Claycord – Talk About Local Politics

May 18, 2018 19:00 pm · 45 comments


This special post is “Talk About LOCAL Politics”.

Please use this post to talk about LOCAL politics, and keep state and national politics out of this thread.

Thank you, and be kind to each other.

Please Note: Users who use multiple names will be deleted. Please choose a name so others can easily chat with you. Users must provide a name in the ‘name field’, please do not use the ‘@’ symbol in the name field.

Badge1104 May 18, 2018 at 9:40 PM

Please vote PAUL GRAVES for district attorney! We need someone who will help keep crime low!

CDE Watcher May 19, 2018 at 7:55 AM

Claycord region of public education is a ticking time bomb. Whose hands are the cleanest for County Superintendent? Scrap the vote, make the elected Board hire for this position that pays above $1,000 per day.

THE BLACK KNIGHT May 19, 2018 at 9:38 AM

Fyi (from last week),

“Fyi May 18, 2018 at 12:59 AM

Easy enough to look up, go county website instead of stupid made up comments!”

If you would’ve taken the time to look, you would’ve noticed that I asked Mayor Edi Birsan a question, I did not make a statement! Mayor Birsan could’ve responded to my question, as he has responded to my questions and the questions of others on this forum for many years. While Mayor Birsan prefers that many of the questions posed to him here are done so off of this forum and in private, as he has stated here many times, myself and many other posters here prefer that those questions all be answered in public so that there is a record of what was said, otherwise it all too often turns into a worthless “He said/He said” or a “He said/She said” argument. An elected official should have no issue publically answering questions from constituents. All that I asked for was a “YES” or a “NO,” but INSTEAD MAYOR BIRSAN CHOSE TO NOT RESPOND! I truly hope that that answer is “NO,” but I’ll have to hear that from Mayor Birsan himself to believe it, NOT YOU!

During the 2016 election cycle for two available seats on the Concord City Council, THE ENTITES THAT RUN THE CITY OF CONCORD, those entities being THE GARAVENTA FAMILY/CONCORD DISPOSAL AND THE CONCORD POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION made the extremely rare, if not unprecedented decision to only endorse one candidate and only fund one campaign, that of Carlyn Obringer. That decision created the appearance of a “WE WON’T SUPPORT YOU, BUT WE WON’T OPPOSE YOU EITHER” agreement between The Garaventa Family/Concord Disposal and the Concord Police Officers Association and Concord City Councilmember and candidate Edi Birsan. When questioned whether or not he had entered into such an agreement, candidate and Councilmember Birsan’s response was to not confirm or deny, but to remain silent on the issue. Fast forward almost 2 years, and all of a sudden some of us that are in the orbit of The Garaventa Family/Concord Disposal and/or Mayor Birsan have begun to hear rumblings that The Garaventa Family, and/or their corporate holdings, and/or their Political Action Committees have paid off a portion of or all of his sizeable campaign debt. The Edi Birsan of today is not the same person that ran for a seat on the Concord City Council in 2010, or that was elected in 2012, or that was re-elected in 2016, and it is because of those “negative” changes that I have witnessed in him that I posed the question to him. There was and is nothing inappropriate or slanderous with asking Mayor Birsan whether or not it is true or false that his campaign debt has been paid off by The Garaventa Family or one of the entities tied to them! Again, I hope that it is not true, that’s why I asked the question, I was simply looking for a confirmation or a denial!

I never made a statement about Mayor Birsan last week I only asked a question of Mayor Birsan!

Well Folk May 22, 2018 at 8:30 AM

You left off Seeno…………most of the council is also in Seeno’ss pocket as well. if you are going to name names, then name them all buddy.

THE BLACK KNIGHT May 19, 2018 at 9:49 AM

Mayor Edi Birsan,

Is it true or false that The Garaventa Family, their corporate entities, their Political Action Committees, or any other entity controlled by them has recently expressed an interest in paying off your campaign debt or has recently paid off your campaign debt?

