Coyote Vally Cisco Objectives Essay

In my view, this is a case of a clash of interests between two parties. One being Cisco and its growing demand for space for its employees given its own position in San Jose i. e that of the regions largest private sector employer. The other party was made by the coalition of the environmentalists, southern communities and affordable housing activists. The employees are the primary stakeholders being directly affected by the development. Of course, in this case, they would benefit from this development which will bring a good work environment and a recreational opportunity which not many other firms facilitate for their employees. Having said that, the formation of a coalition against Cisco’s proposal by the environmentalists, chapters of Sierra club and the Audubon Society goes to prove that Cisco is not being able to keep aboard its non market stakeholders. The concept of â€Å"the purpose of the firm is not simply to make profit but to create value for all its stakeholders† 1 is violated here. The non market stakeholders mentioned above are a part of the society and they feel that running down a greenbelt would be pushing urbanization to its limits and destroying an area of value to them. In spite of the fact that this proposal would bring 20,000 jobs in the coyote valley there was opposition from outside the area. Perhaps, to the stakeholders, the cost of these new jobs is great: a 400-acre campus and adjacent residential area will destroy the remaining agricultural land that once characterized the entire Silicon Valley. Also the monetary sum of $122 million that Cisco is pledging for development of public roads would not suffice. Authorities suggest that in the course of making the â€Å"Cisco’s Coyote Valley† the required infrastructure (freeway interchanges, railroad overpasses, major storm detention systems and sewage lines) costs will be more than that which would/might become a burden on government subsidies. As Cisco might not be able to keep up with the costs of the infrastructure and that cost might fall on the tax payer. In my opinion, had Cisco systems also included a housing plan for the employees with in this project it would be less burdensome on the traffic and might not come across so negatively to the stakeholders? In the proposed idea of Cisco there seems an inefficient use of very large land space, able of being termed a â€Å"Cisco City†. But it lacks a vital aspect of a city – housing for its employees. Especially when constructed by bringing down a plush greenbelt. Coyote Vally Cisco Objectives http://www.landwatch.org/pages/issuesactions/coyote.html