Breaking: Planning commission approves mosque - Morgan Hill Times: San Martin

Breaking: Planning commission approves mosque

San Martin residents fill meeting places to express mostly disdain for plans to build Cordoba Center

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Related Stories


Posted: Thursday, August 2, 2012 5:45 pm | Updated: 2:59 pm, Thu Jan 3, 2013.

SAN JOSE - The Santa Clara County Planning Commission approved plans to build the Cordoba Center in San Martin – a mosque, cemetery and meeting place for the South Valley Islamic Community – at its meeting late Thursday afternoon, according to Hamdy Abbass, spokesman for SVIC who attended the meeting in San Jose.

The decision is a culmination of two back-to-back public meetings in Morgan Hill that unearthed anti-Muslim sentiment among San Martin residents, and drew counter opinions from others expressing tolerance.

County staff was poised to recommend that the commission table the decision on the Cordoba Center for one month, to allow more studies of a backup leachfield for the project’s septic system.

Though, that’s not what transpired Thursday evening.

“It’s a win-win situation for us and for the community because they’re going to get a good neighbor. We look forward to dealing with good neighbors,” Abbass said.

Abbass was “elated” after the meeting. He said the planning commission will recommend that another round of soil tests will be done, though not before the project is approved, but rather before construction begins on the land.

Hundreds of residents mostly from southern Santa Clara County attended two planning advisory meetings to discuss the mosque and cemetery proposal.

SVIC argued against continuing the planning commission’s decision and urged the commission to approve the project, as all previous environmental and impact studies support the proposal.

The meeting of the South County Joint Planning Advisory Committee at the Morgan Hill Community and Cultural Center Wednesday was notably more organized than a meeting the previous night on the same subject, but some of the attendees expressing public comments were more open in their fear of a Muslim presence in San Martin.

At Wednesday’s meeting Nancy Murphy of San Martin called the proposed mosque a “Trojan horse” to the rural, unincorporated town.

“The fanatics are in control of Islam, and they’re slaughtering Christians” in other countries, Murphy proclaimed in front of the crowd of more than 150 residents.

She was followed by a number of South County residents, many who explained that American mainstream Muslims are peaceful, and denouced the “bigotry” and “ugly tactics” that fuel some of the project’s opposition.

Morgan Hill resident Swanee Edwards said the county should be cautious on groundwater issues, but some of the opponents are using this and other complaints to disquise their prejudice against those who practice the Islamic faith.

“To cloak this obvious bigotry in building code and groundwater (concerns) is obviously disingenuous,” Edwards said. “What we don’t understand is what we fear.”

Members of the South Valley Islamic Community, the developer of the project, also spoke at both meetings decrying what they see as a thinly veiled effort to frighten residents and county staff into opposing the mosque.

Despite the scattered comments on the cultural rather than technical aspects of the project that the planning department is tasked with evaluating, many other residents raised what appeared to be honest trepidation over the impact on local groundwater of a septic system designed to handle regular crowds of up to 80 people, as well as San Martin’s first cemetery.

Donald Harley of San Martin spoke at Wednesday’s meeting, as well as Tuesday’s meeting of the San Martin Planning Advisory Committee. He explained Tuesday that the town, including his property that he purchased in the 1970s, has a history of groundwater problems, owing to residents’ legitimate fears of another manmade impact.

These include the perchlorate contamination by the Olin Corporation that was discovered in the early 2000s and affected hundreds of private local wells, and heavy flooding during a handful of notably rainy years.

Harley suggested moving the cemetery uphill from the site on the same property where it is now proposed, where buried bodies won’t be as close to the groundwater table.

Ensuring compliance with regulations

The Cordoba Center was first proposed by the SVIC in 2006, but stalled a couple years later due to a lack of financing. The project was resubmitted in December 2011.

Situated on a 15-acre property on the 14000 block of Monterey Highway, just north of the intersection of California Avenue, the proposal includes two ranch-style structures - a prayer hall and a community center - as well as a cemetery and open space. The southern and eastern edges of the property are at street level, but it slopes uphill toward the northwestern side.

The staff’s lengthy report on the project determined that the Cordoba Center proposal would have no significant impact on any of the areas of concern cited by the public, including groundwater worries even though the staff concluded that a more updated study on that question is needed.

