[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Russ Van Dyne 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:08:01 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 8:29 PM
Subject: Russ Van Dyne 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
We vote for you so do t deny we the public from the ability to comment. AND LISTEN TO THE COMMUNITY. Otherwise it’s
Just politics as usual demonstrating a lack of respect for the citizens you represent! Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Russ Van Dyne
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Barbara A Espinoza 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:08:09 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 8:36 PM
Subject: Barbara A Espinoza 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Barbara A Espinoza
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Vixchel Estrada 95116 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:08:35 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 8:37 PM
Subject: Vixchel Estrada 95116 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Vixchel Estrada
95116
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Tony Silva 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:08:40 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 8:40 PM
Subject: Tony Silva 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Tony Silva
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Tina Rivers 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:08:54 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 8:48 PM
Subject: Tina Rivers 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
I am just so tired of the East side of San Jose not being a true part of our city. This belief that our voices do not need to be heard and our input is not necessary for healthy development is outdated and is segregated thinking. We on the East Side need to be valued as much as those in Willow Glen and Almaden area and our personal knowledge of what our area needs has got to be part of any use/reuse of land. Thank you, yours Tina Rivera Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Tina Rivers
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Debbie Locke 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:08:47 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 8:41 PM
Subject: Debbie Locke 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Debbie Locke
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Marine Chapelier 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:09:01 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 8:55 PM
Subject: Marine Chapelier 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5- 1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Marine Chapelier
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Tina Rivers 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:08:54 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 8:48 PM
Subject: Tina Rivers 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
I am just so tired of the East side of San Jose not being a true part of our city. This belief that our voices do not need to be heard and our input is not necessary for healthy development is outdated and is segregated thinking. We on the East Side need to be valued as much as those in Willow Glen and Almaden area and our personal knowledge of what our area needs has got to be part of any use/reuse of land. Thank you, yours Tina Rivera Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Tina Rivers
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Jennifer Miranda 95122 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:09:08 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 8:56 PM
Subject: Jennifer Miranda 95122 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Jennifer Miranda
95122
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Vina Valencia 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:09:24 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 9:11 PM
Subject: Vina Valencia 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Vina Valencia
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Veronica Frausto 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:09:15 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 9:08 PM
Subject: Veronica Frausto 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Veronica Frausto
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Claudia Quinonez 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:09:31 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 9:18 PM
Subject: Claudia Quinonez 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5- 1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
I have lived for the past 25+ Yrs just a few steps away from the gold course and I DO NOT WANT anything done without the community ,the people, that live around the land acknowledgement. It is our homes that would be at risk and I demand transparency!! Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Claudia Quinonez
95148
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Andres Quinonez 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:09:40 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 9:19 PM
Subject: Andres Quinonez 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5- 1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Andres Quinonez
95148
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Norma Zuniga 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:09:43 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 9:35 PM
Subject: Norma Zuniga 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Norma Zuniga
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Paul Zuniga 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:09:55 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 9:46 PM
Subject: Paul Zuniga 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Paul Zuniga
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Christine azzopardi 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:09:49 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 9:45 PM
Subject: Christine azzopardi 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Christine azzopardi
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Minh Pham 95116 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:10:00 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 10:04 PM
Subject: Minh Pham 95116 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Minh Pham
95116
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Trudy Ellerbeck 95227 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:10:15 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 10:08 PM
Subject: Trudy Ellerbeck 95227 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
East San Jose needs to preserve its open space.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Trudy Ellerbeck
95227
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Danny Garza 95116 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:10:21 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 10:28 PM
Subject: Danny Garza 95116 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Dear Community,
Community input before Developers increase their profits.
Community Health before Developers Wealth.
No 501c3's without Community Accountability first.
Answers to Required and Individual Questions before we answer yes to Development.
In Community Spirit,
Danny Garza
President
Plata Arroyo Neighborhood Association and Gateway East N.A.C.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Danny Garza
95116
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Edith Villanueva 95121 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:10:39 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 10:31 PM
Subject: Edith Villanueva 95121 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Edith Villanueva
95121
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Danny Garza 95116 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:10:21 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 10:28 PM
Subject: Danny Garza 95116 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Dear Community,
Community input before Developers increase their profits.
Community Health before Developers Wealth.
No 501c3's without Community Accountability first.
Answers to Required and Individual Questions before we answer yes to Development.
In Community Spirit,
Danny Garza
President
Plata Arroyo Neighborhood Association and Gateway East N.A.C.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Danny Garza
95116
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org