|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
John McAlister likes to harken back to how things were 50 years ago — a time when orchards still dotted the roadside, Highway 85 was just an engineer’s pipe dream and Mountain View was very much a small town. That was when he first moved to the area, and the memory still influences his perspective.
Fast-forward to today and little Mountain View is bursting at the seams with billion-dollar tech firms and construction cranes dominating the city’s landscape. Despite how much has changed, McAlister firmly believes Mountain View at its core still remains a small town. He considers it his chief mission as a member of the City Council to see that the city’s growth doesn’t come at a sacrifice to its character or quality-of-life.
“I still want people to have that sense that we’re a small city with a big heart,” he explained. “I still believe we can accomplish more housing and still have the heart and character of a small town in the community.”
Coming up on the end of his first term on the council, McAlister, 63, says he is fully committed to giving it another go. Saying he hopes to highlight quality-of-life issues, he filed paperwork to run for re-election this November.
The only other incumbent eligible for reelection, Chris Clark, said he intends to run for a second term, but he was not available to be interviewed prior to the Voice’s Wednesday press deadline. Two newcomers, Thida Cornes and Lucas Ramirez, have also declared their intention to run for the City Council.
Mountain View will have seats on the council up for election in November, which are currently held by John Inks, McAlister, Clark and Mike Kasperzak. Inks and Kasperzak, who will be termed out of office and prohibited from running for another consecutive term, are running for a state Assembly seat representing District 24.
McAlister said he wants smart growth throughout the city. Saying he wants to take a “holistic” approach, he favors the city’s recent efforts to boost housing, especially subsidized homes for those struggling to remain in Mountain View. As the owner of a Baskin-Robbins branch, McAlister says he knows some of his own employees are struggling to find adequate housing in the area. Any proposal for new housing, he said, must also take into account its impacts on local streets, schools, recreation and other public services.
Yet McAlister says he is also cautious about going too far. He worries that a fervent push for new housing could create new troubles. He points to proposals he opposed that would have built residences on property zoned for light-industrial uses along Middlefield and Evelyn roads. Converting that space would have meant Mountain View would lose a strip of small businesses, he said.
“We’re slowly pricing out the small businesses and the services that people need to make a balanced community,” he said. “Small businesses are important to the community. That’s why we need to make sure we’re balanced in how we do this.”
His top accomplishments while on the council, McAlister said, include his efforts last year as mayor to coordinate with other cities to press the Valley Transportation Authority to prioritize the north county’s traffic problems. He also touts his work getting the VTA and Google to discuss a possible light-rail extension into the Moffett Federal Airfield area.
Prior to entering city politics, McAlister said he was just another dad taking an active interest in his children’s schools. One thing led to another he volunteered as treasurer for the Huff Elementary PTA, later joined the school’s site council and start hosting regular fundraisers at his ice-cream shop. From there, he said he began to take an interest in local government.
“I’d always have the chance to bend the ear of an elected official, and sooner of later they’d say, ‘John, shut up or do something about it!” he said. “I’ve always believed in being part of the solution, not part of the problem. And if you’re going to be part of the solution, then go straight to the top.”
His first run for City Council was in 2008, but he was barely edged out in the final tally. He then spent several years serving on the city’s Environmental Planning Commission. In 2012, his second run for a council seat was successful.
He’s just going to abstain from important discussions and votes the whole time, since he owns so much property in the area.
I sense that McAlister and I see eye to eye on many city-related issues. I’d like to vote for him again. The one major concern I have is the extent to which he is required to abstain from votes – keep in mind that the only reason the MV council supported the idiotic BRT dedicated lane was because McAlister was precluded from voting because he owns property along the ECR corridor. One small detail like this and all of a sudden VTA can (and did claim) – “See, Mtn. View supports our proposal.”
“…Not someone who just moved here and wants everything changed to suit THEM.”
Funny coming from YOU…
sdfdsfsadf
McAlister will get my vote. I appreciate his concern for small businesses, and I appreciate his concern for “quality of life.” My impression is that he is also for ownership housing where possible. McAlister has a sense of community, and seems less in the pocket of big money than any of the other current council members.