The South County committee voted to support the staff’s recommendation to continue the project until the September meeting.

Committee member Gordon Siebert, who is a Morgan Hill council member, asked staff to contact the state cemetery and funeral bureau to “assure themselves and residents” that the Cordoba Center’s burial procedures are in compliance with regulations.

He added after the meeting that he was “somewhat concerned” about residents’ comments that addressed the religious rather than the land-use aspects, including some incendiary words heard by attendees leaving the meeting.

County staff said previous groundwater and soil studies throughout the areas where construction and digging are proposed illustrate the soil percolates slowly enough to keep any harmful materials from seeping into the groundwater. Plus, the top of the groundwater table is at least 17-feet below the topsoil, which is more than enough room to meet county and state standards.

Some residents, and even advisory committee members were confused about the percolation tests because some tests conducted at lower elevations on the site in 2006, when a previous developer proposed a residential project on the site, failed. As a result, county staff and the developer decided to “disregard” that project and focus on the Cordoba development, according to Ann Peden of the county department of environmental health.

The septic system and cemetery for that project are proposed at higher elevations on the property, and Peden said all those tests met health regulations. Plus, the county and developer “avoided” any activity at another corner of the property that was prone to flooding.

“That area does support a septic field and expansion field,” Peden said Wednesday.

‘Last minute’ decision by planning staff?

Proponents of the project wondered why the county planning staff decided at the “last minute” to recommend new tests on a section of the property, when all previous testing has already proven the project to be environmentally suitable for septic needs and a cemetery. Abbass said Peden’s history of the soil studies prove that no more testing is necessary.

“Are they giving in to the opposition?” Abbass wondered.

When asked why the extra tests and delay of the project was recommended days after a published recommendation for approval, planning staff said due to the “high volume” of letters, e-mails and comments submitted in the last few days they wanted to be “double sure” that the concerns were comprehensively addressed.

“It was a conservative decision - in the interest of prudence and public concerns, we thought additional testing makes sense,” Santa Clara County planning manager Kirk Girard said Thursday morning.

Wednesday’s meeting was decidedly more orderly than Tuesday’s. South County Joint Planning Advisory Committee chair Mike Wasserman, who is also South County’s elected representative on the board of supervisors, started the Cordoba Center discussion by urging public speakers to direct their comments to the commitee and not the audience, and said the body would “not tolerate” profanity or unnecessary crowd noise.

That contrasted with Tuesday’s meeting of the San Martin Planning Advisory Committee, which was characterized by boisterous yelling and constant interruptions from the crowd. At times, the meeting grew nearly out of control as attendees shouted from the audience against speakers whom they disagreed with, and applauded loudly with those they supported.

That meeting was at the Grange Hall in Morgan Hill, an unusual location for the San Martin committee — it was chosen by county staff in anticipation of the 170-plus who attended. The 186-capacity meeting hall was standing-room only, with people spilling out of two doors on both sides.

More than 20 people spoke during public comments at the meeting, with most against the Cordoba Center project citing the groundwater issue as well as possible impacts on traffic, noise, storm water runoff and flooding, and the Cordoba Center’s capacity to serve local needs in accordance with the county’s general plan. Some speakers even expressed unabashed fear of the Islamic community who plans to make the Cordoba Center their worship headquarters.

Several audience members displayed handmade posters at both meetings alluding to various complaints about the project, labeling its developers a “special interest,” and asking who would be held liable if the groundwater becomes contaminated.

While Sal Akhter, SVIC member and Cordoba Center project manager, spoke as the last public commenter at Tuesday’s meeting, the audience emitted a loud sustain of disapproval as he demonstrated the existing local presence of Muslim residents and activity in San Martin. Akhter was visibly and vocally upset at the reaction and many of the comments that preceded his, and directed many of his words to the audience rather than the committee.

“So much complaints and charges, I don’t where to begin,” said Akhter, who added he has lived in San Martin for 30 years. “We have followed every letter of the law, without a single request for a variance.”

Seated opponents of the project attempted to shout him down, particularly after he exceeded his allotted three-minute speaking limit and the committee allowed him to continue anyway.

