Ask your local legislators:
Why are they supporting a UC Regent (George Marcus of Marcus and Millichap) as the State's developer when it was the UC Regents that decided to sell BAREC?
Why did the State not offer BAREC to local governments and agencies before they offered it to a developer as required by law?
Why is UC Berkeley's Agricultural Research Center, which is being sold at the same time, being given a new location but we get nothing even though our community helped purchase the land and paid for its major buildings?
Why the State’s consultants that are trying to sell the land publicly are saying that the BAREC land has no history when we have documented its history back to 1886 with three uniquely different programs for the State?
Why don’t the State's housing plans reflect the site's history even though local historians say that BAREC is the most important piece of agricultural history land in the CentralCoast and it should be on the national historical registry?
Why don’t they support what BAREC represents (quality of life issues like: urban agriculture and horticulture, healthy food especially for children and seniors, our history, open space in the Valley floor where the population density is the greatest and, therefore, there is the most need for open space, urban environmental issues like drought and chemical reduction and soil health, the education of gardening (the country's number one leisure-time industry) and the training of gardeners, and a balance to the intensity of our high tech community)?
Why has the Silicon Valley Democratic Party united against these important issues for our community and supports in-fill housing everywhere in the Valley floor including on our historical BAREC land without balancing the housing with large open spaces and quality of life benefits?
Why are they supporting the State's developer in building high cost housing when the need is for low cost housing (note that they think that Santa Clara's Redevelopment Agency's six acres of senior housing will take the heat off the State developer's high cost housing)?
Why do they support housing when there are so many housing vacancies and a need for more diverse jobs?
Why do they support housing when housing loses the city money (“The City [Santa Clara] loses money with housing as it is costly to maintain it.” Geoffrey Goodfellow, Santa ClaraCity Director of Planning)?