A new NICE rises from the mud
Let's not miss the point about last night's Son of NICE meeting in the parish hall of Our Lady of Mercy Catholic Church.
Forget attendance. It could have been better--26 signed in--but so what. What matters is who showed up: nearly everyone necessary for a new drive.
Forget that they often disagreed, sometimes vehemently. After all, what did anyone expect with Village Barbarian Richard Lompa and His Honor Josh Genser in the same room?
Forget also the arguments over the Gateway project, railroad "quiet zones," and other projects. They served to bring everyone face to face with the Point's unmet needs. (In other words, I disagree completely with my friend and fellow blogger Fred Arm.)
Ultimately, this meeting was about scouting a new coalition. And on that we have this headline: Jay Betts, who during the original NICE was Chief Opponent Richard Lompa's sidekick and principal ally, said last night that he could see the need for an assessment district to deal with parking. He says his first choice is to push voluntary work as far as possible. But his acceptance, conditional as it is, of any assessment district seems like a breakthrough.
Sure, NICE proponents still have a lot of bargaining to do. But if they proceed carefully--leaving out the known barbarians and bullies--they might piece together a credible, transparent plan. It might even persuade those who voted no the first time around.
Marsha Tomassi, who led the discussion, should be proud that she steered through the predictable disagreements and potential filibuster.
Comments
Ted,
I like your upbeat take on the NICE II "up from the mud" meeting the other night. Unfortunately, those of us hoping for a resurection weren't quite as impressed with the outcome. Marsha certainly should be applauded for her corageous and valiant effort and for so deftly fending off Lompa's viscous and barbarous rants. While things seemed to get off to a decent start with a relatively good showing, and a spirted discussion of the needs, wants, and desires of the town, it quickly devolved into an angry and accusatory exchange. I fear that as long as there are individuals so at odds with each others agendas in this town, progress will have to wait. It would be NICE to limit access to the discussion to those who have something positive to contribute, either in the way of ideas or attitudes, but then we would be accused of secrecy and scheming, which seems to be at least partially responsible for the first NICE's failure.
Here's my take on this whole issue:
I think NICE or whatever name might be ascribed to any Business Improvement District in Point Richmond is dead for the time being. It's going to take time for the mud to dry and the dust to settle, and Lompa and crew to find something else to set their bitter and unbending will against. In the mean time life will go on, businesses and landlords in the Point will continue to struggle with the status quo, and we can all watch as the many other Bay Area districts who willingly initiated BIDs flourish and reap the benifits of their forsight and unity. Maybe in a couple of years the dynamic will have changed sufficiently and a champion will rise to rally the people to push for a new era of progress and prosperity in Point Richmond.
I understand that after I left the meeting Connie Lompa made a comment that "Point Richmond is a company town (Chevron and BNSF presumably) and will never be anything more." I'm not even sure I know what she meant by this, but as long as this is the prevailing attitude then she's absolutly right. It takes a vision and a desire to change the desitiny of our town, and until we can all come together and make the required effort, we will not change that ideology.
Posted by: Andrew Butt | October 27, 2005 12:04 PM