Building up to 945 homes at the Napa Pipe site took a step forward Wednesday as the Napa County Planning Commission voted to recommend the Board of Supervisors allow that.

But the larger questions of whether supervisors will allow that — and when they’ll render a decision — loomed over Wednesday’s meeting, which about 70 people attended.

The Planning Commission voted 3-2 to recommend the supervisors adopt general plan and zoning ordinance amendments that will allow between 700 and 945 homes to be built at the 154-acre site, which sits just south of the city of Napa along the east banks of the Napa River.

Commissioners Mike Basayne, Terry Scott and Bob Fiddaman voted ‘yes,’ while Commissioners Matt Pope and Heather Phillips voted ‘no.’

Their recommendation echoed one put forward by county planning staff; the site’s developers proposed building 2,050 homes.

The vote shifts the action to the Board of Supervisors, which has pledged to tackle the issue this year, and possibly as soon as mid June. The county is working to find space for the meeting to accommodate the large number of people expected to attend.

The board will vote whether or not to adopt those general plan and zoning ordinance amendments.

Supervisor Bill Dodd said at a candidate forum last month that he favored the 700-945 home proposal, while Supervisor Mark Luce said he supports a 350-home plan included in the county’s housing element. Luce said that option is unlikely to be built, but is needed to prevent the state from putting those housing units in the county’s next housing cycle, which begins in 2014.

Supervisor Keith Caldwell said at the forum that he still needed to make a decision. Supervisor Brad Wagenknecht has been opposed to the project, while Diane Dillon has raised skepticism about it. Wagenknecht and Dillon voted in 2007 against putting the project to environmental review.

Scott, Basayne and Fiddaman had previously pledged to support housing at the site at the commission’s last meeting April 2, although they differed in the amounts.

On Wednesday, Fiddaman said he favored the developers’ proposal of 2,050, but eventually changed his position to get a consensus majority vote with Basayne and Scott.

Scott said the project represented an opportunity to replace a blighted industrial site with residential units that are needed in Napa County now and will be needed in the future.

Opponents of the project have criticized it for planning to use the groundwater beneath it, which runs contrary to the county’s general plan. They contend it could set a precedent for future groundwater use in the county.

Scott said the opportunity outweighed the concerns, and said it could become a model for housing in the Bay Area.

“That opportunity is greater than any risks or concerns I may hold,” Scott said. “We’re talking about the Napa that our children and grandchildren will live in. I hope there is a place for them.”

Fiddaman also dismissed the concerns on groundwater use, saying the supply has been used for more than 100 years for industrial purposes. He also didn’t believe it would set any kind of a precedent because the groundwater is underneath the site. A precedent would be set in allowing the developers to obtain groundwater that wasn’t beneath the site.

“The positives so far outweigh the negatives,” Fiddaman said.

Basayne said county staff and consultants hired to work on the project had allayed any concerns about it. He said building homes there would alleviate pressure to develop other areas of the county, such as the Agricultural Preserve.

Further, he said his vote wouldn’t sway on the news that the county’s latest regional housing needs allocation had plummeted, possibly to 74 units in the next cycle. The county’s allocation during this current cycle has been more than 600 units.

“... Some development will be needed to meet our county’s housing needs,” Basayne said. “This project embraces common sense and responsible growth.”

Phillips disagreed with that in explaining her decision to oppose the project, and said that it was no longer needed.

“The county is not in the business of building houses,” Phillips said.

Phillips said she preferred development occur within the city of Napa when it’s determined to be needed.

Pope said he also preferred to keep housing developments within the cities of Napa and American Canyon, which he said are adopting planning principles that would create the kind of dense, walkable neighborhoods the Napa Pipe project embodies. He also said he was concerned with its traffic impacts, how it would exceed the county’s growth limits and how it would use groundwater.

“We are essentially placing a new bedroom community north of American Canyon,” Pope said.


This story has been modified since its original posting to correct the commissioners previous stated positions on the project.

(60) comments

kck

[quote]misofrappacino said: "gogiants - did you read the article I posted?"[/quote]

THATS IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!A BASEBALL STADIUM, MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL IN NAPA. OH wait, Sorry, lost all my senses. OK go Giants. Sounds better then talking about useless houses clogging up the works.

jimihil

Hopefully the home pricing will be in alignment with the rest of Napa... otherwise, this project will effectively move American Canyon and Vallejo 10 mile north. I don't think most Napa residents want that... I know I don't!!!

