You might ask . . . with the Pacifica Tribune and the local blog Pacifica Riptide, what need is there for yet ANOTHER blog about Pacifica? And why would I be involved after moving to Texas?
Well let me preface the first question by saying I think Elaine Larsen (editor of the Pacifica Tribune) and John Maybury (owner and moderator of the Pacifica Riptide blog) are both decent people with good hearts. The issue I have is one of content, and that as hard as Elaine Larsen tries, the modern paradigm of the local newspaper owned by a corporation is one where the bottom line for the bean counters becomes more important than purpose of the Fourth Estate. She's understaffed and overwhelmed, so I feel she just doesn't have the time or resources to be the editor she wants to be. I've tried faulting her for it, but she's such a nice and honest and intelligent person, its difficult to stay mad at her. Unfortunately, an editorial gaffe was made and local funny guy Ian Butler was allowed to mention my wife in one of his columns . . . well the first rule of politics is you don't go after families. It was a despicable swipe, one I won't blame all too much on the busy editor. When I confronted Mr. Butler about it after a City Council meeting (the same meeting where he and Tod Schlesinger shook hands and buried the hatchet, and Tod offered his sympathies for Ian's brother who had just had a heart attack), he got that look most professional basketball players have mastered when called for a blatant foul. Me? Foul on me? What did I do? I'm innocent, ref!!
Anyway, my wife and I canceled our subscription to the Trib, though I still follow it online. I also feel (and this was an issue with previous editor Chris Hunter) that those who want to control every aspect of this town repeatedly bully the local editor any time they don't like the content, especially when it reveals some dirty aspect to their policies and the effect those policies have had on Pacifica. The end result is, as hard as the dear editor tries, the Trib repeatedly falls short of serving the community in an honest and open manner, as a good newspaper should.
I then turned to Maybury's blog, Pacifica Riptide, which I felt had become a very reliable source of local information. I didn't like Lionel Emde when I first moved to Pacifica and we had some issues over Measure L and Don Peebles, but you know what? I respect the hell out of his research and his integrity and his posts to Riptide have become the local version of Matt Taibbi, "beat" reporter for Rolling Stone. Maybury generally does a good job of keeping the peace, and despite him being a Bloody Sox fan, I like him personally. We had many a good personal conversation over lunch at the Upper Crust Deli. I thought the exchange of ideas was helpful, for a time. But Mayburrito knows where his bread is buttered, and his blog has more often than not become the playground for the propaganda of the "frog and snake" crowd. There is a definite bias, and Maybury admits as much with his all too frequent "its my blog and I'll post what I like" rants. I thoguth maybe he understood where our priorities lied in a city that is probably a few years from bankruptcy and becoming unincorporated San Mateo County, but reading his blog day after day hasn't convinced me he sees this as a burning issue for the citizens of Pacifica.
But somewhere during this controversy over the Sharp Park Golf Course, I began to see that once again Pacifica wasn't being given the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Ian Butler's word and a handshake became moot once he went back to ragging on Tod Schlesinger. I mean crikey, I stood there and watched 2 men shake hands and agree to disagree, and there goes Ian back at it like it never happened. And I realized that some people will shake your hand, stare you blank in the eye, then stab you in the back if it suits their agenda. Hey, that's politics, they say. And I say the ref throws a 15 yard B.S. flag on that. Any person who lies to accomplish his or her goals is part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Because at the heart of what I am saying is most people in Pacifica work hard, volunteer when they can, but otherwise aren't really given the TRUTH on a daily basis. And the citizens of this town need it. Not pie in the sky promises, not fake handshakes and thinly veiled agendas, they need someone to tell them the ship hit the iceberg and they better think about grabbing a life boat before its too late.
