Blog Master G

Word. And photos, too.

Blog Master G random header image

Saratoga Dem Watch

Thursday, November 10th, 2005 · 2 Comments

There’s a new local blog in town that aims to keep the new Democratic control in Saratoga Springs in check: Saratoga Dem Watch. The blog’s only been around for two days so far — it launched yesterday, following our sweep of the elections — and already has a number of posts analyzing what happened in the election.

I always appreciate hearing what the other side has to say — especially when it’s rational and makes statements supported by facts and research rather than sweeping, simplistic statements, as I see all too often from the right — and, so far, this blog seems to be a good resource for getting an intelligent perspective from local Republicans.

One of the posts from yesterday, however, did seem a bit dramatic:

If the Republican Party stays ontop of them here, then two years from now, the Republicans can show the voters that they got exactly what they voted for. Two years from now, you can show those that stayed at home that their “statement” harmed the city. Saratoga Lake will be drained, there will be Section 8 housing on North Broadway (exagerating), and Property Taxes will not have gone down. If the Dems try to implement Rent Control, you’re going to see every landlord in the city put up a For Sale sign, thus crushing the real estate market across the city. When the real estate market crashes over the next year, Affordable Housing will be the least of our concerns. You want to vote for them again?

I look forward to watching the debate unfold on the antithesis of this blog.

(Thanks, David, for the heads-up on this.)

Tags: saratoga springs

2 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Duckman // Nov 10, 2005 at 11:39 am

    I’m glad to see you value facts and research over talking points. In line with that I’d like to enlighten you about the facts surrounding development in Saratoga Springs. Between 1990 and 2000 the City gained over 6000 jobs and approximately 1000 residents. During this same period, the number of people commuting into the City rose 80%. Your home state of California has dealt with issues of growth for decades. Californina recommends a balanced growth ratio of 1 housing unit for every 1.5 jobs. Such a ratio ensures that the cumulative effects of unbalanced growth (higher housing costs being the most prevalent) are kept in check. Our new “progressive” administration was elected on a platform of controlling growth. This stance is inherently socially inequitable. What the City needs is a greater supply of housing. Arguments that more housing leads to increasing school burdens may in fact be true, but sometimes doing the right thing demands a sacrifice. The City pro-actively attracted the jobs and taxes that support the community. For the City to deny housing to these people is wrong. That doesnt even get into the argument of the 44,000+ vehicle trips per day that are another cumulative effect of this jobs/housing imbalance. I’m sorry to tell you this, but the leadership of the City (whether they be Democrat or Republican) are not concerned about social equity, they’re only concerned about keeping their little quaint corner of the world the (dis)uptopia that it is.

  • 2 At_Hearth_Side // Nov 15, 2005 at 7:49 am

    Thank you Gabe, for pointing me to the new blog ‘Dem Watch.’

    Although a long time blogger on the Net, I’m new to this particular blogging experience. I hope for reasoned dialoge, from both sides. Calm, reasoned talk rocks!

    ‘Rocks’ or whatever the present ‘in thing’ is, for expressing approval. Sorry if ‘rocks’ is wayyyyy behind the times. ,-)

    I know there’s a more recent way of saying “Yessss!”. But somehow, saying that dialoge is *the sex,* just doesn’t seem to fit. *grin*