Susan Adams

Follow Marin Events

• HomeUpSt V ScopingSt V PostmortemSt Vincents Scoping meeting Sep 10thSusan Adams •
• Adams Amendment •

Paul Cohen stated early in the campaign he was undecided on the St Vincents development and that he was waiting for the EIR before he decided, knowing the EIR would not be completed before election day. Business sees big bucks and the unions see big jobs in the ST. Vincent/Silviera projects and are all going to be behind him for that reason only. This is not about "need" in the Cohen campaign, this is about "greed".

Two years ago the City Manager stated that the city needs more space to develop additional commercial zones for additional revenues. The City Council of San Rafael has followed his dictate to the letter and in the process has plans to developed all existing commercial zones within the existing city limits. East Francisco Blvd. development is almost completed and infill development is all but non-existent. There is no more space in San Rafael to develop and the city will now move further north to find those additional commercial zones to develop. This during a time of 21% commercial vacancies in San Rafael.

Paul has been a major player in these developments and has not once voted against a development in San Rafael.

To his credit he did work to get some affordable housing in the infill areas of downtown San Rafael, however it was too little and will not alleviate the shortage of affordable rental units in town.

Shapell has funneled money into Paul Cohen's campaign through Cynthia Murray. You knew of Shapell's history in the East Bay of usurping public opinion and contributing campaign funds to specifically targeted supervisors and elected officials to pass their gated community developments.

As far as creating coalitions on the board. Some have stated Susan will not be able to work with a board that she has suggested should take a 16% salary cut. Those people do not know politics. When the campaign is over the work of being a supervisor will begin. Issues are decided by supervisory votes on a day to day basis and creating majorities for an issue is only a two vote deal. After supervisors vote, the issues align themselves with the supervisors specific goals. District needs override any previous issues and they move on. Having a vendetta against one supervisor would do nothing but hurt your agenda. It just doesn't play out that supervisors would not work with Susan or anyone elected to office no matter what their campaign promises were. It would not be politically prudent to ostracize the one vote you might need to help pass your proposals.