Lompico civil engineer enters supervisor race
by Peter Burke
Sep 15, 2011 | 7125 views | 27 27 comments | 145 145 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Bill Smallman
Bill Smallman
slideshow
Bill Smallman, a civil engineer and a member of the Lompico County Water District Board of Directors, has announced he will run to be the next representative of the 5th District on the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors.

Smallman, a 20-year Lompico resident, is an estimator in the construction industry. He has 25 years experience in public works construction, including water mains, pump stations and the like. He has a special affinity for water-related issues.

“I got into politics when the Lompico Headwaters were being threatened by logging,” Smallman said.

He said became friends with some of the anti-logging advocates, namely Kevin Collins and Mary Jo Walker, and helped work on the campaign to save the headwaters. The headwaters were eventually purchased by the Sempervirens Fund and are protected from logging.

“I feel like I will be the strongest candidate in terms of the environment,” Smallman said.

Smallman said he is part of the Lompico Water Conservancy, Sempervirens Fund and is involved with the Santa Cruz County Land Trust. He said he recently joined the Valley Women’s Club and plans to join the club’s environmental committee.

Smallman was elected to the Lompico County Water District in 2008 — he ran because he was concerned about the headwaters and felt his experience in the water-related construction industry would serve the community well. The district has recently bounced back from the brink of bankruptcy after directors fired the district’s general manager.

Smallman said he would like to see the Lompico district merge with the larger San Lorenzo Valley Water District, an option under discussion following Lompico’s financial crisis.

Smallman has not served as board president and noted that becoming supervisor would be a learning experience.

“It would be a big jump for me,” he said.

Smallman said, if he had been in the position, he would have tried to immediately put a stop to the former Felton Meadows housing project, and is “anti-sprawl.” He feels that the San Lorenzo Valley does not need high-density development.

Another goal as supervisor, he said, would be to maintain solvency.

“I want to make sure the county remains fiscally sound,” Smallman said.

In terms of representing Scotts Valley and San Lorenzo Valley, Smallman thinks it would come naturally.

“I love Scotts Valley, and I love the San Lorenzo Valley,” he said. “I would treat them equally. I spend a lot of time in both.”

Smallman is against the current redistricting proposal that splits Scotts Valley between two supervisorial districts.

“It’s obvious to me there is some gerrymandering,” Smallman said. “In my opinion, it seems crazy.”

Smallman, who will likely seek an endorsement from the Democratic Party in Santa Cruz, said he is just starting his campaign, but plans to be in the race for the long-term.

“I’ve been thinking about this for a long time,” Smallman said.

The June 2012 election will determine who is the area’s next county supervisor. Boulder Creek’s Eric Hammer and Scotts Valley mayor Dene Bustichi have also entered the race.



Comments
(27)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
TargetSalsa
|
September 19, 2011
I still can't believe how naive the city remains and pushed that application through . Target is so big, it operates one "Department" below cost and lets the others prop the store up. Closing and throttling of local businesses. There is plenty to still not like about that kind of unfair competition.
Suzy Q
|
September 19, 2011
Actually, if you google mojca's comments you find that he or she happens to be very much FOR Boulder Creek. Whoever she or he is, you can tell there is much concern for community.

That's cool!
whoopie!
|
September 19, 2011
there goes mojca again. anti boulder creek rec as usual.
mojca
|
September 19, 2011
Glad to see we have a few more choices for the Board of Supervisors position besides the big H.
Bill Smallman
|
September 19, 2011
@Ummm

No I meant Campos- he wrote an article in "How we see it" in the Sentinel.
Umm
|
September 19, 2011
Tony Campos is no longer on the Board of Supervisors, did you mean Greg Caput, the current representative of District 4 (since January 2011)?
Emergency Plan 4 SV
|
September 18, 2011
Would you push SV to produce a PUBLICLY RELEASED emergency plan addressing the Propane facility council approved?

September is Emergency Preparedness Month.

Taxpayers should not have to force these highly paid people to provide basic public safety information. Scout training is to be prepared for emergencies. 1/2 mile evacuation zone should be a high priority.
Bill Smallman
|
September 18, 2011
thoughsofit,

I have to say that you are knowledgeable person and would be extremely interested in meeting you. I think we share the same views. The Scenic Route is a great idea. Thanks for sharing. I have heard of it, and does appear to be a valuable tool to prevent ill-advised development. I imagine that applications and followups, lobbying with the State Government is necessary to achieve this. If elected I would be interested in tackling this task.