Lars Anderson May 19, 2018 at 3:41 PM

Yes, Edi is likely in bed now with the evil empire 0 Concord POA and the Garaventa ‘s – he would have never got the Mayor’s job unless he got down on his knees and crawled to these two overlords of Concord politics. Apparently it was a “If I can’t beat them, I’ll join them kind of thing”. lol

Lars Anderson May 19, 2018 at 3:28 PM

Transparent California, the public service web site that tracks the salaries of government workers in California, just added the 2017 salaries for City of Concord workers to their database. I invite Claycord readers to take the time to look at them, they well explain why the City of Concord is continually broke. Profligate out of control spending on city salaries, mostly at the PD, is the reason Concord is broke when the economy is bad, and broke even in when the economy is good. In fact, these figures show that Concord is a city steeped in cronyism and corruption – at a level that is probably unsurpassed in the bay area. Concord, without question, is the most corrupt city in Northern California.
In looking at the Transparent Cal figures I noticed patrolman Ronald Bruckert, powerful head of the Concord Police Officers Association, had another banner year, he made 80,000 in OT in 2017. In 2016 Bruckert made 81,000 in OT, and in 2015 he made 75,000 in OT, bringing his 3 year total to 235,000 in OT. If you put these figures together with his regular pay, Bruckert made 664,000 in salary over a 36 month period. But wait, we haven’t included his benefits, Bruckert’s pension and benefit package cost us taxpayers another 215,000 over a 36 months period, so Bruckerts total compensation over three a year period was approximately 1 million, one hundred and fifteen thousands dollars.
Bruckert, I should mention, is not in management at Concord PD. What position does Bruckert hold at Concord PD? Well – on paper – he’s just a patrolman. Think about this for a minute. The City of Concord paid a lowly patrolman – who supervises nobody, and likely has no more than a few junior college units for education, a little over 1 million dollars in pay and benefits, in just 36 months.
Why does Bruckert make so much money? Is he some kind of super-cop or something? In fact, the reason Bruckert is making this unbelievable amount of money – a little over a million in just three years – is because he’s the President of the POA in Concord. Period. The Chief of Police, who understands how powerful the POA is in Concord, is paying him off – trying to keep Bruckert – and other veteran officers happy, and I am sure Bruckert is happy as a clam after making a little over 1 million in just 36 months.
In fact, as head of the POA Bruckert has the “power” to remove the Concord Police Chief or the Concord City manager anytime he wants. Why does Bruckert wield such power? Because the Concord POA has put hand picked stooges on the city council – Hoffmiester, Leone, MCGallian, and Obringer – these people are all just errand runners and flunkies for the Concord POA. Their campaigns, I should mention, are paid for by Concord Disposal – the POA’s partner in crime, the other corrupt special interest group that controls the Concord City Council (the garbage company has had a no-bid contract to haul Concord’s garbage for better than 70 years).
Supposedly we’ve got some reform candidates emerging in this election cycle – like this Kenji Yamada fellow, who looks like a pretty capable guy, but I haven’t heard him make a peep about the out of control spending at Concord PD – which has destroyed the city budget – I didn’t hear much about this from this other ‘reform” candidate Hope Johnson either last election cycle. Both are or were petrified to take on this corrupt Concord POA, sadly.

Chicken Little May 19, 2018 at 3:49 PM

Pretty wild imagination you have there, because you don’t know squat.

Hope Johnson May 19, 2018 at 4:31 PM

@ Lars Anderson
Do your homework. No one in Concord who paid attention during the 2016 campaign considers me “petrified” to take on the POA. I posted many times before you ever appeared on the Local Politics thread about the police department taking up too much of Concord’s budget and it was a major issue in my campaign for council in 2016. Watch any campaign forum video and you will see Birsan and I argue about it.

In addition, I recently appeared at the Council to argue against the new police substation at Todos Santos, as it creates three stations in a one block area around the park. I specifically stated that if it takes three locations to police Todos Santos, then something is not right about how the police are handling patrols. It’s wasted resources (Birsan agreed on that one).

Kenji has also posted here about the Concord police budget. He did a detailed spreadsheet of spending on police departments in various nearby cities in an effort to compare how much is spent on police on average.

Why don’t you come on down to a Council meeting yourself and show us all how brave you are in the face of the CPD instead of posting BS about the people who do?

Here is a copy of the relevant part of my my issues statement from 2016 posted on my website:
Restructure Existing Budget: Concord’s Police Department uses a whopping 59% of our city budget so we need revised patrol and enforcement structures that don’t increase costs to keep our neighborhoods safe.
Add Foot Patrols and Substations: Testing police foot patrols and substations in known problem areas allows officers to work with neighbors on minor crime and disorder issues such as panhandling and local drug dealing before they escalate. This was the case when the North Concord substation was active.
Specialized Training: Officers increasingly handle more than crime and need targeted training to effectively deal with the mentally ill, drug addiction, and domestic violence.
Increase Code Enforcement: Good code enforcement decreases blight and limits places for crime. Cared for areas with enforced rules don’t attract criminals, yet code enforcement is allotted less than $1 million of the police department’s $52 million budget.
Blight Fines: Enforce fines for owners of blighted commercial space to limit unsafe spaces.

