Poll: Redwood City Voters Oppose Cargill Development By 57% To 28%
May 17, 2011 
12 Comments
“The more voters learn about this project, the less they like it.”
A new poll of Redwood City registered voters demonstrates overwhelming opposition to Minnesota-based agribusiness giant Cargill and Arizona luxury home developer DMB Associates’ proposal to build a new city on restorable San Francisco Bay salt ponds.
“The more voters learn about this project, the less they like it,” said Save The Bay Executive Director David Lewis. “Redwood City residents do not want to build on the Bay, even after the developer has lobbied them intensely for years.”
The poll, released in its entirety, found 88% of Redwood City voters are familiar with the salt pond development plan; 57% oppose it, while only 28% support the plan. The poll used the developer’s own description of the project as the “Saltworks 50/50 Balanced Plan” – even though the plan actually would develop well over half the site, where all development is prohibited by city zoning laws. After hearing a short list of concerns about the project, opposition rose to 64% to 28%.
For five years, Cargill and DMB Associates have bombarded Redwood City with tens of millions of dollars of mail, phone calls, and advertising promoting the project, pushed by a large full-time staff, consultants and lobbyists. In spite of that relentless effort, the poll found city voters are overwhelmingly opposed to the project, even knowing that it includes mixed use housing, businesses and schools, and land being dedicated for natural habitat and parks and recreation purposes.
The poll also found:
- 78% of respondents agree that 12,000 new homes will make traffic on local streets and freeways much worse
- 64% agree the Cargill salt ponds should be restored to tidal marsh for fish and wildlife
- 62% agree that, with future sea levels expected to rise, building on the bay is a bad idea
Urban sprawl, massive Bay fill and diking have already reduced the Bay’s size by one-third. Cargill and DMB Associates propose to build up to 12,000 homes for 32,000 people on Bay salt ponds that Redwood City’s General Plan says should “remain open space forever,” and that are a priority for federal protection in the San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge.
“These developers and the City Council should heed residents’ strong desire to halt this project and fully restore Redwood City’s salt ponds,” Lewis said.
The poll of 350 Redwood City registered voters was conducted by J. Moore Methods from May 11 to May 15, 2011, and has a margin of error of +/- 5.3%.
What do you think?
Thank you Redwood City residents! I too have the same sentiments about this undesirable project. I’m your neighbor living in San Carlos.
Austin
“As custodians of the planet it is our responsibility to deal with all species with kindness, love, and compassion. That these animals suffer through human cruelty is beyond understanding. Please help to stop this madness.” ~ Richard Gere, American Actor
“We are fellow passengers on the same planet, and we are all equally responsible for the happiness and the well-being of the world in which we happen to live.” ~ Hendrick Van Loon
“The worst sin towards our fellow creatures is not to hate them, but to be indifferent to them. That’s the essence of inhumanity.” ~ George Bernard Shaw, Irish Playright and Critic
“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” ~ Martin Luther King, Jr., Civil Rights Leader
This sort of destruction of the Bay has been in the works since way back when, in the 20th century. If the developers had gotten their way, the Bay today would be just a channel from the Ocean to both the North & south bays. All one has to do is look at Foster City, which I believe was the last large development built into the bay, to see what it would look like. Let Cargill/DMB build, then all the others will come out of their holes wanting to do the same. With the Climate changes that are in store for the World, this plan takes on added stupidity of the Century idea.
Thank you for all your work to save the Bay.I’m afraid if they are allowed to build, the next generation of taxpayers will be paying the price of their folly.
Living directly across the Bay from the project site, I feel I’m entitled to make my voice heard.
We’re all Bay Area residents and the effect on the Bay will be felt regionally. I sincerely believe the Bay Area is better off with more wetlands than it is with more housing projects. The increase in population cramps us all and we know that air pollutants along the peninsula drift more often over to this side of the Bay than vice-versa.
We should be looking for ways to mitigate the effects of climate change not creating more problems that will need fixing later or adding to the global warming burden.
California is one of the most diverse states in the union. What makes it that way
is its mountains, deserts, and wet lands. These areas must be protected and preserved. Don’t let them be destroyed by some large company, in order to make money.
I am still opposed to the Cargill proposed project. One, it is against the zoning laws, and I am opposed to variances to the zoning–particularly if the land is environmentally sensitive. Two, projected sea level rise appears to make this a silly idea. Three, the Bay Area is already populated more than our resources (transportation, roads, air quality, jobs) allow for. Building new housing just encourages a greater population in an already overcrowded and over-stressed region.
We have lost almost all the wetlands in this country and also around the bay. Wetlands are not just important for wildlife but also for our well being. The salt ponds should be restored. We do not need more single homes in the bay area which will be sensitive to floods and earthquakes and on top of everything else are far away from decent public transportation.
Not only is the assault on the Bay a shameful example of greed, it also is without rational justification. California and the Bay Area are losing potential home buyers at an accelerating rate. And this is not a temporary condition. There isn’t a pressing need for addtional housing. And this economic “sinkhole” has yet to reach its half life.
I believe that KQED members should contact the station and tell them that accepting commercials from Cargill is in direct opposition to the professed philosophy of PBS and that membership will not be renewed as long as Cargill is named as a sponsor. I am doing that.
Hello Frances,
Apologies for the delay. We had an issue with our comments posting. Your comment is now posted to the blog. Thanks for reading!
Best,
Monica
Natural habits around our globe are disappearing at an alarming rate. There are countries with little resources to fight encroaching development. Here in the bay area a mecca of possibilities exist.
As a friend of the Shorebird Nature Center and a founding member of “EAST” Essential action street theater. I do outreach education regarding the 3 P’s and the impacts on birds,animals and water sources.
I strongly agree with SAVE the BAY. We need to preserve as much of the natural habit as possible if and when ever we can. Millions of people live around the bay while it continues to diminish in size.
Wetlands are a vital source to an extensive ecological system which serves a variety of birds, wildlife and plants including fish,amphibians,crustaceans etc; which depend on their survival.
According to the EPA
http://water.epa.gov/type/wetlands/fish.cfm
1/3 of US threatened endangered species live only in wetlands.
U CAN DO IT REDWOOD CITY!!!