I objected the Target in SV because of a list of reasons i.e. environmental, traffic etc but a lot was aesthetics- The hotel does look very architecturally done well with open space around it. A big box store would destroy that. Even if it did create jobs, they would be low paying ones. As for convenience in shopping, I think people don't mind going out of town to go to a Target. I certainly don't and stop by after work in San Jose. Bottom line I think that property should remain open space, or a park.

I realize being anti-development suppress job creation, but people have to realize that construction jobs are temporary for new development. I'm more interested in trying to create more sustainable jobs which don't affect the landscape negatively.

Hope we can talk about this more in the future. I won't be able to keep up with these blogs much longer as this article goes away.

Thanks again,

Bill
Larry Slater
|
September 18, 2011
You make a good point about leaving a legacy. If it weren't for uproar Mark Stone would leave the 5th district riddled with low-income public housing and oversized concrete campaign centers mascarading as community centers. That's all part of his progressive thinking. John Leopold is the same way, all the more reason to not have part of Scotts Valley in Leopold's reach.

The two valleys are very special places. We should work to keep them that way.
thoughsofit
|
September 18, 2011
Thank for the reply.

In SV there has been a push to squash dissent. The Council has taken steps including limiting the amount of campaign spending on council races to $100. How do you feel about placing what is essentially an unconstitutional restriction of Freedom of Speech?

The incumbents have access and word of mouth through organized local groups. New candidates, who I would argue are old interests wanting to make their own change for the better (we hope), have the real need to raising and spending money in the media to get their ideas and candidacy out there.

As well, the SV COuncil has peeled back the requirement to post the CIty Council Minutes, it's an option... Since you brought up Target, they saw that that information - the way they were using it - was quite objectionable for a great many. So instead of slowing down and reconsidering, they push ahead and passed a SEIR and application even though the project was pulled by Target. And the coverage was essentially gone for those with the need, full schedule, handicap or otherwise today that information posted on their web site , as they have done for years.

Really the list goes on, and they are equally offensive to people who expect the city to run the day to day business of the CIty instead of worrying about how to derail their critics - which is essential for a healthy system of government.

How do you plan to handle your critics?

Secondly, I'm glad you think the Scenic Route is a good idea. But do you have a plan to act on this? As we know the State of California has indicated hwy 9 and part of hwy 17 to be one of the few routs qualified, running along the edge of DIstrict 5. The one that you would seek to represent. Would you lobby, plan and put forward a plan to get the Scenic Route Designation enacted?

Many of us realize that declaring the Dist. 5 portion of HWY 17, would effectively end the Target development. It runs directly adjacent and 20' from the property line on La Madrona. If I was a smart politician, you might say I have handed you a gift, you probably didn't know you could reach into the area and have such a fundamental effect on Santa Cruz County directly.

But let's say you did know, That would mean you should get up to speed on the Target issue from the area neighborhoods perspective. First, the project is not closed. In fact the only thing that has changed is that the SV COuncil passed the application and allowed a land owner who was in default and bankruptcy to push that unpopular application through anyways.

So it's essentially just waiting for the economy to recover and a retailer to want to put something there. The Council is oh to happy to allow it. You by contract, can not only protect the Golden eagles and other fauna that use the space, but put an end to the threat all together.

And that you objected against Target, how? ok, it's easy to object to a project 1/3 the size of the Capitola Mall that impacts the residential neighborhood day and night, along the main route to the school, it's another to support one that is only 1/4 the size. What do you support for the space? Do you see as building there the only way to create jobs?

It's clear that not everything has been done. From the jobs creation standpoint that does NOT require building. If you care to reach our to the people who are not part of the cloistered construction trades, you would see what that might be. I know.

In fact it is a reality that there is a requirement and trending shift that the trades, must re-educate to have meaningful employment in the information economy during this prolonged economic down turn.

It's a false sense of security to achieve a higher percentage of a declining market in Business, this is no different. You should be concerned, and pushing development to stop the slide is just temporary and damaging to long term prosperity for the area.