Concord Mike May 19, 2018 at 4:35 PM

Lars, is this the data you are referring to?

Keep all three barrels up May 20, 2018 at 8:21 AM

Lars, please don’t start spewing things out of your mouth that you have no knowledge of. You’re just making yourself look foolish. Again.

Kenji May 22, 2018 at 11:22 AM

Candidate Kenji Yamada here, reporting in. Here’s the spreadsheet of police spending comparisons that Hope mentioned above. Edit suggestions welcome. It’s a work in progress.

Concord Mike May 19, 2018 at 4:31 PM

Lars, is this the data you are referring to?

R May 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM

I am reading some libel here.

Chicken Little May 19, 2018 at 6:17 PM

Yes, it seems that Lars likes to accuse people of things when he has no evidence to back it up. Not a very good idea.

long time resident May 19, 2018 at 5:08 PM

Martinez vote no on F. Don’t fall for the big money. If you want more space turning into cluster housing then vote yes on F. If you want to save Martinez vote no on F.

Lena May 20, 2018 at 11:53 AM

Clayton has now officially published its “politically correct” history in a section of the Clayton Pioneer called “Looking Back …”

Without the slightest embarassment, the city admits to applying for Redevelopment Funds to build bocce ball courts. Guess the rich think its some kind of depravation not to have specialize and exotic recreation provided by the taxpayers. They also display a photo of the “supporters” of the Grove Park.” I count nine people out of what … a population of 3,000 at that time?

It gets worse, but you’ll have to read for yourself about the decimation of the original reason incorporated, and the way those in power further their own self interest.

Lena May 20, 2018 at 12:39 PM

Well, DeSaulnier is up for re-election. Personally, I think it’s time he got a real job.

Fred P. May 24, 2018 at 7:43 AM

But then he wouldn’t have a forum to “issue a statement”….

I don’t think there’s anything he’s qualified for – certainly, anyone can repeat what the DNC/Pelosi tells him to say….

Concord Mike May 20, 2018 at 10:56 PM

On Tuesday, May 29, Concord City Council and Planning Commission will have a joint meeting described as a “Study session on cannabis uses and industry trends; and provide direction to staff on taxation, regulation, and permitting of cannabis.”

Yes it is a “joint meeting” about joints.

I will be there to make my usual “just say no” arguments to the council… And I am sure I will again be outnumbered by maybe 8-10 cannabis dealers, would-be “dispensary” operators, and cannabis organization representatives who will tell council how much money in taxes they can make by turning Concord into the epicenter of all-things-cannabis.

Would be nice if more people who object to the “cannabization” of Concord took the time to come down to the council meeting and speak up.

I wouldn’t object to a cannabis medicinal dispensary in Concord that is restricted to CBD products (edibles, creams, pills) that have little or no THC. CBD is the ingredient that is claimed to have medicinal properties.

It is the higher THC content edibles and smoking products that are psychoactive and addictive. Keep that dangerous stuff out of Concord.

AlwaysBePositive May 21, 2018 at 1:49 PM

The dangerous stuff is tobacco and alcohol. Far more people die from these drugs than cannabis. What exactly is it you are afraid of? The chance that some of your neighbors will find something that allows them to move away from opiods? Do you like to drink, but don’t want others that don’t drink to have a substance they like? What is your deal?

Forsythe May 22, 2018 at 9:10 AM

The issues may seem complicated, but the bottom line is simple: marijuana is not family friendly. It is bad news.

More users mean more addicts. About 1 in 9 users become addicts. In teens, the number jumps to 1 in 6.

If there are riches to be made, ask yourself why? Without repeat business (lots of users) no one would be getting rich.
If you care about educational outcomes, be aware that marijuana impairs the ability to learn. The result? Higher drop-out rates and lower grades.
User’s have double the risk of a car accident. Testing for impaired driving due to pot use is difficult.
Taxes will not pay for the increased social costs of more users. Alcohol and tobacco studies have found that for every dollar gained in taxes, we spent $10 in social costs.
In places that have experimented with legalization, marijuana use and associated problems have skyrocketed. The Netherlands, the U.K., and other countries, after experiencing a wave of increased use, are now reversing their policies.


