SEPO Rebuttal to BIA President and CEO
Note: The following is in response to a letter that was submitted to Fresno's Mayor and Councilmembers by Michael Prandini, president and CEO of the Building Industry Association. The letter was published on The Business Journal on February 2, 2024 and can be read here.
On behalf of property owners in the Southeast Development Area, we submit the following rebuttal to the arguments Building Industry Association President Prandini sets forth in this article:
The will of the taxpayer and property owners in the area should take precedence over the money changers—whose interests are only profit at the expense of the property owners who overwhelmingly oppose this project. City officials are representatives of the people, not dictators who impose their wants and desires. The decisions should not be made according to the flow of money. It’s time to lock the back doors to prevent the lobbyists from buying their will. Our water, our air quality, our farmland, our freedom to choose our own way of life should come first—not profit for the few.
The opposition to this project has been growing ever since it was first introduced and formerly known as SEGA. There is substantial push back, and the fact that this piece of information was not acknowledged, sheds some light on why Prandini is so intent on making his letter public. It seems evident that he has some skin in the game.
Prandini notes that “work on the SEDA specific plan has been ongoing for more than 10 years.” While this is correct, he fails to recognize that the main reason for the elongated duration is that it is and was a poor plan conceived without any research. Over this period of time, city staff hasn’t put forth any effort to modify or improve it, but rather committed all of their efforts to developing a strategy to implement it. Rushing the process, or skipping steps and adopting SEDA nullifies all the reasons these safe-guards exists.
Furthermore, the approach suggested in his letter, to address the public infrastructure and related financing challenges after the EIR is certified and the plan adopted is preposterous. This would be the same approach that was used to pass the “Affordable Care Act” and then reading it to find out what it contained. We all know how that has turned out and continue to live with the devastating results today.Prandini also noted on behalf of the BIA that they believe “failure to adopt a specific plan for SEDA will eventually bring development in the city to a standstill, limit housing opportunities and, thereby, drive up the cost of housing.” Once the plan is adopted, members of the BIA will lobby and argue to minimize their contribution to the infrastructure cost.
The developer efforts to transfer the cost back to the city means that the citizens of Fresno, regardless of the area that they reside in, will bear the brunt of this financial obligation. Just to subsidize the profits of a few well-connected developers. If SEDA is adopted before the financial obligations are designated, there will be no turning back and the public will have no means to avoid the increased monetary burden. Much like the High Speed Rail fiasco, Fresno residents will pay an enormous price for this project in the long run.
For these precise reasons, the SEDA plan shouldn’t be adopted. There are glaring deficiencies that the city has failed to address and adoption of SEDA would only facilitate inadequate solutions to the problems. The city created this problem. SEDA can’t fix it.Another erroneous claim from Prandini is that “the lack of a tax-sharing agreement between the city and the County of Fresno” will also likely “restrict or limit growth in the city in the future.” While the tax-sharing agreement is preferred, it doesn’t stop development.
Lastly, infrastructure, water and sewer are glaring deficiencies in the plan. That, we agree on, Mr. Prandini. And for that reason alone, SEDA should’t be adopted. The city has smeared lipstick on this project for well over 15 years and unfortunately, it is still a pig. Casting a blind eye to SEDA's problem’s (including the compromise of food and water supplies for the metro area at large), doesn’t mean they don’t exist.In short, it is evident that Prandini and the members of BIA are concerned more with eliminating their costs and evading their responsibilities associated with the plan, thereby granting them the enjoyment of greater profits, while the people—Fresno’s citizens at large—would bear that financial burden.
As we move forward in our attempts to agree on a plan for this area (as far as we may be from reaching that goal), our objective, as property owners in southeast Fresno is to confront city planners, developers and representatives when they are overreaching their bounds. We are deeply concerned by the city’s carelessness and their lack of transparency as it pertains to this plan. We are equally concerned with the evidence in Prandini’s article that developers are treating it as a mere money grab. If and when citizens all across our city become the brunt of such missteps as we move forward, we will hold the responsible parties accountable.
So we will be inquiring of our city officials and representatives how they intend to respond to this type of pressure from the BIA. We will remind them who they represent in their office. Election is coming up and we are spreading the word to not elect those who are influenced by big money. We will also inquire about the donations the mayor has received and to which elected officials the BIA has contributed.We ask you directly, Mr. Prandini, how will the BIA benefit from the passage of SEDA (because it seems obvious that it will) and what has the organization invested into ensuring that it does?
For anyone else who is against this nonsense, we ask you to join the opposition. You can find out more information at sepofresno.com.