You don’t want to change Mountain View, you claim?
Ah, but you do. You want to drive everyone out who doesn’t earn a *certain* amount, because they don’t “measure up.”
But I guess your memory is rather faulty, sunshine.
” McAlister will get my vote. I appreciate his concern for small businesses, and I appreciate his concern for “quality of life.”
Really? He supported the minimum wage increases. And is no growth going back to the 50’s really a quality of life characteristic?
Mr McAlister has been a surprising voice of moderation on council. Unlike the balanced mv movement, he seems to focus on smart growth and addressing our difficult transportation woes, like the editorial for a monorail system to connect north bayshore.
He didn’t get my vote last time, but will get my vote this time. I think that says a lot in our current adversarial political climate.
@”Really” –
Advocating for something closer to living wage does not disqualify someone from being pro-small business.
Advocating for “quality of life” does not mean that McAlister wants to return to the 1950s. That’s a ridiculous statement to make.
Read the first paragraph of the article. It says it all . He prefers the 50’s. It incfluences his perspective. The MW is not a living wage or even close to it. Supporting a higher MW does not help,small business’s
We need to change zoning laws. If he’s not in favor of removing the strip and not in favor of building higher, then how does he hope to solve housing issues? “Middle of the road” is a bs position.
New construction needs to offer ground floor business and multiple stories of housing on top.
Fvck the 50’s. Make this decade special. We can have a charming city that also houses a growing population. These things are not at odds with each other. Ditch the 2-3 story height limits. Build up. Having more neighbors is a wonderful thing.
McAlister got his when things were cheap. That’s luck. This generations life is harder. Pining for the 50’s only denies the opportunity to own property to the next generation. That’d be a shameful outcome.
@ Scott
If you don’t like smaller cities, why did you move here? It is arrogant and selfish to want to build “up” and go past 2-3 floors because YOU like it. The people already here should be who decide, not a bunch of people who think the city should change for their needs.
I suggest you move to SF, since you like “more neighbors”.
Scott – “Pining for the 50’s”? Give me a break.
The writer of the article, intentionally or not, walked right into the meme that developers and their true believers pushed in the last election – that anyone who wants any kind of moderation in development is just “pining for the 50’s.” John McAlister has been on the EPC and Council for years, and he’s not an idiot.
The article goes on to quote McAlister:
“I still want people to have that sense that we’re a small city with a big heart,” he explained. “I still believe we can accomplish more housing and still have the heart and character of a small town in the community.”
Do you have a problem with that?
We don’t even know yet what effect the current wave of building is going to have. There are some 2000 housing units in the pipeline. The City Council is looking at 10,250 more units in North Bayshore, plus several million square feet of new office space in North Bayshore and San Antonio, if they can figure out how to pretend that it won’t produce a congestion nightmare. 6000 more units on the US Government property at Middlefield and Moffett are probably on the way to approval. And you want more?
I have to think that there is a rush on by developers and their representatives on the Council to get approval for as much as possible, before residents have a chance to see the effects of the current wave of building.
If Councilmember McAlister votes on April 26 (or ever) for a landlord-tenant mediation ordinance that does not outlaw preemptive evictions, I, for one, will be opposing his re-election. However, I am also interested (especially if he does not vote for such an ordinance) in learning more about his voting record – including on the addition of so much development in Mountain View. Any politician can talk about “balance” and preserving or improving “the quality of life.” But with incumbents seeking re-election, voters can actually examine the incumbent’s voting record.
@why bother, is there something wrong with owning businesses in the area? That actually give me reason to vote for him, someone local who knows the history here, someone who’s run a business and knows of the issues. Not someone who just moved here and wants everything changed to suit THEM.
Oh sunshine….I’d use the@ but @@mvresident2003 is rather redundant. Anyhoo, how is that funny coming from me? I moved here specifically because I want to live in a smaller, suburban area. I don’t want lots of apartments and high-rises, if I did I’d have moved to the City.
Again, I’m not trying to change it. But apparently you’re one of the ones who are.