“Time!” numerous audience members repeatedly and loudly shouted at the expiration of the clock. Dozens intermittently screamed angry responses to some of his comments.

Aside from potential water contamination, another resounding concern among residents and committee members was the project might not meet county general plan requirements that the project serve local needs in order to minimize unnecessary impacts from outside the community.

County planner Rob Eastwood at both meetings stressed that in the case of a religious institution, it would be nearly impossible and potentially litigious if the county attempts to link the project to the religious affiliation of those who live around it.

State and federal laws guaranteeing religious freedom and free speech would likely trump the local land use laws, he said.

Besides, SVIC members said they do in fact live and work in San Martin and areas surrounding the community. The SVIC has a core membership group of about 80 Muslim families in the south Santa Clara Valley area.

More about

More about

More about

  • Discuss

Rules of Conduct

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

Welcome to the discussion.


  • hollisterresident831 posted at 8:44 am on Wed, Aug 8, 2012.

    hollisterresident831 Posts: 34

    No you're not going to ignore everything I say, you are going to ignore THE TRUTH.

  • Billy Yancey posted at 8:47 pm on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    Billy Yancey Posts: 11

    Not gonna bother reading that whole comment. Reported for personal attacks and lies

  • hollisterresident831 posted at 8:38 pm on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    hollisterresident831 Posts: 34

    I used the word explain mister smart educated one. That doesn't require a question mark. You understand what I asked, now answer.

  • WilliamYancey posted at 8:22 pm on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390

    I don't see a question mark. Interrogative statements require them. I guess you were absent that day first grade. And never came back to school again.

  • hollisterresident831 posted at 8:08 pm on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    hollisterresident831 Posts: 34

    And also, you ARE trying to take away my freedom of speech! You allegedly reported me to the Sheriffs only because I don't agree with you! I have never threatened anyone in my posts or done anything against the law, thus you are reporting me for speaking my mind. You won't even tell me what comments of mine you reported, probably because you didn't. SO pathetic!

  • hollisterresident831 posted at 8:01 pm on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    hollisterresident831 Posts: 34

    William Yancey, again not answering any of my questions. Here's one, why is it that any country that isn't majority Muslim can co-exist with any other religion, BUT any country or area that is majorty Muslim CANT co-exist with any other religion. Explain it PLEASE and don't go around this question.

  • WilliamYancey posted at 7:34 pm on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390

    "...yet you report my comments to authorities, trying to take away my freedom of speech."

    That is such an excellent comment. It so perfectly captures your ignorance of the Constitution and the law and rights... there's just so much wrong there. I'd be hard-pressed to come up with a statement that betrayed such deep misunderstandings of so many things in so few words. I'm going to share that statement.

  • hollisterresident831 posted at 7:08 pm on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    hollisterresident831 Posts: 34

    Hahahaha Yancey, I didn't post any comment talking about violence anywhere. And I love how you claim to be so much for the constitution, yet you report my comments to authorities, trying to take away my freedom of speech. I have given you verses from the Koran, provided examples of countries in Europe that are going to **** because of Islam, and plenty of other things, yet you won't ever talk about anything that a mention. Please tell me exactly what comments of mine that you reported to authorities that they actually took seriously.

  • WilliamYancey posted at 6:26 pm on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390

    No, if you thought it was "just dumb," you wouldn't be demanding that I meet you in person, or hurling vicious insults. No, you are obsessed with me, to the point where you make up stories to yourself about how I'm other users that you don't like. If you didn't care, you'd ignore me. You wouldn't post enraged replies to me, then throw a tantrum and declare you're never coming back to this website and how you're going to pretend I don't exist. I understand what you're trying to do by pretending you're just laughing at me. But, you're not just laughing. You're preoccupied with me.

    Here, I'll issue you a challenge: Go one month without replying to anything I post or referencing me in any of your posts.

  • fredoliveri posted at 6:18 pm on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    fredoliveri Posts: 285

    I know I did yancey, but you are such an easy target. You can tell by all the others posts directed at you. As you can tell, you provide laughter. Back when you were beaverbutt and the horatiogalt I thought you were just pushing buttons. Then I realized you actually believed the tripe you were promoting. Then it became just dumb.

