Hi,

I thought you might be interested in the letters my wife and I recently authored. They might provide some good ideas for letters of your own. Please feel free to post these to your web site if you have one!

I've also attached the Microsoft Word Mail Merge documents to this message. Three letters to the City, one to the County, one to the CEC, and three address files to make sure the appropriate people hear from us.

You'll notice that each template has two letters in it - one from Carol and one from me - just in case they're counting letters. We sent both copies of each letter in the same envelope to save on postage.

Following is the letter we sent to the CEC recently. It contains the bodies of all our other letters so far. Please consult the attached files to determine to whom the letters were actually sent...

-Tim and Carol

Carol Hayes
Timothy Hayes
7214 Via Maria
San Jose, CA 95139-1144

September 19, 1999

CEC Commissioners and CEC Project Leader
California Energy Commission
1516 Ninth Street, MS-15
Sacramento, CA 95814

To whom it may concern:

To keep you informed of our opposition to the first-choice site for the proposed Metcalf Energy Center, we are sending you copies of the letters we recently sent to the San Jose City Council, San Jose�s Planning Department, and the Santa Clara County Supervisors.

We urge your support in ensuring that the proposed power plant is not located near existing residential areas, or in urban areas in general, for the reasons outlined in the letters.

Sincerely,

Carol Hayes
Tim Hayes

Carol Hayes
Timothy Hayes
7214 Via Maria
San Jose, CA 95139-1144

September 6, 1999

San Jose City Councilmember
City of San Jose
801 North First Street, #600
San Jose, CA 95110-1797

Dear Councilmember,

As a resident of Blossom Valley in South San Jose I am opposed to any amendment(s) to the current zoning requirements contained in the San Jose Master Plan that would allow the construction and operation of the proposed Calpine Power Plant.

The site of the proposed Calpine Power Plant has been zoned light industrial for many years. Residential areas have been built less than 1.5 miles of the proposed site based upon the zoning outlined in the Master Plan. Many of those who live in the area moved here with full knowledge of the Master Plan. We now hear that the area may soon be rezoned public/quasi-public so that the Calpine Power Plant can be built.

It makes no sense to place this power plant in the center of a growing residential and light industrial center where people live and work, and where children attend schools. This plant will not benefit San Jose directly. It will however, bring with it the unnecessary risks associated with the on-site storage of hazardous chemicals and the introduction of waste materials to our ground water and our air.

Please vote against any zoning changes that would allow Calpine to build their power plant within 1.5 miles of these residential areas.

Sincerely,

Carol Hayes
Tim Hayes

Carol Hayes
Timothy Hayes
7214 Via Maria
San Jose, CA 95139-1144

September 16, 1999

San Jose City Councilmember
San Jose City Hall
801 N. First St, #600
San Jose, CA 95110

Dear City Councilmember:

I am writing to you in reference to the City Planning Department�s recent review of a proposal by Calpine requesting that the zoning in North Coyote Valley be changed from Campus Industrial to Public/Quasi-Public so that the Metcalf Energy Center can be built.

I believe approving the proposed rezoning would be an extremely bad business decision for the City for the following reasons:

• San Jose stands to gain MORE revenues by maintaining the existing zoning of Campus Industrial, as provided in the General Plan. The existing zoning allows for state of the art technology business to move into the area. These businesses provide an excellent source of tax income for the city. Why accept potentially less revenues?
• As high tech moves into the area, real estate values in the surrounding residential areas will increase, providing an even higher tax base for the city.
• As Campus Industrial (i.e. high technology) companies move into the area, others will follow providing a higher tax base.
• Based upon the existing zoning, several residential areas have been built in the area surrounding the proposed power plant site. Residential property values will suffer as a direct result of Calpine building of a power plant in the area.
• Rezoning from Campus Industrial to Public/Quasi-Public is a step backwards for San Jose, and is not a precedent that should be set, or even considered.
• San Jose already has other areas zoned Public/Quasi-Public on which Calpine could build a power plant. Why do we need more areas zoned Public/Quasi-Public?
• Campus Industrial zoning ensures that the area will produce less pollution than the proposed power plant promises to produce.
• For the most part, high technology companies provide more jobs per acre of developed land than the proposed power plant possibly could.