Having a longer view, and seeing what the real need is when the adjustment finishes, is what is needed. In short, if you are running to protect your profession and personal interests, you are not doing yourself or the community a favor.

If you are a RARE individual who is willing to do what is hard, but right, you can become a real pioneer and leave a substantial legacy.

One minute past the last project built, you have what you allowed. Then that will be that and everyone has to live with the results. What do you want SLV to be and look like? And behave?

Bill Smallman
|
September 18, 2011
Whatwouldyousupport,

Scenic Route: Great Idea - I support. Its a no-brainer we live in one of the most beautiful, unique areas in the State.

GerryMandering: I didn't actually say the redistricting proposal was crazy, but did look suspiciously like gerrymandering. If you look at the plan with trying to make equal populations in each district, the first part makes sense, but then seems to not make sense in regard to our district. Tony Campos made a good point that it helps to have a second district supe for a city as an additional vote on the Board.

Scotts Valley: I think voters are somewhat concerned that my work experience history is public works construction. I worked, physically, on the first STEP, secondary treatment effluent pump, system in Penn Valley- and I do mean physically :-). But I am really quite a different choice vs. Dene Bustichi. I advocated the creation of an Open Space District and went and spoke with a Director of Mid Penn OSD and studied how they were formed in 1972. In my mind it is the most effective way to protect against sprawl, protect environment allow the public to experience the truly unique area we live in. As you may know, the entire Scotts Valley council voted against the SC Land Trust efforts to even place this on the ballot. I do however want constituents from Scotts Valley who are environmentalist but are concerned about job, the County finances, and having the County provide services more effectively- So I want to take that stance and the best candidate for that area as well. I support the Town Center, as long as it is well designed, but I was against the Target. I was in favor of the La Bahia. I know development within City Limits will turn off the most ardent environmentalist out there, but feel it is a compromise worth taking for the economy, saving large areas for open space is where it at. The Town Center would be the ideal location for low cost high density if required or desired. And there are important water/environmental issues to look at. Again, I'm against SV and SLV sprawl, but favor improvement on existing developed areas which help/ not impact the environment.
Valley Voter
|
September 18, 2011
This is amazingly refreshing. A candidate who speaks to people with coherence and thoughtfulness.

What a concept!

Looking forward to watching your campaign unfold and meeting you, Mr. Smallman.

I live in the valley and I vote.
Bill Smallman
|
September 18, 2011
Dear Mr. Homan,

Thanks for the additional info regarding the Felton Meadows project. I don't just feel I would of put a red flag to stop this project because of lack of infrastructure, I know. I am definitely more of a science interested Civil Engineer, rather than one that gets excited about new development projects. I started college wanting to be a Marine Biologist, then switched to Physics to Engineering, and am interested in the Environmental division of Civil Engineering study. Also, I know that I would of protested the project on the grounds that I am against high density sprawl in SLV.

Bill Smallman
Whatwouldyousupport
|
September 17, 2011
Scenic Route. In this day and age of needing tourism and would you openly push to enact the Scenic Route Designation along the roads in your jurisdiction? We will be looking for whoever in in office to actively preserve over developing. Would you commit to doing this to gain the support of what would be your stiff opposition? Be aware that SV does not have the will to say no to any large developments. Do not assume getting favor from SV council that you will have the favor of the city. They are allowing bad feelings to fester still. You should know that they will help you all you want, until you have an independent mind. Look at the reception they are giving Stone. It's important, that you have a record, which looks pretty thin, but also go on the record for how you will keep your communities autonomy in the face of the recent track record of SV, which as a contractor, you are perceived as running for Bustichi and the rest of the SV council, who are good for their family and friends but not so much for the rest of the City. A lot of people think they spend too freely and with the misplaced priorities. It may be unfortunate that the perception of the connection exists, and maybe you don't care, but you will have to show us why we should even take the chance. To date there has been years of failed plans and projects and with regional cooperation necessary, you have to also work with all of the communities. Your stance on Gerrymandering in Scotts VAlley, and claiming to represent SLV is QUITE a stretch. It's also too convenient that you are on the water board. The other SV fellow on a water board built up the Falcon homes project, we are not looking for more building in the Redwoods. Imagine no opposition to the build agenda, far worse than a balanced set of candidates. You may even not recognize the kind of change that you would be enabling, and by the time you do, it would be to late for everyone. How far should you go to enable this? Are you truly the person SLV needs?