  • WilliamYancey posted at 4:30 pm on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390

    Okay, fred. Whatever you say. You know, I still have the screenshot from a week or so ago of when you said you were going to stop responding to my posts. You lasted about 36 hours. Good job.

  • fredoliveri posted at 3:51 pm on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    fredoliveri Posts: 285

    yancey, please not the word "laughter" in my post. No one is upset, we are to busy laughing.

  • WilliamYancey posted at 2:51 pm on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390

    Then why are you getting so upset? If I did nothing and nothing's going to happen, no one has anything to worry about.

  • fredoliveri posted at 1:26 pm on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    fredoliveri Posts: 285

    So you forwarded the comments to the "authorities." yancey, we know you did nothing of the sort. Why do attempt to cover one lie with another? The "authorities," give us a break from the laughter.

  • WilliamYancey posted at 12:04 pm on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390

    hollisterresident, you've never posted a single fact anywhere. You posted some hysterical nonsense about how all Muslims are terrorists and that if this project gets approved, you'll all be beheaded. I responded that was nonsense, and pointed you to the relevant provisions of the Constitution that protected people's freedom of worship in this country. You responded with more hysterical nonsense and violent rhetoric. So I forwarded your comments to the authorities. It's out of my hands now. But, again, keep carrying on like nothing's changed.

  • fredoliveri posted at 11:31 am on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    fredoliveri Posts: 285

    Who did you contact yancey in the law enforcement office? I will go down and talk to them. We all know you lie, so what is knew. No one likes you as you can tell my the rhetoric directed toward your posts. The Times rules of conduct do not apply to you.

  • hollisterresident831 posted at 10:32 am on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    hollisterresident831 Posts: 34

    WilliamYancey, please direct me to any comment I posted that I threatened anyone? Oh and also, please direct me to any comment you posted that actually responded to my facs.

  • WilliamYancey posted at 1:38 am on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390

    They said nothing about mine, fred. They said they would investigate the posts of people posting threatening comments. That's all I'm concerned about.

  • fredoliveri posted at 12:19 am on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.

    fredoliveri Posts: 285

    yancey, myself and others know that you are a pathetic lying loser and no one believes you. The police would laugh at your posts.

  • WilliamYancey posted at 9:38 pm on Mon, Aug 6, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390

    Believe fred if you derive comfort from it. Law enforcement takes seriously any extremist rhetoric, which the dispatcher at the Sheriff's Office agreed your language on here constituted. They informed me that they take seriously any possible threat to any group in the country, and that they are well aware of extremist views regarding the Cordoba Center. I don't know what their methods are, and it's probably best that they remain confidential. But, at the very least, I expect that they're gotten your IP and know where you're posting from. Again, be flippant about this if you want. But, the Sheriff's Office is aware of what gets posted here, and they're keeping tabs on you. That's all that matters.

  • hollisterresident831 posted at 9:04 pm on Mon, Aug 6, 2012.

    hollisterresident831 Posts: 34

    Fred, SO TRUE! Everyone hates him! All I do is spit out facts to him and all he can do is call me names and threaten me! He's wack and can't argue if his life depended it. He never answers any of my questions. PATHETIC!

    And Williamyancey, I'm still waiting for law enforcement to contact me.

  • fredoliveri posted at 8:53 pm on Mon, Aug 6, 2012.

    fredoliveri Posts: 285

    Holllister, you have to know that williamyancey did not report you and the law enforcement did not thank him profusely. They would have laughed him out of the office. Basically he is a coward who sits behind a computer spewing hate toward anyone who disagrees with him in violation of the MH Times Rules of Conduct which the MH Times ignores. No one likes him.

  • hollisterresident831 posted at 8:05 pm on Mon, Aug 6, 2012.

    hollisterresident831 Posts: 34

    Good for you William you reported me because you think I'm psycho. I actually know facts about Islam you don't. You're closing argument was reporting me. You totally won the argument LOL. Pathetic.

  • WilliamYancey posted at 6:48 pm on Mon, Aug 6, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390

    I'll let the Sheriff's office decide what should be done with you. Your over the top rhetoric has made you a target for law enforcement. I was thanked profusely for reporting you.