Does it make any sense to anyone that while Brent Plater, Ian Butler, and Carlos Davidson are promoting one of the most dishonest land grabs in the history of the Peninsula, effectively dismantling the one true "tourist" attraction of Pacifica in the Sharp Park Golf Course . . . Mayor Julie Lancelle (who ironically supports the golf course!) is busting union lines in the paper by making a direct plea to city employees to kick their union bosses in the ass to help close an $863,000 budget deficit? Gosh, Mister Wizard, how do an attack on a revenue generating enterprise and lack of city revenue have anything in common?
You know what, there have been endemic budget deficits in Pacifica since the Friends of Pacifica helped "save" Mori Point. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that there haven't been any "good times" in Pacifica, financially, regardless of the state of the economy. At least we consistently fall short during booms AND busts. The same people who say hiking trails and snake preserves are our future also ran world class developers like Don Peebles, Trammel Crow, and Barry Swenson (among others) out of town.
Beautiful hills? We got 'em. But they're full of fleas and ticks and other nasties. Wetlands? We got 'em, but they have to be sprayed every 3 weeks to keep West Nile away from the natives. We have a state of the art sewer plant that overflows during every heavy winter rainfall, miles of missing sewer pipes in our infrastructure that contaminate the soil and ocean every single day, and we had the worst drop in our road quality in the last 4 years out of SEVEN COUNTIES!! Oh yeah, and we're broke with $140 million in debt obligations. Sewer rates go up even as use goes down, and the economic plan heaped upon the good citizens of Pacifica are a Walgreens and more taxes.
As for my family moving to Texas, it was the right move. We're in one of the richest counties in the country with some of the highest rated schools. In today's economy, it is all we hoped for and more. But we spent many years making good friends who shared our vision of Pacifica, as a city who could make a few smart decisions if the right people were in charge and the lie-mongers got kicked to the curb. So my guns may be in Texas (*Author's Note: I have never owned a weapon nor will I ever own a weapon. A belt buckle, maybe) but my heart still lives in Pacifica for now.
So open your ears, your eyes, and your mouths! I love a good fight. I'm half Irish! No one gets censored here, and if you feel the need to launch a personal attack, be ready to accept the same back at ya. Let's have a good, honest, down to earth brouhaha about the facts, not as we wish they were, but as they are in all their painful glory. You've been lied to, Pacifica. For years. I believe in all that you are, and all that you can be if we can work together and be honest with each other.
JEFFREY SIMONS
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
46 comments:
After watching Ian Butler over the years I have concluded that he is not capable of independent thought. What you are hearing, when Ian speaks, are the implanted mantras of extreme environmentalists John Curtis and Brent Plater. Forgive Ian for he knows not what he does.
For the record, here is the "despicable swipe" that Jeff refers to (from my Pacifica Tribune column titled "Gallows Humorist"):
"Jeff Simons, the city council candidate who ran on a platform of fiscal responsibility, owes $11,000 from his losing campaign. He owes it to his wife, which can only mean one thing: lots and lots of dishwashing."
And here is the excerpt of Jeff's letter to the editor a month earlier, which was the source of my joke:
"Mr. Howard also said my campaign has $11,000 in outstanding debt and that was one of the worst he's ever seen, yet the only person my campaign owes money is Robbyn Simons (my wife). So please feel free to continue making generous contributions to my campaign (I should note she is a registered Republican and quite sensitive about money)."
I find it interesting that Jeff, who delights in attacking others, would hold a grudge for nearly a year from such an innocuous quip. You know what they say about people who live in glass houses...
And as for the above comment about me speaking the "implanted mantras of John Curtis and Brent Plater", remember that I advocate a 9 hole course, just like ...Tod Schlesinger.
I don't hold a grudge, Ian. I shook your hand just like Tod did, and your word and your handshake mean nothing. You and Fred Howard continually attacked my campaign and my family with half truths and sarcasm, which is you're right to do in a free country. A country I served to defend. As a columnist, you should have never mentioned my family, and again you continue to deny any wrongdoing. Mister Howard made a completely baseless assertion based on faulty information, to which I was responding in good humor. You had no business, nor would any responsible columnist, to make the comments you did. It was never your place to do so.