5th Generation Napan
5th Generation Napan

I'd still rather see it paved over and high paying industrial jobs there, than houses with vegatable gardens in there sucking up the chromiam and heavy metals from the ground to eat!

Napin

When the earthquake hits that soil will liquify. The insurance companies know that and will declare bankruptcy when that happens. However, perhaps now is the time to build the state required low income homes that Napa has been avoiding for so long! Require 50% low income housing.

misofrappacino

gogiants - did you read the article I posted?

gogiants

misofrap... so you're saying that 1 man's findings who did research on the project provides more decisive information than the team of independent experts who worked for years drafting the Environmental Impact Report??? Sorry, I believe the independent experts who are the experts in their respective fields.

Residential is a good idea at Napa Pipe. I can't wait to live there!

109823

I don't live on that side of town (thank god) but I have had ocassions to be there during peak commute hours and it's a mess. I can't imagine what it would be like by adding all those homes and businesses to an already congested area. Hopefully there will be some individuals with the stones to reject it for good.

garretth37

Developers and business owner have come to California to build, expand and produce goods and services. People use to buy a lot and build they own home or hire out a builder, you had very small scale developements. After WW2 you did find a big industrial march to the cities, people could buy a home and raise a family and have car in the driveway, this is how I was raised. Now you can build those small single family homes because of tight land use laws. Lets see, Ag preserve, laws in against infill on the bay, on the hills, against the lot size, dwelling sizes, zoning small homes to big homes all sorts of rules, regs, laws. Why would you want to relcoate or even start a large scale industrail site when you know you can provide housing or even get a site near housing that can be built.

Cadence

Guess why and when these were written?

"We've directed our efforts to people who live and work in Napa city and county, but haven't been able to afford to buy," said Tim Wilkins, president and CEO of American Homes. "We have put together special programs and directed them to people who work in places such as schools, the fire and police departments, at Napa College and Napa State Hospital" and "The homes feature custom designed hardwood cabinets, granite countertops, stainless steel appliances, hardwood floors in dining rooms, living rooms and kitchen, crown molding, a wet bar, built in vacuum system and air conditioning."

The NVR, 12/5/2005, in an article describing the still mostly empty Apella Townhomes. Oops, now it's Meritage Villas. Must be the lack of water taxis on California Blvd??

reason-ator

[quote]BD4 said: "I'm sorry, the NIMBY's just tick me off."[/quote]

So you want to add a thousand more.

Sounds like you've thought it through.

reason-ator

[quote]napan123 said: "And I think water taxis are a fantastic idea! "[/quote]

The water taxis will be a failed vision.

We'll all be driving our flying cars by then.

misofrappacino

BD4 - here are plenty of facts for you - please read these comments by Michael Haley who did some extensive research into the project and its impacts:

http://napa.patch.com/blog_posts/napa-pipe-comments-for-the-planning-commission

- the water use story is flawed because the previous industrial use returned the water to the aquifer, whereas residential use will not because it will go into the sewer system instead

- using groundwater not only breaks our pact with agriculture but it will create a mess in terms of fighting over water - a problem we are blessed right now not to have because nobody gets the groundwater except for emergencies

- traffic story is flawed because it is based upon faulty numbers and also assumes high industrial use as a comparison, which is something that doesn't exist and wouldn't for the foreseeable future

Anyhow, please read more of MIchael's postings - he's done his homework. The project is a bad idea. And that's a fact.

-

Concerned Citizen

[quote]BD4 said: "Thanks Cordell.Napan123 - Thanks for providing some of the "FACTS" to those who need them.If even half of the naysayers would take the time to educate themselves about this project they might see another perspective. What do you want to bet that most of the posters here are over 50 and own their own "single family " home? You're all set aren't you? Forget about those who are working hard to own something.....anything! What do you care, as long as it doesn't impact your quality of life. I'm sorry, the NIMBY's just tick me off."[/quote]
WHOA, BD4...so, if people disagree with you; they're automatically "over 50...." Yeah, right! Read the other posts here...there is much to learn. Following YOUR (il)logic; let's just pave over the entire valley with housing to satisfy everyone who wants to live here. Guess WHAT?? Not everyone gets everything they want. if you can't afford to live here, move somewhere else. It's a free country, after all...