Kenji May 22, 2018 at 11:28 AM

Mike, I will again object to the lack of acknowledgement in your remarks on this subject of the fact that many Concord residents – not just representatives of business, organizations, or residents of other communities – are in favor of permitting and regulating cannabis businesses in this city on a similar basis to two considerably more harmful substances which are already legally sold in this city: tobacco and alcohol.

We have a children’s playground in Todos Santos. Less than two hundred feet away is a business where adults consume an intoxicating substance for recreational purposes. That business is Hop Grenade. The entrance of EJ Phair, where recreational alcohol is also sold and consumed, is about 270 feet from the same playground.

Where is your objection to this?

Hope Johnson May 23, 2018 at 12:15 AM

One thing is for sure, Concord Mike is correct that the city really wants the cannabis tax money. Staff had using the potential tax money from cannabis as a recommendation for the fiscal budget this evening at the council meeting. Councilmember Hoffmeister said she didn’t want to vote on that item because it’s coming before they even hold the meeting with the Planning Commission. Council continued voting on the item with the recommendation in it to a later date.

Concord Mike May 23, 2018 at 2:11 PM

@Kenji, AlwaysBePositive,

Your claim that alcohol and tobacco are less harmful than cannabis is incorrect, but it is a common misconception encouraged and promoted by the big cannabis lobby.

Abuse/addiction rates for alcohol and marijuana are comparable, and tobacco and marijuana smoke contain similar cancer causing agents . It is not harmless or benign when smoked.

Facts should matter, but for a lot of people, getting high matters more. Sad.

Concord Mike May 23, 2018 at 2:24 PM


Thank you for sharing that info. I watched your testimony on cable last night regarding the Hunters Point scandal (you made good points), but I didn’t watch the rest of the show. I will have to look at the video recording to see what city staff is up to.

My guess is the city staff has spent way over $200,000 in staff time, police trips to visit cannabis locations, etc. Over the last two years on this issue. Not to mention all the city council and planning commission meetings we have had to be subjected to when Concord has much more pressing issues to consider.

Randy May 23, 2018 at 4:25 PM

Sacramento held the Cannabis Cup a few weeks ago and raked in $200K for a 3 day event.

Lena May 23, 2018 at 6:10 PM

Randy, there are some things more important than money.

Kenji May 24, 2018 at 2:34 PM

Mike, my claim is not that alcohol and tobacco are less harmful than cannabis. It’s the opposite. Alcohol has destroyed many lives. Alcohol has actually killed thousands, and is still killing – not just liquor, but even beer specifically. Far worse than cannabis has ever done. I don’t think you can reasonably deny that.

Based on your continuing disinclination to call for Hop Grenade, EJ Phair, Tower Grille, and Vinnie’s to be moved out of their current proximity to the children’s playground in Todos Santos, I don’t think you believe in a consistent principle of “Businesses should not be allowed to sell intoxicating substances with significant potential harms within proximity of children.”

Anonymous May 21, 2018 at 8:52 AM

We also see the City Manager makes about the same salary as the President of the United States. The Chief of Police is within a few bucks of the salary paid to the Chief in LA, a somewhat bigger department then Concord.

Seems like I remember voting to raise the sales tax to save the Police Department .

Frankly I have a hard time getting too upset over a beat cop making a bunch of OT and I’d like proof that it’s a reward for being President of the POA. I’m a lot more upset over executive salaries .

Hope Johnson May 21, 2018 at 9:45 AM

Concord City Council plans to give itself a 4% raise – on agenda for tomorrow, May 22.

Silva May 21, 2018 at 10:50 AM

Gee, I can’t imagine if they’ll pass it.

Concord Mike May 21, 2018 at 12:46 PM

How about an alignment of interests?

Council gets the same increase the average concord resident earned in the prior year. Not a penny more.

Hope Johnson May 21, 2018 at 1:16 PM

Good idea, Concord Mike.

Hope Johnson May 21, 2018 at 9:48 AM

The proposed soccer stadium (15,000-18,000 seats) near Todos santos downtown is also on the agenda. Staff plans to explore its use as a convention center and close the Concord Pavilion.