  • hollisterresident831 posted at 6:39 pm on Mon, Aug 6, 2012.

    hollisterresident831 Posts: 34

    ALSO William Yancey, you think that I should be watched by the cops because I don't like Muslims and so didn't the guy who murdered the Sikhs. Then shouldn't Muslims be watched by the cops too because of the 135 terrorists attacks and 663 people dead around the world in the name of Islam in the past 17 days? That's your reasoning. Wow.

  • hollisterresident831 posted at 6:19 pm on Mon, Aug 6, 2012.

    hollisterresident831 Posts: 34

    Also Yancey, there is no news article saying that the Sikh shooter was a Christian. So while you critisize everyone here who disagrees with you for where we get our news, please, tell us where you get yours?

  • hollisterresident831 posted at 6:11 pm on Mon, Aug 6, 2012.

    hollisterresident831 Posts: 34

    Yancey, you have to be the most ignorant person I have ever come across. There was no article stating that that man was a Christian. And if he claimed to be a Christian, where in the Bible does it tell you to kill others like that? NO WHERE. The Koran tells you to not make friends with Christians or Jews or you are considered "one of them." And if you are "one of them" the Koran commands you to kill them. You are so ignorant about Islam it's rediculous for you to even talk. So what do you think about the 663 people that have died so far during Ramadan thanks to Muslims? (you'll probably ignore this point in your response, instead you'll talk about how ignorant, evil, or psycho I am). Also, did I ever threaten to shoot up this Mosque? You're completely stupid. You gotta be on something put down the crack.

  • WilliamYancey posted at 12:03 pm on Mon, Aug 6, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390

    Maybe if you stopped getting your "news" from worldnetdaily and cnsnews, you'd have a better idea what was going on in the world.

  • WilliamYancey posted at 12:02 pm on Mon, Aug 6, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390

    Yes, you are. You were so quick to deny that he was a white, Christian fundamentalist, because, in your mind, white people don't do these sorts of things. Only Muslims do. You're a worm.

  • fredoliveri posted at 9:02 am on Mon, Aug 6, 2012.

    fredoliveri Posts: 285

    First reports were that it was a domestic violent act. News had it wrong. Indications are that he was or is a white supremacist with a filthy mouth just like yancey. This was a horrific event and I would think most Americans agree with that statement. I am not rushing to his defense or mocking the victims you low life liar.

  • WilliamYancey posted at 6:53 am on Mon, Aug 6, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390

    Yes, when white people commit acts of terrorism, it's a domestic dispute. Of course, that's another lie coming out of your filthy mouth. He was a Christian fundamentalist and white supremacist. But, being that you're also one, I'm not surprised that you're rushing to his defense and mocking the victims of yesterday's massacre. That's par for the course for you.

  • fredoliveri posted at 12:16 am on Mon, Aug 6, 2012.

    fredoliveri Posts: 285

    Gee yancey, as usual with your foul bigoted hate spewing illiterate rants you were hoping that it was those horrible Christians again. Turns out it was a domestic dispute. Do you ever get anything right?

  • hollisterresident831 posted at 9:41 pm on Sun, Aug 5, 2012.

    hollisterresident831 Posts: 34

    It is day 17 in the holy month of Ramadan and there have been 135 terrorist attacks and 663 people dead. In the name of any other religion no one has died in the passed 17 days. THIS IS WHAT IS GOING TO BE PRACTICED IN SAN MARTIN PEOPLE. I hope you're all happy!

  • WilliamYancey posted at 9:09 pm on Sun, Aug 5, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390

    "Waaahhh, I don't like the results of a poll, so I'll assail it for being unrepresentative, even though polls on websites are inherently unrepresentative. But. I'll ignore that fact when the results are to my liking."

  • Rikard Kilgaren posted at 7:28 pm on Sun, Aug 5, 2012.

    Rikard Kilgaren Posts: 46

    Houston – August 5, 2012

    It is really unfortunate that the Morgan Hill Times continues to promote the vitriol, comments lacking reason, and blatant lies and misstatements by many commentators (and columnists). The Times Poll Numbers regarding the Mosque are bogus – The Times should show the area the "votes" came from. I’d guess they are not representative of the people - in the area The Morgan Hill Times serves – whom are most affected by circumstances regarding Land Use and Planning in addition to Environmental Hazards. Interesting I have to "login" to read an article, or post a comment, but I can vote in The Morgan Hill Times bogus poll from anywhere in the United States!! How cool is that? The representation of the count by The Morgan Hill Times is patently false.