napavgirl

Little boxes on the hillside, Little boxes made of ticky tacky...

notpc

Just want everyone to notice that proponents of this project will never address the fire protection issue with this project. The county is dumping on the City of Napa and its citizens by forcing the city to subsidize fire protection for this urban sprawl. Some of these proponents still haven't figured out that this is a county project and the city is not responsible for fire protection . It just happens that the city has the closest engine and truck company and the city taxpayers are being robbed of the resources they pay for. You will never hear a proponent of this project a planning commissioner or Board of Supervisor address this issue.

napa333

BD4- Whats wrong with being concerned about things that impact the quality of your life . WOW , water taxis ,movies in an old drydock AND pie in the sky , a huge tax burden on the citizens of the city of Napa and a developer with pockets full of money riding into the sunset . It just does'nt get any better than this folks .

Cadence

Oh, so young people, hospitality folks and vineyard workers demand perfect construction and ideal parking (why parking? I thought these green young folks would be hiking and pedaling wherever they needed to go!)but amazingly, the demographic most apt to produce kids and need schools doesn't care about a school within their walkable community?

As you said, geez... I don't believe you and and I don't believe the developer's fantasy. If these perfectly constructed new homes are for workers, they'll be commuting in cars and they'll take their kids to schools in Napa in cars. If instead they become vacation homes, we don't need them. Ask your local hoteliers.

BD4

Thanks Cordell.
Napan123 - Thanks for providing some of the "FACTS" to those who need them.

If even half of the naysayers would take the time to educate themselves about this project they might see another perspective. What do you want to bet that most of the posters here are over 50 and own their own "single family " home? You're all set aren't you? Forget about those who are working hard to own something.....anything! What do you care, as long as it doesn't impact your quality of life.

I'm sorry, the NIMBY's just tick me off.

ruralresident

It doesn't matter which side of this issue you are on. This development is a gold mine for the developer and a huge tax burden and traffic nightmare for the citizens Corpocracy in action, right in front of your eyes.

Nancys

[quote]FireDog said: "I can't believe they are going to put homes on that contaminated site. Good luck to the people that are going to live out there. I worked out there for years, there is so much hazardous waste material dumped out there.Lead paint, gallons and gallons of hydraulic oil and solvents. It's been and industrial site since the 1940s, No enviromental watch dogs for the early years. You couldn't pay me to live out there!!!! I guess stupid is as stupid does."[/quote]

Nancys

Firedog, I couldn't agree more with you. my husbend,son and i all worked there, i know whats in that ground. i wish everyone that might live there "GOOD LUCK"

BD4

Notpc - I don't think I said anything in my comments about water taxis. But since you brought it up, do you have any evidence they would not be feasible? I don't.

Cadence - have you been in those townhouses on Lincoln? I have. Not a place I would want to live. They didn't sell because they are not so good construction to say the least & there are no amenities. When asked about parking the sales person said you could park in the parking lot at Coldwell Banker. Geez!

mar584

People have been coming here from all over the world to make a buck at our (locals) (natives) expense. Now we have to put up with even more traffic and more people. Our representatives don't rep us at all. They are always ready to do the bidding of the money outsider people.

Cadence

BD4, if townhomes and condos are typically more affordable and what young people want, why did the townhomes across from Lucky's on California sit empty for years????

Even baloney can be "well said."

napan123

notpc - just to point out the lack of "fact" in your own posts... the proposal includes 4 story buildings. The industrial building that exist on the property right now are 7 stories high. But the housing proposed is 4 stories.

Also, in regards to "facts" missing from many of these posts. The impact fees the developer has to pay are meant to cover the cost of fire, police, schools, etc. These are services that will be provided for using the impact fees if the experts of those departments in Napa deem them necessary. It is not up to the developer (nor should it be) to determine if the county should run a fire department there.

Same goes for schools, the proposal includes a 10 acre site for a school, its up to the School district to determine if its necessary. If so, then impact fees will cover the costs of building it.