Steve Homan
|
September 17, 2011
Comment #2:

The 2.5 million that the county wasted was actually the tax money from the Live Oak/Soquel Redevelopment Agency. There is no Redevelopment Agency for the San Lorenzo Valley. The Board was trying to mollify former Supervisor Beautz, who had vowed to have no more affordable housing in Live Oak until every Supervisor's district had a project. The problem with this is that not every district, especially in rural areas, has the infrastructure to support such a project. That was my disagreement all along: No infrastructure for sewage and storm water meant there would be huge public health and environmental health problems for the public, for Zayante Creek, and for the San Lorenzo River.
Steve Homan
|
September 17, 2011
This gentleman seems more like a reasonable candidate. I want to know more about him. He does need to educate himself more about how poorly planned the Felton Meadows (Zayante Oaks) project was with regard to sewage disposal, storm drainage, and water supply issues. This project should never come back again. It was other civil engineers who proposed and blessed a plan that had a tiny on-site sewage disposal system surrounding storm water detention ponds on a site with mostly poor percolation, very high groundwater, and springs. The small area that was perhaps large enough to support sewage disposal systems for two homes also was the only area where the state protected oak woodland area exists. These trees would have been sacrificed for the project. Site planning is an art AND a science. A project is supposed to be designed with the site in mind, not imposed on the site regardless of its natural limitations. Engineers should behave as scientists, not project advocates.
Bill Smallman
|
September 17, 2011
Dear Sarah, Betty Zayante, Bullies 2, and the other positive bloggers,

To be honest, and unfortunately, I did not take an active role in protesting the Felton Meadow project. I can remember around the time I moved here, Safeway was replacing their septic tank system. I knew some of the VWC members supported the plan, but not so actively. I can't believe the County wasted close to 2 million on the project. Its a big reason why I mentioned this issue as my work experience Civil PE would be a huge asset on the Board. I did recently go to a VWC Enviromental Committee meeting recently and agreed with everything they were doing. Not sure if I should disenfranchise myself for their past mistakes, but that was a big one.

Thanks for the positive remarks everyone, and yes definitely forums and I will go out of my way to show my positions and what I will do exactly if elected Supervisor.

Bill Smallman.
Sarah Greene
|
September 17, 2011
Bill, bless you for entering entering the supervisor race. Please hold some public forums early on so people can get to know you better.

You've started off, with this article, on conflicted footing. You say you opposed the Felton Meadow housing project, yet you align yourself with the Valley Womens Club. The Valley Womens Club SUPPORTED the Felton housing project to the extent that members of their executive board formed an astroturf group to market the project for the San Jose developer. County and RDA emails show a Valley Womens Club board member querying the county on how to best move the project forward WITHOUT COMPLETE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. Another board member stated in the Press Banner that there would be no opposition to the project. Yet other board members threatened boycott to Felton businesses which did not support the development.

The Felton Meadow is an environmentally sensitive site. Building a high density housing project on it defies the most important LEED principles - don't build on an environmentally site in proximity to water bodies or wetlands, or in relationship to floodplains, or laden with endangered species.

The Valley Womens Club later took to calling anyone who opposed the project NIMBYs. Their reputation has suffered from their seemingly hypocritical stances.

Please take a broader look at your constituents. Mark Stone's reputation also has suffered from his tunnel vision. It is hope of many that our next supervisor is more inclusive.

Namaste.
Berta Narez
|
September 16, 2011
Huh? What does the paper have to do with the fact that 2 of the candidates are contractors and 1 is a civil engineer?

I'm glad to see candidates who have backgrounds in industry. They have a better understanding of local economy than a career politician/public feeder.
Rename
|
September 16, 2011
How about renaming the paper "Friends of Contractors"


We encourage your online comments in this public forum, but please keep them respectful and constructive. This is not a forum for personal attacks, libelous statements, profanity or racist slurs. Readers may report such inappropriate comments by e-mailing the editor at pbeditor@pressbanner.com.