Well Folk May 22, 2018 at 8:28 AM

Why on earth does Concord need a 15,000-18,000 seat soccer stadium? Is it getting a pro team. And why does Concord need a convention center? Concord is not a destination, not close to a major airport and there is no night life. No convention goers will not take a 45-60 minute BART ride to get here.
There are a whole lot of people stuck on stupid when it comes to the running of Concord. Lots of pipe dreams with little to no reality

Hope Johnson May 21, 2018 at 1:18 PM

Tomorrow, May 22, the Concord City Council will be considering granting a 12-month extension of time for Lennar to negotiate the Development Agreement at the Concord Naval Weapons Station. Following is the text of the email I sent to Council requesting an extension be delayed until we learn further information from the investigation of falsification of radioactive soil samples.


—–Forwarded Message—–
From: Hope Johnson
Sent: May 21, 2018 12:57 PM
To: “”
Cc: “” , City Clerk , “” , “” ,,,,,
Subject: request to continue extension of CNWS negotiating agreement with Lennar to later meeting

Dear Concord City Council:

I write to urge you to continue the decision on a 12-month extension to negotiate the Development Agreement with Lennar at the Concord Naval Weapons Station (Item 10a on the May 22 Council meeting agenda) to a later meeting.

Need further info on soil sample falsification first
Council should not make a decision on such a lengthy extension before additional information is available on the investigation into the falsification of radioactive soil samples by Tetra Tech at Hunters Point. All of the same parties are involved at the CNWS as at the site in San Francisco. Any entity or individual could be found to be involved over the next few months, including Lennar or Five Point or their employees.

In fact, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors is facing the consequences of radioactive contaminated soil from Hunters Point being shipped to the Keller landfill in Pittsburg. The county has confirmed this happened and is in the process of its own investigation. A preliminary report to the Board is scheduled for June 5. This situation is unfolding in our own backyard, and it would be irresponsible for the Council to extend the negotiating process before at least this information is available to the public. Remember, contaminated soil from the CNWS is also being shipped to Keller by Tetra Tech, the same company that falsified soil samples at Hunters Point.

Concord should not be locked into a long-term agreement with Lennar when such a serious health and safety matter for residents and workers is pending investigation. Council should continue consideration of the extension closer to the end of the current agreement in July when more information is likely to be available. If needed, shorter extensions could be granted in July until more investigation information is available, public trust and confidence has been restored in the parties cleaning the CNWS, and we are certain contaminated soil will not be improperly shipped to the Keller landfill in Pittsburg..

Consider possibility of local control over development being removed
Before granting a 12-month extension to negotiate, Council should consider that there are attempts being made to take away local control of development near transit. Local governments could be forced to accept the development plans of BART, and potentially developers, without restrictions. This is problematic enough alone as we try to maintain quality of life for current residents, but is an extra concern when there is the possibility that entities involved here may have colluded to falsify soil samples.

More information on the investigation and these State bills needs to be revealed before an extension is granted.

Specific Plan is not dependent on Development Agreement
Staff’s memo recommending the 12-month extension implies that the need for an extension is related to the establishment of the Specific Plan and the addition of the USCG and BART properties. This is not accurate.

Nothing prevents the ideas for the CNWS Specific Plan from moving forward if the decision to extend the negotiation of the Development Agreement is delayed. Development agreements are frequently negotiated well before specific plans are completed. This seems especially true in this case since Lennar does not have any negotiating rights to any more than the first phase of the development while the Specific Plan covers the entire CNWS project.

The same is true for the USCG and BART properties. Lennar is not the developer for either of these properties and the development of these properties is not subject to the Navy turning over the land for Phase 1 of the CNWS. The actual construction at the USCG and BART properties may be dependent on Lennar starting the infrastructure on the CNWS, but this will not affect the ability of those properties to be planned.

Council needs to consider the seriousness of the next few months during the investigation of soil falsification at Hunters Point, and delay consideration of the extension to Lennar. The specific Plan will not be jeopardized and the health and safety of Concord and Pittsburg residents and future workers at the CNWS are at stake.

Must require separate Lennar deposit to pay Concord staff if extension granted
Should the Council choose to grant the extension to negotiate now or at a later date, Lennar must be required to provide a separate deposit to cover payments it makes to Concord to reimburse the city for staff time spent on the Specific Plan.