Your lies will catch up with you, sir. Not just about me, but about Pacifica. I think you're a despicable person . . . not the first in my life, and not the last. No grudge, just the truth.
I'll say here what I said to John Maybury in private: you are not this community's Will Durst, you are this community's Glenn Beck. Cheap, without conscience, without fact, an instigator without remorse who will say anything to promote a failed agenda. I don't hold a grudge, I'm just pointing out your continual lies. Perhaps I should write a column about your financial situation and the various liberties you take with the law? It wouldn't matter. You are so dense with your own ego, just like Plater and Davidson, that no hard truth about yourself would ever inspire change.
By the powers invested in me by the almighty Olbermann, I dub you 3 the Worst Persons of the Week.
what I find utterly fascinating is that Ian is focused on defending the cheap shot he took at my wife, but when I also say: "while Brent Plater, Ian Butler, and Carlos Davidson are promoting one of the most dishonest land grabs in the history of the Peninsula, effectively dismantling the one true "tourist" attraction of Pacifica in the Sharp Park Golf Course" . . . he offers no rebuttal. Except to say he advocates a 9-hole golf course (and continues perpetuating a myth that Tod S advocates a 9-hole course when it was a comment he made at a City Council meeting as a passing thought, not an outright endorsement) which is like saying I advocate half a snake, or I want to preserve just the top half of the Mona Lisa.
Excellent article Jeff. It's nice to see truth in print without being censored. Thank you to all who started this blog.
Lois Rogan
Perpetuating a myth? Passing thought? Tod's televised words at the city council meeting were "I have been advocating a 9 hole course for years".
I love it when none golfers tell us that a nine hole course is good enough. This is not and shall never be an option for a true golfer.
Hey Ian, what if that nice stairway to the top of Mori Point only went up half way? Would that be ok with you? Did'nt think so. What if the 2.2 million dollar snake bridge had a wall half way through? No good right? Thought so.
This is why I do not and will not ever advocate a nine hole option at Sharp Park.
I've known Tod for years and that was the first he's ever mentioned the golf course and 9 holes. I speak to him almost every day and he never talks about it. I asked him about this issue and he says his comments were flippant, he's no 9-hole advocate. Its not an issue he is focused on right now, and he admits a 9 hole course is no solution.
Sorry Ian, but you're taking a little political grandstanding way out of context to garner credibility and it ain't working. You're usual style, take something one person says out of context and write you're own narrative around it to make you look thoughtful. Go back to criticizing my weight on youtube and then crying about how painful these personal attacks are on Riptide.
Again, notice how Ian wants to focus on what Tod said and what it means, instead of addressing the blatant lies being perpetuated by Brent Plater and Carlos Davidson to ruin one of Pacifica's only real tourist attractions, in order to "preserve" a species that Ian's own show seems to indicate is flourishing and in no danger of becoming extinct. Notice how Ian doesn't address the city's collapsing infrastructure, or the endemic budget deficits.
Nope he'd rather follow people around with cameras and recorders, provoke them, then record their reactions as some sort of "gotcha" game so he can cry "victim". Again, this is what passes for "leadership" in Pacifica. Ignore the economy, ignore the health hazards of a collapsing sewer infrastructure and the expanding wetlands, ignore the city being on the brink of bankruptcy . . . let's talk about Tod making a flippant comment about the golf course and pretend we're all smarmy and superior.
So when Tod publicly stated that he has advocated a 9 hole course "for years" he meant to say that he never really thought about it until right then? Maybe I should post that footage so people can make up their own minds.
"...in order to "preserve" a species that Ian's own show seems to indicate is flourishing and in no danger of becoming extinct."
You mean the part where the zookeeper holding an SF garter says there are only about "12 to 20" of them left at Sharp Park, and as few as 600 in the world, and their numbers continue to decline?
"Nope he'd rather follow people around with cameras and recorders, provoke them, then record their reactions as some sort of "gotcha" game so he can cry "victim"."