And I think water taxis are a fantastic idea!

cordell

BD4: Well said.

notpc

BD4- Facts? Really? Do you truly believe that water taxis are feasible? Do you really believe these units in seven story buildings are going to be affordable for the hospitality industry and wine industry workers? Don't forget the homeowners dues to maintain seven story buildings with elevators, add that cost onto the mortgage payment. Do you believe that this is good planning when there are no county services that are close for fire protection? Is this a good deal for the city of Napa that will have to subsidize fire protection with the closest engine and truck? You may want to consult with the residents of Browns Valley who will see a reduction of available resources for their potential emergencies. This county planning commission and possibly the Board of Supervisors are setting a precedent for this county that mirrors the development that created the problems that the cities of Fairfield and Antioch have that don't go away.Its called urban sprawl which inflicts economic turmoil.

Concerned Citizen

Well, this is too bad...but it isn't a done deal...not by a long shot. The Supervisors must "OK" this...we have to make our feelings known. Can you imagine the absolute horrible traffic in an area where it is already almost impossible to naigate? This is an atrocityy

here's my suggestion: Stop cowtowing to ABAG...withdraw from the 9 bay area counties and align with the counties to our north and north/west.

Another: We will NEVER have enough room..this is a fact. No matter what magical plan is proposed; there will always be "this group" or that group thinking that their needs must be accomodated no matter what. Ain't gonna happen, folks.

If people don't want to commute, move to another area and work there. It isn't up to everyone else to (through taxes) provide housing. Through taxes, i say, because of all the services, etc. which will need upgrading/expansion...equals more $ our of our property taxes...with less representation.

This is a boondoggle and a very bad idea!!!

BD4

Obviously many of the people posting here haven't read the EIR or know anything about what they are talking about. Contaminated soil? to be removed. Ground water? The site has always used it's own ground water. Keep it zoned industrial? Fore pete's sake that property had been for sale for years with no entity willing to move their business there. So now someone has bought the property & wants to make something of it & people are in an uproar. Where were you when it was sitting empty for years? No one cared about it before!

Get the facts before making comments you can't back up. It's going to be built, so why not come up with contructive input.


reason-ator

[quote]misofrappacino said: "This project is a really bad idea."[/quote]

Which makes is appealing to all of the politicians in the area. They've never seen a bad idea that they haven't embraced.

Oddly, there is always someone to gain financially from the bad idea. It makes me wonder how many people are benefitting from the bad ideas.

I really think we need to investigate our leader's finances. Some of them have to have left their money trail uncovered.

The trouble with this bad idea is it can't be undone after the money has been collected. Perhaps their can be a clause in the agreement-if the water taxis and highway fly-overs don't materialize the houses have to be razed.

My guess is Rogal wouldn't have the money to fill his mouth.

Paddy
Paddy

[quote]GoDodgers said: "What's with the name calling? Atleast the Napa Pine project is bringing to light the need for housing in Napa. I am just hoping there will be enough units for everyone interested. In the very least, locals will flock to hang out there."[/quote]

Not if it takes 45 minutes to get there from Trancas. Imagine the anger and resentment this project will generate as you waste your life away in epic traffic jams. A trip to Kaiser Hospital in Vallejo, which once took me 20 minutes, may soon take 90 minutes. I can smell the lawsuits already.

misofrappacino

Oops - I meant, "Most of the homes in this proposed project are going to be in the 450K range, and only a fraction will be affordable".

misofrappacino

This project is a really bad idea. I hope the supervisors do the right thing and vote this down. It's been stated already, many times on this site and on napa patch; bad precedent, water issues, increased traffic, lack of infrastructure, and so on. Most of the homes in this proposed project are not going to be in the 450K range, and only a fraction will be affordable. That is, if the pretty plan touted by Rogel is built. But apparently, we have no real idea of what will actually be built there. The land is blighted and flood prone. We have so many homes for sale on the market right now here in the city of Napa - good, well built homes, in established neighborhoods. This napa pipe project makes no sense.

danfromnapa

Traffic will be bumper to bumper from Imola/29 to soscol and all the way down to American canyon. The EIR even states this.

GoDodgers
GoDodgers

What's with the name calling? Atleast the Napa Pine project is bringing to light the need for housing in Napa. I am just hoping there will be enough units for everyone interested. In the very least, locals will flock to hang out there.

FireDog

I can't believe they are going to put homes on that contaminated site. Good luck to the people that are going to live out there. I worked out there for years, there is so much hazardous waste material dumped out there.Lead paint, gallons and gallons of hydraulic oil and solvents. It's been and industrial site since the 1940s, No enviromental watch dogs for the early years. You couldn't pay me to live out there!!!! I guess stupid is as stupid does.