The Metcalf Energy Center should not be built so close to existing residential areas it hurts everyone.

• It hurts the residents with it�s increased potential for harm from pollution (relatively �cleaner� pollution but undeniably, additional pollution), and from it�s detrimental effects on the current real estate values in the area.
• It hurts other Campus Industrial companies considering a move to the area, who must now consider the proximity of the power plant and assess the additional risks that it presents.
• It hurts San Jose�s image, as the capital of the high technology industry.

At a recent City Planning meeting we heard quite a bit about preserving the communities, building something that fit the area, etc. etc. As a homeowner and taxpayer who lives less than one mile from the area being considered for rezoning I implore you to consider the reasoning above and vote NO on the zoning modification.

Sincerely,

Carol Hayes
Tim Hayes

Carol Hayes
Timothy Hayes
7214 Via Maria
San Jose, CA 95139-1144

September 19, 1999

San Jose City Councilmember
San Jose City Hall
801 N. First Street, Room 600
San Jose, CA 95110

Dear City Councilmember:

Our lives are officially on hold now, and it is not a pleasant feeling.

We were going to invest in some improvements to our home, to the tune of approximately $30,000. Then we realized that we might well be throwing perfectly good money into a bad investment! Allowing the Calpine power plant to be built less than one mile from our residence will cause our property values to decrease.

Calpine says that the plant will generate the pollution equivalent of only about 300 additional cars. I say that statistics can be manipulated to anyone�s advantage, but that no one can dispute facts. For example, the Calpine plant will contribute 100% of its air pollution to the existing pollution of San Jose, but San Jose will get nowhere near 100% of the power output by this plant. In fact, the output from this plant will be added directly to the power grid of the Western United States! San Jose will not benefit directly from this. San Jose and the surrounding cities will only benefit from the pollution that this plant generates. So why should it be built in San Jose? And even if it had to be built in San Jose, why should it be built so close to existing residential housing?

The City Council refuses to take a stand on the Calpine/Bechtel issue. Because of this, more people�s lives are being put on hold! Please put an end to our purgatory. Let us get on with our lives. Put an early end to this fiasco by voting NO on the proposed zoning change from Campus Industrial to Public/Quasi-Public.

We are being held hostage by our City Council - unable to invest further in our own homes, for fear that our property values will be eroded by your eventual approval of the power plant.

The Fairchild mess has held the value of our homes down for almost twenty years now. We do NOT need another disclosure requirement when selling our homes!

Perhaps I don�t have all the facts. Please provide your constituency with at least three direct benefits that San Jose will realize from the building of the Calpine power plant. I haven't heard of even one direct benefit yet, but I've heard plenty of reasons why the plant should NOT be built close to populated areas.

On another note, is Public/Quasi-Public the appropriate zoning for a power plant? I think not! Not while that same zoning is used for churches, schools, and other public, not-for-profit institutions! Think twice about the precedent you�re setting here!

Sincerely,

Carol Hayes
Tim Hayes

Carol Hayes
Timothy Hayes
7214 Via Maria
San Jose, CA 95139-1144

September 19, 1999

Santa Clara County Supervisor
Office of the Board of Supervisors
County Government Center, East Wing, 10th Floor
70 W. Hedding St.
San Jose, CA 95110

Dear County Supervisor:

You will soon be deciding whether to allow San Jose to annex a parcel of county land that will be part of Calpine/Bechtel�s proposed power plant site, otherwise known as the Metcalf Energy Center.

I would like you to strongly consider a NO vote on this annexation request. Please stand with me in letting Calpine, Bechtel, and San Jose know that the additional pollution that this plant promises to bring to Santa Clara County is not welcome.

Please make it clear that there are no real good business reasons to build this plant so close to existing residential housing.

Please send the signal that the existing zoning, the zoning that has been in place for more than twenty years, is the correct and appropriate zoning for this area.

Please consider the hardships that we, the current homeowners will undergo when our land values are negatively affected by the operation of a power plant less than one mile away.

Please DO NOT rubber-stamp this annexation request.

Sincerely,

Carol Hayes
Tim Hayes