Hard-right blogger Russ Steele has been enlisted to start trashing Jim Firth, who is running for Grass Valley City Council, from his blog — high atop another town, no less.
From his days as an appointee to the county transportation commission, Russ has long been a water bearer (AKA political Gunga Din) for the “old guard.”
Progressive Terry Lamphier’s upset of staunch conservative John Spencer for District 3 supervisor, and the transfer of The Union’s “Tea Party Gazette” publisher to Roseburg, Ore., upset longstanding “world order” in Grass Valley, so now Russ is summoned to mud-up the issue.
Firth is one of six candidates running for three open seats on the Grass Valley City Council.
The inflexible “old guard” interests of Grass Valley (pro-Loma Rica housing, pro-Idaho-Maryland Mine, pro-suing the County over airport land use plans and so on) are supporting Lisa Swarthout, Howard Levine and Jan Arbuckle. It’s a “slate.”
That’s fine. And it’s up for Grass Valley voters to decide. (Though many ardent supporter of Lisa, Howard and Jan don’t live in Grass Valley).
Facts are illuminating in a campaign — no matter whom you support — but Russ is stretching wildly (like “stretch” Willie McCovey) on this one.
Despite Russ’ trash talk, Firth says the most important issue facing Grass Valley is “JOBS!” But never mind that.
Russ is trying to link Firth’s opposition to a publicly funded baseball park in San Francisco in 1989 with a no-growth mindset in Grass Valley in 2012.
I happen to know a lot about both fights. In fact, I broke the story of the naming of PacBell Park on Page 1 of The Chronicle in April 1996. My story is here. It really “PO’ed” the Giants, who wanted us to sit on the story for a few days. But I had good sources, and they ultimately went along. Larry Baer and I visit at the ballpark.
The issue of PacBell Park was not whether to build a new stadium; it was how to finance it and where to build it.
A lot of people felt that the Giants should use private money, not taxpayer money. Owners Bob Lurie and later Peter McGowan were antagonistic figures. A lot of people also felt the Giants and 49ers should work together for a joint complex.
Firth, for one, “would rather see the Giants and the 49ers come up with a joint plan for a new sports complex at Candlestick Point,” as The Chronicle pointed out. And he opposed using public funds. (I’ll bet Russ would agree with Firth’s position, arguing for private — not public — funding for a similar project up here, such as a performing arts center).
In the end, guess what? The Giants funded their own stadium with private money. It was the first Major League ballpark built without public funds since the completion of Dodger Stadium in 1962. And it turned out fine — for the investors and the city.
The outcome wasn’t so rosy for the 49ers. Without any joint stadium, guess what the 49ers did? They left San Francisco all together and are building a new stadium in Santa Clara.
So Firth wasn’t such a dummy after all. In fact, his view saved the taxpayers money, and a joint sports complex could have kept the 49ers in San Francisco.
I don’t have any dogs in the fight for Grass Valley City Council. But I am continually “PO’ed” at petulant small-town politics and the lying that goes with it.
Let’s hope that whoever sits on the next Grass Valley City Council understands the value of a diversified economy. Betting on boom-and-bust cycles benefits only a few at the expense of many.
And let’s hope the Council values independent thinking. It sometimes leads to innovation. At best it’s still going to be a 4-1 vote most of the time anyway.
Filed under: Uncategorized
In my opinion, combined baseball and football stadiums just don’t work. I have attended both football and baseball games at Shea, Humphreydome, Astrodome, RFK, LA Coliseum, Oakland Coliseum, The Stick and even ATT Park.
The problem is baseball fields by square footage of playing area are greatly more than football. Football fields are rectangular and baseball fields are triangular. What you wind up with is obscure viewing angles, depending on the sport you are attending. Team owners especially dislike dual use stadiums for the sale of sky boxes. While the owner of a baseball team might draw top dollar for a sky box behind home plate, the owner of a football team has to sell it as an end zone rate.
Baseball stadiums have limited multi-use. Yes, I know ATT hosts college bowl games but it requires both teams on the same side of the field and crash pads at one end zone. Football multi-use can host soccer, lacrosse, and field hockey.
I would have liked to see the Niners cut a deal to stay in SF but not a dual use stadium. I would rather have seen them cut a deal with Stanford for 3 years while The Stick was razed and a new, football only stadium built.
Dave,
Good points. But a sports complex doesn’t necessarily mean a single stadium for both sports. The benefits come from joint parking and other economies of scale. In hindsight Pac Bell Park and a Santa Clara stadium was a “draw” for San Franciscans.
Seattle nailed it – Safeco Field(Mariners) & CenturyLink(Seahawks & Sounders) on the Emerald City’s south side is great. SF could have been poaching the SJ earthquakes vs losing the 49ers had they built two complexes.
Others nailed it too!
In Kansas City, it’s the Harry S. Truman sports complex — home to two major sports venues. There’s Arrowhead Stadium, home of the Kansas City Chiefs, and Kauffman Stadium, home of the Kansas City Royals.
And in Pittsburg, Heinz Field (home to the Steelers) is adjacent to PNC Park (home to the Pirates) on the Allegheny River.
Nope, Jim Firth — though vilified at the time in some old-school S.F. business circles — was onto something with a joint stadium concept. Instead, the Giants and 49ers went their separate ways.
Win some. But also lose some.
In fact, it’s a good example of the value of having diverse voices on an elected board like the GVCC. You want to consider options, not be subjected to 5-0 votes all the time. GV needs some “out of the box” thinking. Most local issues are nonpartisan, including sports complexes.
Barry Pruett on Jim Firth this morning:
“… the most partsian Democrat that I have ever met in this town and someone with whom you cannot have a rational conversation.”
First Greg Diaz. Then Nate Beason. Then Tom Anderson. Now Jim Firth. Barry’s list keeps growing and growing …
If this guy wants to be in politics, he’s got a unique approach.
Now Todd Juvinall is going negative:
http://sierradragonsbreathe.blogspot.com/2012/10/partisanship-at-local-level-political.html
Must be onto something!
What do you mean going negative? His entire life is a negative drain on our culture! By the way, he is not allowing me to post anymore, which is probably a blessing in disguise.
I acknowledge it is his blog but from what I’ve seen, you’ve “bested” him many times so I somewhat understand why he doesn’t want you posting there anymore. Keep up the good work. Also enjoy your posts in the Auburn Journal.
For one–meaning you–who shows he knows American history, to engage Todd, who clearly doesn’t understand the various ‘history learned by rote,’ which he confuses with critical thinking, and makes assertions w/o any attempt to provide evidence, etc., that his point/opinion is worth considering to the educated, seems to me to be an activity to ease boredom.
It’s clear his analytic abilities are junior highish and running a blog makes him seem intelligent to himself and others like him.
Politics aside, he can’t defend whatever he says and I think it is because he doesn’t know how to. He just ridicules all whom disagree and from what I see, he ridicules those with far greater intelligence. IMO, he;d make a good poster boy for the book, Idiot America.
Bummer I don’t live in Grass Valley so I can vote for Mr. Firth. I think it’s great that Russ, Barry, and Todd are making a big issue of him (and others) in their blogs. In case a voter is undecided, a look at those blogs will change that (although it may not go the way those 3 hope it would).
I think you are on to something here Annie–I know a lot of the local Republicans actually see Barry, George, Russ, Todd, Martin and Chuck as a drag on what they hope to achieve. I just hope they never wake up tot he fact that the more they talk the less people support their ideas!
Thanks Steve. I couldn’t agree more.
Shucks! I compliment competing bloggers and get called nasty. The only thing I’ve seen nasty is one’s response to my compliment that they can convince voters.