More on budget decisions
Editor:
After reading Councilwoman Nihart's letter in the Tribune it is obvious to me that she chose to ignore the facts. At the regular council meeting on June 8 she and fellow council members announced and voted on item #7 and stated that because of hard times, they were untying themselves from the management cafeteria plan and taking a cut of $5,580 a year on their benefit plan. What Ms. Nihart did not tell you was that resolution 45-2009 was attached to item #7 that gave the council members an additional $100 for their dental plan. This raised their benefits back up to $1,020 a month. This resolution was never revealed to the public. It was unanimously passed with a single vote on item #7 with no mention of the attached resolution 45-2009. Does not this action therefore negate the so called benefit cut? With resolution 45-2009 the council's pay and benefit package now comes to $1,020 a month per member. When their wages are added at $700 a month the sum comes to $1,720 a month. This council's entire budget for this year comes to $157,500. So much for honesty and transparency. The public and the employees of this city deserve better.
Vi Gotelli
Former Vice Mayor
Save public golf
Editor:
(This letter was originally adddressed to "Dear Friends of San Francisco Golf"):
As a native San Franciscan, I was both thrilled and very proud this week as the greatest golfers from America and around the eorld met at Harding Park to contest the President's Cup. As I watched the competition unfold, I reflected back through my own seven decades playing golf in the great golfing town of San Francisco.
With my thoughts returning to my youth in San Francisco , however, I have been alarmed by news that the city's other wonderful 18-hole municipal courses, Sharp Park and Lincoln Park, are in jeopardy. The news of Sharp Park is particularly distressing. To me it is unthinkable that San Francisco would seriously contemplate the destruction of that Alister MacKenzie masterwork.
Sharp Park is a great course of the old school: a seaside course, designed by one of history's greatest architects, where the wind and weather dictate the play of the game. Dr. MacKenzie's beautiful design does not punish with narrow fairways and heavy rough, but rather charms and inspires and exhilarates with beauty. Dr. MacKenzie does not force golfers to hit any particular shot, but instead gives them options to challenge their imaginations. Sharp is an unpretentious place, where golfers enjoy a scenic walk in the salt air, then a sandwich and a beer in an old-fashioned pub. In these ways, Sharp connects golfers to the Scottish public course roots of the game. This is Dr. MacKenzie's great gift to the American public golfer.
Without the public courses, golf becomes inaccessible. The game shrivels and dies. The glorious restoration of Harding must not be at the expense of Sharp or Lincoln. So I write this letter to urge my friends and fellow-San Francisco Bay Area golfers to preserve Dr. MacKenzie's legacy, and defend San Francisco 's golf heritage and public courses. Defend them with your time, your money, and your passion. Do not let anybody destroy Sharp or Lincoln .
See you around the links.
Ken Venturi
Honorary Chairman, San Francisco Public Golf Alliance
(Editor's note: Ken Venturi is one of two former U.S. Open champions who graduated from San Francisco's Lincoln High School and who support saving the Sharp Park Golf Course in its entirety. The other is Johnny Miller.)
Gotelli vs. Nihart
Editor:
Putting both Oct. 14 letters up for comparison it clear that both Past Councilmember Gotelli and Councilmember Nihart were presenting accurate information the 2009-10 budget.
Ms. Gotelli was focused on the entire legal department with a four-year look back. Her information is both comprehensive and accurate. The primary reason the city legal budget was reduced this year is because $300,000+ was removed from the former use of outside legal contractors.
Ms. Nihart was intent on defending the salary of City Attorney Quick, removing from consideration such items as four weeks vacation pay, benefits, and a huge lifetime pension — personally, I think that's all real money spent by the public. Ms. Nihart also defended the $100 City Council salary reduction, approximately the same amount as their increase on the health benefit side.
By comparison, city council compensation may have been rolled back to 2006 levels, whereas this week the stock market Dow rose to 1999 levels, and the overall economy fell to 1945 levels.
Previously in a booming economy, and with multiple opportunities, in full knowledge of our civic need, this city council of eight years failed to deliver a sustainable economic program for this city. How much is that loss worth? Want a more edgy view of Pacifica, wake-up to the new blog in town fixpacifica.blogspot.com/
Kathy Meeh
Sun Valley
No comments:
Post a Comment