If you've seen my show, (which doesn't air in Texas, so I'm gonna assume you haven't) all I do is ask people's opinion and record it. No one is ever provoked, there is no gotcha, and there is no victim. There is just the public getting a chance to voice their opinion, and so far everyone I have interviewed has been quite happy with the results. Do you just make this stuff up while you are writing it?
I'm sorry, I don't have time to debate the merits of restoration vs. preservation, it's all I can do to factually rebut the bizarre inaccuracies in your posts. Perhaps you should stop wasting people's time and focus on something other than untrue personal attacks. Otherwise this site will descend into irrelevance at best, and at worst turn the public away from any real point you may have buried amongst the petty sniping.
Wavelength is worldwide on the internet.
so now Ian denies following Tod Schlesinger around with a video camera at a City Council meeting to provoke a reaction, or editing a video of "Tod Unhinged" and posting it on youtube and Riptide to provoke a reaction.
I did see the golf course episode of "Wavelength" and saw Barb Arietta and your other guest get very agitated about the lies that were allowed to propagate from Brent Plater's mouth and your own. I also saw the interview with the zookeeper who said they have seen more baby snakes since the Mori Point restoration.
There are no merits to "restoration", other than placating a few egos. Its been very clear from Day 1 of CBD's assault on the SF Board of Supervisors that not only is Brent Plater willing to say anything to further his own agenda, but he has some pretty fanatical followers willing to do the same.
But keep trying to marginalize the truth, Ian. You're good at it.
Butler, you are so overmatched. Give it up.
"now Ian denies following Tod Schlesinger around with a video camera at a City Council meeting to provoke a reaction"
Actually, I stood in the back of the council chamber taping Tod's rant at oral communications. After he finished his bizarre rant, he marched to the back of the room and yelled into my camera "If you put anything on YouTube that has been edited, I'm gonna sue you!" It was quite a performance.
I never said a word, followed him around or provoked him in any way. I just pointed a camera at the guy who was making a fool of himself in public. That episode is now up for an award. Wish me luck!
I have posted on YouTube the segment of my TV show called "Ian Meets a San Francisco Garter", which Jeff Simons spun thusly, "...a species which Ian's own show seems to indicate is flourishing and is in no danger of becoming extinct."
I encourage anyone interested in the truth to watch the segment and see what was actually said, it is quite informative. It can be seen here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dhyTuHPnrA
From the video:
Butler: "I would have thought that all the work they did on Mori Point already, these would. . . their numbers would have been increasing by now."
Zookeeper: "And they have seen more of them. I mean, when they first started here, they'd seen like 1 or 2, and I know there's been a few more sightings so . . . anyway, it takes time, its not instantaneous, you have to, you know, slowly build up a population. I think its exciting they're still seeing them so that's a good sign for sure . . . I know they've found some youngsters so that means . . . there is some breeding going on."
This is the statement to which I was referring. Draw your own conclusions, but this statement seems to indicate the species is recovering quite well at Mori Point.
also, there is a link along the sidebar to Plater's video entitled: "Restore Sharp Park Wins Debate on Pacifica Public Television!"
"...this statement seems to indicate the species is recovering quite well at Mori Point."
Can you say cherry picking? She also said the present estimated total population at Mori point is "12 to 20". Any population under a few hundred is in serious danger of inbreeding. 12 to 20 is barely considered viable, let alone "recovering quite well".
see for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dhyTuHPnrA
Well maybe since you're advocating for the "survival" of a species, you should know a little more about the timeline to repopulate? How is it "cherry picking" when it was her direct response to the very question you asked her?
She also said when asked how many were left in the Mori Point: "I think that they've estimated that its population is only about 12-20 at this time, but its really hard to tell. They're difficult to see. In fact, biologists have worked here for years and not seen one . . .so its really really hard to tell. they're smart. They either get really trap shy and don't go into traps, or they're really . . . they love traps and just keep going in there and catching the same individuals."
If I quote the entire interview to prove I'm right, is that still "cherry picking"? Talk about cherry picking you're data!! Numerous times the zookeeper said its hard to estimate the population, but Ian says that is good enough for his infallible scientific research.
Ian, you are so clearly losing the argument against Jeffrey and your own video seems to undermine a lot of the reasons for getting rid of the golf course.I mentioned before that you are over-matched. I would now have to say you are totally over-matched. ;0)
Ian, you really are a "Funny Guy". The frogs and snakes are laughing at you...
Simple math:
18 HOLE MacKenzie designed Sharp Park Golf Course = x * Sharp Park (where x is some percentage of the total acreage of Sharp Park)
and:
Mori Point + Sharp Park NOT = Critical Habitat for recovery of RLF and SFGS (per USFWS - the official referees on this)
therefore:
18 hole MacKenzie designed Sharp Park Golf Course NOT = Critical Habitat for recovery of RLF and SFGS
Federal law: Any area not designated as "critical habitat" has no bearing on the recovery of a species
CONCLUSION: Sharp Park Golf Course has no bearing upon the recovery of the RLF and SFGS.
They didn't give the Nobel Prize to me and Obama for nothing...
Since Jeff and Tod have accused me of misrepresenting Tod's statements about turning Sharp Park into a 9 hole course, I have put together this informative video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9d3lclQM34
Enjoy!
Ian,
you're better than Glenn Beck! I love how you "cherry pick" your videos. Tod made 1 statement at 1 meeting to support the 9-hole course. He has since withdrawn this comment, and clearly stated that at the next council meeting. You continue to state that he supports a 9-hole course, which isn't true.
But you keep on misrepresenting people. It seems to be what you're good at.
the Butler did it...
"Tod made 1 statement at 1 meeting to support the 9-hole course."
Actually, according to Tod, he spoke with the mayor supporting a nine hole course prior to the meeting.
"You continue to state that he supports a 9-hole course, which isn't true."
Twice I stated that Tod supported a nine hole course (the same amount of times as Tod!). Since then I have simply shown why I thought so at the time.
"But you keep on misrepresenting people."
It's funny Jeff would say that just after misrepresenting me. Looks like somebody is projecting.
See for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9d3lclQM34
well you keep playing your clever little word games, Ian. At least we won't censor you here.
I'm curious about your obsession with Tod, though. You follow him everywhere like a little lapdog, hoping to catch an opportunity to make fun of him for some self-gratification. C'mon Ian, tell us the real reason you were so excited to shake Tod's hand that night.
"You follow him everywhere like a little lapdog, hoping to catch an opportunity to make fun of him for some self-gratification."
Uh, I've never followed Tod anywhere in my life.
Can you please stop saying things that are patently false? It's a full time job just debunking all of your crap, and it's probably wearing out any readers who have tried to follow along. But if you insist on making this site the "Jeff Attacks Ian Show", I guess I'll just have to keep defending myself.
Will Riptide post this? Doubtful. This is in response to John Maybury's post about Moderated Blogs.
"Our prime directive is that posting must be respectful; if not, it goes in the trash".
How is allowing Brent Plater to Call Jim Vreeland drunk at a public meeting being respectful? When I pointed out that the same Brent Plater accused Sharp Park management of under reporting rounds and pocketing the money for themselves I was vilified by you Mr Maybury.
As far as I'm concerned the above article if you will, gives you license to spread your own type of propoganda. Riptide is not anything close to a neutral, fair site. You allow the posters with whom you agree with to get away with the very things you don't allow from those with whom you disagree with. This is not a blog, it is an outlet for your message and those who follow your lead. If they don't walk in step with your so called rules, their post will not see the light of day, like this one I submit to you now probably won't.
How do you justify your disrespect for differing opinions at Fix Pacifica by calling it Fox Pacifica? At least things there are on the up & up and not "moderated" to present one man's opinion. Shame on you John for not playing fairly.
"I've never followed Tod anywhere in my life"
now now Ian you and I both know that is a patently untrue statement.