Sickothis

Fact: Young people can't afford a home here because of Prop 13. I'm not arguing pro or con regarding Prop 13, but it is the fact.

LynnseyAK
LynnseyAK

This is great to me - a little like downtown is supposed to be. I think the homes sound big enough for small families. I think the current problem with buying homes in Napa isn't the size, but the quality. Many young families would be able to purchase one of these NICE homes in a great area. This is NOT the case elswhere in Napa!

reason-ator

Sooo,,, we're going to build homes for people who won't be able to afford to work here, because we built houses in the area that would have provided good local jobs.

It would be just like Napa to pour fill in a drydock, build a cul-de-sac, and give it a nautical name. Hopefully, they'll fill it before the America's Cup comes here. It would be good to cash in on our stupidity.

WHen something doesn't make sense, there's usually money involved. I don't see any money on the top side of the table. Perhaps it slipped out of someone's greasy palm.

GuppyGirl
GuppyGirl

Overall happy with the Planning Commission's recommendation of Napa Pipe housing. Not everyone desires to live in a large home and many can't afford to live in one. I think Napa Pipe offers a great solution to this housing problem and Napans of all ages could benefit from it. 700-945 homes is significantly less than what was proposed, so I hope the developers' original vision is still viable.

Alta Heitzer

My opinion on this matter mirrors that written by Napa City Manager Mike Parness, representing the position of the City of Napa. Along with the City, I'm also concerned with traffic, infrastructure and other issues there.
Also, I don't have a warm and fuzzy feeling about the pristine nature of the soil there. My gut tells me that we may be setting ourselves up for more and bigger problems down the road, should residences be established there.

5th Generation Napan
5th Generation Napan

Theres no helping the new generations attitude of "I need to start a family and I want 2500 to 3000 sq ft of home at the start"! In times past when you started out you got smaller homes and expanded and built up. The developers now are building the big foot print houses and young families can barely afford them. The homes built are not small because there is no money in it for developers. The high density homes being built are not the nice appeling affordable single family home, they are apartments,(condo, townhome, and such)People in the past could afford the homes here because they HAD good paying jobs. Bring the jobs back local where you dont have to pay an arm/leg for communiting to the bay area to afford a home here. There are other places to build homes here but Mr. Rogal and Co. bought this place with the idea of a zone change and flip. There are too many cons and negative for this particular project, but most people are ignoring them. We need homes but this is the wrong place .

MyPopeValley

Napa and any UP Valley housing is mainly targeted towards the weekender or someone who could write off the home as AGriculture when they produce a drop of wine on the property.

It is always interesting to see the homes listed on the main page of the NVR website. Those homes shown are always affordable and geared towards the young families of Napa, aren't they?

BD4

Most youg people can't afford single family homes, which is what Napa is primarily composed of. Townhomes & condos are typically more affordable and maintenance is less. Look at the most current subdivisions going in. They are all high end single family homes. What young couple/family can afford that? This is a perfect project for the young and people who want to downsize from a single family home. I think the number of homes should be increased. With that few homes I would wonder if the project would be viable.

MyPopeValley

5th Geriatrics Napan-
Our local Children already cannot "afford" to own and live in this area. Why is that? Scarcity of homes or inflated perceived land value due to restrictions?
Fiddaman voted for this to keep any sign of affordable housing out of his area...UP VALLEY.

napan123

These smaller homes are needed here. There are so many people working in our restaurants, wineries and hotels that would love to live here but they don't need or want a single family home. This plan is innovative and a sustainable and will create a vibrant neighborhood for the working class, without having to step on the toes of our vineyard land or put pressure on infill projects that are out of character with existing neighborhoods.

Valleylocal

Finally some sense. Keep this moving in the right direction please.

Bauhausfan
Bauhausfan

[quote]ruralresident said: "divided asked, "Can we have an honest investigation on which billionaire's is behind this boondoggle ..."Corporate developers are behind it and they fund very powerful lobbyists. Corporate developers and their lobbyists are also behind the housing mandates. It's another example or corpocracy running and ruining our lives.Clearly, when our representatives do not listen to and represent the majority voice of the people, then our town is no longer our own; it is owned, by the moneyed interests.This is a very good reason to know who you are voting for, who they represent, and in whose pocket they sit."[/quote]

If the population of the state wasn't growing then the demand wouldn't be there and building more homes wouldn't be needed.