A deposit by was required to reimburse costs incurred by the City of Concord for the Development Agreement. No such deposit was required when Lennar agreed to pay for Concord staff time to work on the Specific Plan. This means the public, as well as Councilmembers, have no real way to track who is being paid by Lennar and how much. For example, we don’t know if the City Manager has been paid by Lennar or not, if there has been other expenses paid such as travel or meals, or if all the staff time for CAC meetings are paid for by Lennar. If the Specific Plan is now expected to be ongoing, this needs to be remedied. Lennar should deposit a specific amount with the city to cover payments to staff related tot he Specific Plan, and each and every dollar paid to staff should be accounted for. If additional money is needed in the future to cover expenses, the matter should be placed on a Council agenda for additional deposit money to be requested with a detailed explanation of where the money went and why more is needed

There should not be an open-ended opportunity for Lennar to provide money to Concord staff.

Request Lennar refrain from contributions in the community during negotiations
The original negotiation agreement prevents Lennar and related entities from making campaign contributions to Council members during the negotiation of the development agreement. Since staff claims this agreement is now tied to the Specific Plan, Lennar needs to stop making monetary contributions in the community.

The public has no idea if Lennar is making these community contributions at the request of staff or Councilmembers. Lennar may be contributing to Councilmembers’ or staff’s pet projects or neighborhoods in exchange for what it wants to be in the Development Agreement. The CNWS project is too important to be decided on anything but the merits of the proposed benefits for Concord. The public shouldn’t decide if the Specific Plan or Development Agreement is the best deal for Concord based on how much money Lennar has handed out, and neither should staff or the Council. This type of community contribution may be legal in California, but in most states it is not and is considered bribery. Concord needs to be certain the CNWS deal is the best possible deal on its merits, and put a stop to Lennar handing out money to curry favor in any way, and include this in writing in any extension of time to negotiate.

Council must delay any lengthy extensions of time to negotiate with Lennar until more is known about the falsification of soil samples in order to protect public health and safety. Further, Council must take responsibility that Lennar is not able to pay to play through extensions of time, unregulated payments to city staff, or contributions in the community requested by anyone involved in the CNWS planning or vote. This is serious. Health and safety are at risk.

Thank you for your time and consideration,
Hope Johnson

Hope Johnson May 23, 2018 at 1:05 AM

Vice Mayor Obringer tried to do the responsible thing and delay the decision to grant Lennar a 12 month extension to negotiate until the investigations into the falsification of soil samples provided more info, but the other Councilmembers, except Ron Leone who had to recuse himself from the vote, moved forward with the extension anyway.

No additional restrictions were placed on Lennar so it is free to move forward with 12 more months of pay to play in Concord.

Anonymous May 22, 2018 at 5:30 PM

Some airhead named Lynn Mackey is running for something. Her ads are right in the middle of stuff I want to read. No vote for her May 22, 2018 at 11:05 PM

Was anyone watching the Council meeting on the item on the soccer stadium downtown? Council allowed the developer to stand at the podium and add what he wanted in the motion while Obringer was in the middle of making the motion. Doesn’t seem ethical – the developer was basically writing the agreement himself. May 22, 2018 at 11:23 PM

Looks like staff is recommending placing an extension of Measure Q on the Nov 2020 ballot at one cent. Isn’t that double what it is now? Aren’t they supposed to be phasing it out?

Anonymous May 23, 2018 at 6:15 PM

Gotta pay for those fat police pensions somehow. Ballooning pension costs and police overstaffing are eating Concord’s budget. The city will have to either raise taxes or drastically cut services if they don’t deal with it soon. They’re opting for higher taxes.

KAD May 23, 2018 at 11:52 PM

As long as they keep giving raises to everyone, I will vote NO on the Measure.

Alice Bristol May 23, 2018 at 9:29 PM

Citizens of Clayton are you aware of the plans to build a 3 story Senior Care center at the entrance to downtown Clayton?? Look into it and then let your feelings be heard at city council meetings and planning commision meetings or email city council members from the city of Clayton website. This should not go through without the people of Clayton being aware of the details. And it is not a done deal yet. There was a meeting with the proposed developer tonight and their plans do not look like Clayton but every strip mall in every city. Ugh!!! Please tell a neighbor!

Lena May 24, 2018 at 3:06 PM

The proposed “assisted living” and “memory care” is all wrong for Clayton, not just in design, but in philosophy. Seniors do much better if cared for in their homes and that is the direction we as a society should be moving in caring for them. Who in their right minds would want to live out their days warehoused in senior internment camps? Please let the Clayton City Council know you are opposed to this development for downtown Clayton not just because it is large and obnoxious, but because Clayton already has a senior citizen residential development and one is enough for Clayton..

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: