My hunch is the same as it has been all along: A new courthouse will wind up near the Rood Center for logistic reasons that suit the courts, and dealing with the unintended consequences of relocating it — AKA, a big vacant building downtown to join the others — will be addressed “at a later date.” It’s just how things work around here. Though up for re-election, the judges aren’t willing to be leaders on this issue either. Here are excerpts from the letter and a link below:

“After many months, the State agreed with the local members of the (project advisory group) to make the current site the preferred site for the new construction,” according to a letter from judges dated Feb. 28 to the Nevada City Council and County Board of Supervisors.

“Recently, the State has reversed course, deciding that the current site is not desirable for the new construction, stating budget issues as a principle reason. The State also notes that there has been local opposition to demolishing the current structure in order to build a new courthouse.

“The judges appreciate and share the community’s concerns about the detrimental impacts economically and culturally of relocating the courthouse outside of the downtown area.

“We understand that a potential result of abandoning the current buildings will be a large vacant space left in the downtown area.

“If the voice of the community is not heard, either due to dissent, lack of consensus, or procrastination, then the State will decide for us where our next county courthouse will be situated. Thus, whether the new courthouse is built on the current site or elsewhere may well depend on a vocal, strong community commitment to a particular site.

“In this regard, we respectfully urge the Council and the County to take a leadership position, both to address its obligations to its constituents and to give us direction as we continue to participate in the PAG.”

The letter is here. (Scroll down a bit, past the “WaterWise” discussion).

Filed under: Uncategorized | 12 Comments »

Our far right-wing blogger Russ Steels never misses a chance to bash our Golden State and blame our ills on AB32 (and the defeat of Prop. 23) — whether it’s relevant or not. It’s rather monotonous.

This morning, Russ is touting Apple Computer’s expansion in Texas — still minor compared to its expansion in the Golden State with a new spaceship-shaped headquarters. Apple is driving the biggest leasing surge in Silicon Valley since the dot.com boom, as Bloomberg reports.

“Remember our Prop 23/AB-32 debate, when we were assured by our local left that high tech companies like Apple would save the California economy? Well, maybe not,” he writes, touting Apple’s plans to create a campus in Austin, Texas.

And as it turns out, however, tea-party activists have been big critics of the enterprise fund that Gov. Rick Perry used to entice Apple’s expansion in the “Hee-Haw” state. Here’s the background from AP:

“The enterprise fund is one of two designed to entice technology companies and top researchers to Texas. Perry said the payout to Apple is one of the largest and the company’s job pledge one of the most ambitious since the fund was created in 2003. He said the fund has invested more than $443.4 million and signed contracts to generate 62,000 new jobs and more than $15.4 billion in capital investment,” according to the Associated Press.

“Tea party activists and other critics of using state money to attract private enterprise call the fund an example of ‘crony capitalism,’ complaining that it funnels taxpayer dollars to politically connected firms with little guarantee of job creation.

“A report in November by the political watchdog group Texans for Public Justice found that companies receiving money from the Texas Enterprise Fund created 22,349 jobs by the end of 2010, or roughly 37 percent of the 59,100 jobs that the governor’s office said the participating firms had promised to create as of summer 2010.”

Filed under: Uncategorized | 1 Comment »