    Hopefully, some one will come along with a valid voice for ALL THE PEOPLE of Morgan Hill, not just the select few that The Morgan Hill Times is aligned with. The Morgan Hill Times continued alignment with, and de facto support of, any proposition put forth by the Council and City Manager, the County, and the State - without regard to the overall benefit to the community and essentially allowing unfettered dialogue from various folks - whom by printing and quoting in nearly every column - providing the appearance of "authority" is disgusting. And, The Morgan Hill Times ignores, out of hand, folks that have researched various issues and possess a reasoned opinion on various circumstances.

    But, I understand, no sensationalism associated with those that know what they are talking about

  • hollisterresident831 posted at 7:02 pm on Sun, Aug 5, 2012.

    hollisterresident831 Posts: 34

    What a shame this had to happen ): LET THE PROTESTS BEGIN!

  • San Martin Mom posted at 4:29 am on Sun, Aug 5, 2012.

    San Martin Mom Posts: 1

    • This entire discussion is ridiculous. The issue really has nothing to do with what religion the people in this proposed building follow. It's not like the Muslim religion is contagious or something. Honestly, if this is what that meeting was like, then I can see why the project was approved. So, instead of getting mad, get smart. Having a temper tantrum never solves anything, and, if it did, it wouldn't be in your favor - if for no other reason that to teach you all a lesson about infantile behavior.
    That said . . . I, too, am opposed to this establishment being built in San Martin. I have lived here for over a dozen years. We've weathered wells contaminated with perchlorate. We've tried unsuccessfully to be incorporated - in hopes that "projects" like this would not get thrown out here. And now this. This issue here is that the proposed graveyard poses a serious threat to our ground water. A large number of San Martin residents, myself included, are on well systems - not public water (part of staying unincorporated). I'm not sure how many times this problem has to be evaluated and this project denied before these people find another location - preferably one where there is a strong Muslim citizen base (clearly, that is not the case in San Martin).
    I will say this though - if this groundwater study suddenly produces different results, and it is determined that this is not an issue - the graveyard is "safe' - then that might be the appopriate time to start investigating who's in who's pocket (minus the temper tantrum). Let's not forget . . . I'm sure the only reason they are trying to locate the mosque here is because the project has yet to be approved anywhere else. They are persistent, I will give them that. But, again, why not locate your fellowship somewhere it is wanted, even better, "needed". I can only imagine the issues these people will have to deal with if they actually manage build it here. The tagging, the rudeness, more temper tantrums. I can't for the life of me understand why they want to be here so badly (and I'm not trying to draw a parallel between self-destructive behavior and Muslims - really).
    And, where is Mr. Wasserman during all of this? Does this not fall under his 'jurisdiction'? Wondering where he stands - my thought being that his opinion might actually hold some weight - more so than a room full of worked up toddlers. Then again, as a good little politician, he would more than likely take the p.c. route. Might lose some votes that way though. Something to consider.
    I'll be so glad when the day comes that San Martin is no longer the go-to-place (aka dumping ground) for every pedofile, illegal immigrant, and unwanted/unsafe/unhealthy "project" in Santa Clara County. If they're not careful, they're going to run every tax-paying, law-abiding legal voter out of the area. Then what will San Martin and South County be left with? Too scary to think about . . .

  • tacostuffer posted at 11:42 pm on Sat, Aug 4, 2012.

    tacostuffer Posts: 4

    This can't happen here, right ? (see below from this week's news) I think there is more at play here than than simple country people expressing "anti-Muslim sentiment" ... Angela, you're right, hatred does not make good neighbors, and I don't see much in these articles that isn't pure unadulterated (pun intended) hatred.

    (I hope these news sources aren't too flakey or biased toward the conservative end of the spectrum to be considered reputable).

    To me, the most chilling sentence in the NY Times article: "In silence, more than 300 people from the town watched."

    SVIC - what do you have to say about this ? Do you understand San Martin's "bias"?

  • Angela posted at 9:29 pm on Sat, Aug 4, 2012.