5th Generation Napan
5th Generation Napan

America as a nation is finally realizing we need to bring our manufacuting jobs and facilities back home. We are realizing that the money needs to be kept here and not sent out. But NAPA is still in denial! A perfect piece of property with river access, dry docks (already in place), Airport access, and access to the best shipping port in the world, is only good for some houses! Nieave, backward thinking at the best. Boom to Napa? Yah right, Rogal is changing the zoneing to FLIP the property,there are NO developers in Napa big enought to build even 500 homes so the money will go out to an outside developer. A couple of Napans might get a decent job for 2 years max. And we still are left with a high cost of infastructure left for the City to take care of, out of our pockets! Money in every direction is going OUT (except for a couple of Napa Pipe Backers)and people are buying into the smoke and mirrors. Keept it INDUSTRIAL ZONED! Otherwise your kids will never afford to live here or AMC!

Paddy
Paddy

Imagine Yountville with one way in and out dumping all vehicles onto Hwy. 29..... This is what Napa is faced with.

ruralresident

divided asked, "Can we have an honest investigation on which billionaire's is behind this boondoggle ..."

Corporate developers are behind it and they fund very powerful lobbyists. Corporate developers and their lobbyists are also behind the housing mandates. It's another example or corpocracy running and ruining our lives.

Clearly, when our representatives do not listen to and represent the majority voice of the people, then our town is no longer our own; it is owned, by the moneyed interests.

This is a very good reason to know who you are voting for, who they represent, and in whose pocket they sit.

bullylover

More houses in Napa? It wasn't that long ago that we had "brown outs" and we were in a big water shortage. And, the Planners want more houses? Walk to work? Will all the people who live in this new development be able to work to work? There will be enough jobs in this development to sustain all these people?

Mama San
Mama San

I don't usually sign ballot intiatives but this is one I would

divided we fail

945 homes? another short term solution for an long term problem. this is honestly looks like Copia 2, or the wonderful Riverfront condo's overlooking the ugly dirty river, or a nicer veiw of the JAIL. I love saturating the market with more homes, so our values can go lower. Can we have an honest investigation on which billionaire's is behind this boondoggle, and where will the money be funded from from private funds, or grants from the
US government. Sadly I feel this project is going to be an huge bust. and Im sure the banks that fund this project will be bailed out by the little people that they are looking out for....LOL but its no joke

Cadence

What a shame.

Hope those kids and grandkids who all want to stay in Napa will be content as low pay hospitality staff or vineyard workers because there is zero provision for them to have well paying jobs in the kinds of clean industries that pay well, the kind that Napa has not even tried to bring here. (Btw,
their low pay selves will not be able to afford the $450,000 townhomes.)

Or I've got it - they can all COMMUTE on the brand new, 4 lane hwy 12! That's it! They can commute to their mortgage-paying jobs and when the commute becomes simply too onerous, guess what? They can move closer to their jobs. Bye kids! And then their families can write boo hoo letters to the editor about being boondoggled.

vocal-de-local
vocal-de-local

This isn't a done deal yet. It still has to pass the BOS level. Some of our supervisors have backbone. I believe that Dillon, Caldwell, and Wagenknecht will vote against it and that Dodd and Luce will vote for it. There's still hope.

Napa
Napa

So it is proof that our citizen's voices are not heard for the cons of such an undertaking as Napa Pipe. Blowhards care more for the finacial aspect of rolling in the big money than they do for the underdog who waists their breath. Congratulations and welcome to urban sprawl and more congestion of our roads. Rogal got what he wanted now Napa deal with it you're on your own.

gogiants

I'm so thankful that our planning commissioners are recommending this project. Napa needs a place like this where people can walk to work or to the market, enjoy greenbelts and community gardens.

gizzi143

This is great news - Napa Pipe is the perfect location to plan for the future residential needs of our community. My only concern is that with the smaller number of units, will there be enough density to support the shops and restaurants and market needed to be truly the walkable neighborhood that was envisioned. I wish they would have approved the full project, but I'm happy we're moving in the right direction.

REPUBLICANKID
REPUBLICANKID

So it is as good as done Should bring in some tax money So the road repare tax should not be needed.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.