Butch,
Thanks for you post. To be truthful, Fix Pacifica has several editors who don't always agree on things. We disagree publicly and privately. Viva la difference!
This is an interesting conversation. Ian attacked me on Riptide (because I said I was healthier in Red Bluff)and was allowed to say that I was ridiculing and insulting the whole town. When I tried to respond to the attack, the premise was that Ian got to do that because he was defending Pacifica and that I had "attacked" Pacifica. At that time, John and I had a lengthy email discussion. I asked John if what I was writing was "hate speech" and he said no, but he had to censure me. So Ian pretty much gets to say what he wants on Riptide and I kind of wish we could censure him here...just because... but then we wouldn't be "fair and balanced", would we? Although Ian is quite amusing when he is trying to be serious.
Isn't there a meeting tomorrow night (10/6) in San Carlos? Anyone know where it is? Does it strike anyone as odd that the meeting to discuss Pacifica's fate is in San Carlos? Does anyone think it is odd that a San Carlos company called Recology is supportive of paving over Pacifica? Is this a case of one San Carlos business patting the back of another? Recology's logo includes a highlight of the letters "eco" and a little green plant growing out of the letter "R." And they support a six-plus lane highway that Caltrans is trying to railroad through Pacifica?? They forget we don't live in a Communist country. Low-level government cannot dictate to the populace. Pacifica is an educated and energized town. Pacificans fight for land like it's their children. Caltrans has tried this before many times. I've only lived here six years, but I did my research before moving here. Maybe Caltrans should look at the historic record. Go build where people want concrete. That's not Pacifica.
www.originofalphabet.com
Jennifer, I saw your same comment on Riptide. San Mateo County government presides in San Carlos. The road "fate" is now a 24 year identified outstanding issue. Even NIMBY city council members "get it", with exception of Sue Digre, who is stuck about where you are.
You consider yourself "the populace", I submit to you that you are more likely a vocal minority. Most ordinary people who commute might prefer not to be "stuck in traffic", and there are compelling safety and ecological reasons for keeping traffic flowing on the only highway we have through Pacifica.
Threatened in this city is sustainable development. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_development>. Viewing the graphic land, civic, economic formula there maybe you can figure-out why this city "fights over land". (And since you posted your comment on Jeff's 10/6/09, two year old article for some reason-- I'm sure he would agree with this comment).
Most people accept that traffic is a problem there and solutions are needed. The argument many have is over how to go about that. Extend the freeway segment by segment through this town or explore other less costly and less invasive options that have been ignored? What's the majority say? Who knows? No definitive survey has been taken and no one, certainly not the Chamber or Fix Pacifica, can accurately claim to represent anyone outside their small memberships. Even within those groups there are different opinions. Just your basic Pacifica street brawl to be probably played out in the courts for years and years.
"...or explore other less costly and less invasive options that have been ignored?"
Anon (10/6, 6:49pm), the 287 page thoroughly researched and considered DEIR/EA Highway widening document has several pages of discussed options that have been explored and set-aside, including a graphic summary page of these. The public process, including commentary, has been going on for several years, and will continue until 10/22/11. By all means submit your suggestions that no one else has considered.
Based upon your voting proposal, shall we also have a regional majority vote for similar public safety issues, stated for this measure as "Shall regional highway 1 be widened in Pacifica?" Then, we must do the same for the 20 other San Mateo council cities? Burlingame needs a bridge replacement. Pacifica has a bridge replacement in process. Vote for each one, if the vote fails so does the project safety. Oh well, we all voted, the ballot cost is $100,000 or more each time. Fortunately there are Federal and State regulations that counter that "idea" in favor of the common good and best practice benefit of us all.
From my view, the Pacifica Chamber of Commerce was very savvy to have a member vote regarding the highway widening commuter traffic solution, and they were unanimously in favor of moving the process forward. Moving the process forward is how progress happens, Anon. As for "Fix Pacifica", just us posters, most of whom have good sense. For those of you who ultimately want nothing and no fix (as evidenced by this highway congestion issue over 24 years), if you are now threatening a law suit against DEIR/EA regulatory research, review and approval, good luck!