    Angela Posts: 1

    They say keep your friends close and keep your enemies closer. Let them build the mosque. Then if you have doubt, from time to time go visit and see/hear what they are preaching. This way you will know if it is about bigotry or whatever. I hope the mosque serve the community as far as facilities are concerned. It should have interfaith meetings, feed the poor, offer counselling, recreation (i.e. a gym) etc. for the kids. Hatred never made good neighbours.

  • WilliamYancey posted at 10:13 pm on Fri, Aug 3, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390


  • tacostuffer posted at 9:40 pm on Fri, Aug 3, 2012.

    tacostuffer Posts: 4

    Wow William, really ? Please take your name calling elsewhere.

  • citizen9 posted at 1:02 pm on Fri, Aug 3, 2012.

    citizen9 Posts: 2

    Second to last line should down. My apologies

  • citizen9 posted at 1:01 pm on Fri, Aug 3, 2012.

    citizen9 Posts: 2

    As a resident of San Martin...and a believer in our inherent freedoms....I am against the plan for one reason...the water issue. If you do not live here, it is likely you do not understand the situation.
    I have lived in surrounding areas and the concerns here are valid. We have a high water table, water quality issues, and very expensive water. The idea of a this location within San Martin is very disturbing. No matter who is buried there.
    This is not based on fear of race or religion...but of impact to those already in San Martin. It is a heavy rural area and with that water use is of key interest.
    Before anyone spouts off about bigotry...realize you are using too easy of an avenue. That is not...I repeat not...the central issue of why residents of this down oppose this development.
    A place of worship is fine...just not a burial site.

  • WilliamYancey posted at 11:53 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390

    That's unfair to San Martin. Really, that describes the entire South County.

  • Gettin goog posted at 11:25 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.

    Gettin goog Posts: 50

    Let the fun begin!! When this area is taken over you will then get it.

  • WilliamYancey posted at 9:53 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390

    I hope there's good surveillance footage of the red-faced, screaming bigots who attended the previous meetings. It's going to be one of them who attempts to vandalize the property once construction starts, and if not, they'll know who's responsible. Keep on eye on those lunatics,

  • WilliamYancey posted at 9:49 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390

    "He explained Tuesday that the town, including his property that he purchased in the 1970s, has a history of groundwater problems, owing to residents’ legitimate fears of another manmade impact."

    The town's history of groundwater problems is a result of residents' fears of "another manmade impact?" Is English your second language?

  • WilliamYancey posted at 9:45 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.

    WilliamYancey Posts: 390

    School Mom, if it was only San Martin residents commenting, it'd be... well, just you. None of the bigots who want to deny people their right to worship, or people like gettin goog making not-so-veiled threats, live in San Martin, either,

  • School Mom posted at 8:41 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.

    School Mom Posts: 56

    I've been reading with interest the comments regarding this topic, Many from people who don't live in San Martin. Thank you so much for your nimby-istic comments. Your accusations of racism and bigotry have only served to show your disgusting lack of knowledge and regard for San Martin.

    One pundit wrote "What are they so angry about?" I can't speak for every landowner in San Martin, I can speak for myself. I am angry because:
    1. We have no voice. We are spoon fed the excrement other "incorporated" cities in Santa Clara County refuse to accept.
    2. We've had to put up with people, money, and influence pushing agendas forward that don't benefit the San Martin community. While the county turns a blind eye. This has been a sad, disgusting history in recent years for San Martin, you only need to look at the controversy around the "Math Institute, the County Airport, to name two of some of the unwanted developments foisted upon us..
    3. We have not been silent concerning other enterprises doing what they want because they they know we have no power and the county does not care.
    4. And finally, I am angry at people who don't live here, don't understand the rural community, and feel it necessary to tell me how it is where I live.
    I don't care who or what you worship, just abide by the law and follow the rules. And if you don't live in San Martin, how dare you make any comment.

  • Gettin goog posted at 7:22 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.

    Gettin goog Posts: 50

    Interesting that these people think they are going to be welcomed.. Coming to a town where no one wants them. The should bury their dead bodies where their ground water sits.. oh but wait they dont live here so they don't care. This situation is beyond disgusting!!!!! Good luck to you because you are going to need it. I have a plan lets bottle the run off water and deliver it to them , and let THEM drink it.