As for me, I like the efficient 1.3 mile highway widening design which fits well into the limited highway space available. And I'm glad those who have held regulated "right of way" property along highway 1 (37-45 years) may finally sell their property to the State and receive financial compensation. Win, win!
Pacifica Riptide is run like a Communist Country.
Not everyone who opposes the HWY1 Widening is a environmental radical. Most don't believe it will cost 50 million. Most believe it will end up costing Tax Payers much more. Total Chaos.
Majority of Pacificans love our rolling coastal mountains and hiking trails.
Majority of Pacificans want to keep the 18 Hole Sharp Park Golf Course.
Majority of Pacificans want a New Senior Citizen/Disabled Veterans Living Facility built on Oddstad.
Majority of Pacificans wants Nicks Rest. to renovate and build a Bigger and Better Hotel.
Majority of Pacificans want the old WWTP to be a New Library, City Hall.
Majority of Pacificans want to be able to enjoy their day on the beach with bonfires and mans best friend.
Majority of Pacificans do not read Ian Butler or John Maybury.
Majority of Pacificans are excited about the new business being built at the Sea Bowl lot by Tait Cowan.
It is up to City Hall to work it all out and get it done. They were voted in for a reason.
Polling done by one who asks and knows Pacificans.
A Must Read For Every Californian.
http://www.vanityfair.com/business/features/2011/11/michael-lewis-201111#gotopage2
anons649and1243 reasonable and probably very close to what most Pacificans think about this.
Unfortunately on this site you'll get the same canned response from one writer who seems either to not read the item she's responding to, or, as others have pointed out, does not understand. Oh well.
Jennifer Ball. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Wasn’t she the one that spoke at the Caltrans meeting. I mean, yelled, flung her arms about wildly, and scared me? I’m not quite sure what she was saying because the delivery was so over the top that the content got lost. Sort of like a Gaga video. I always though that Eileen Carey was a little…..well, you know. Laurie Goldberg was up there, too. Now we have Jennifer Ball. A perfect trio, and Eileen seems to be the rational one.
I like the 3 stooges. You know, Moe is the smart one
Anon (501), similar to "majority of 1" Anon (1243), improving our only regional highway through Pacifica is NOT a popularity contest.
Anon (1243) cares about the cost to generic taxpayers, really? 45 years since that part of the highway has been updated, traffic congestion identified there 24 years ago. The overdue issue is commuter safety and efficiency, and the cost is not likely to be lower or less in the future.
And, "laid-back majority of 1" Anon (1243) didn't add much in the way of city infrastructure or accountability to his/her anonymous, selective "I know Pacifica" list, weak.
Anon (501) apparently unlike you and the Anons you reference, I did read the 287 page highway DEIR/EA, and do understand the functional issues. Further, the highway widening is in agreement with the current city council (exception Sue Digre), and with prior city councils, with resolutions or majority votes passed in 2003 and 1999. 1999 to 2011, that's 12 years later. Where have you been? Apparently not commuting during peak traffic hours.
As the "majority of Pacificans" might know widening the highway 1.3 miles will allow the traffic to flow better on and off Fassler, Rockaway and Rena Del Mar exits. This is not "rocket science" or complicated to understand or visualize. But, if there were 10 highway meetings with diagrams and other drawings; with all the rejected for cause highway alternatives explained to you Anons, 1 by 1 personally-- its pretty clear, you wouldn't "get it".
So, Anon (501) you also say my reasoned highway 1 comments based upon known fact and scientific evidence leading to certain understandings are "canned". To that I say, your Anonymous comments may be "creative" but are not well presented, and may have been discarded because they are not practical, reasonable or cost effective. When it comes to city improvement, one thing from you that is almost always canned, and that is: NO.
What the hell was in that can? Everytime somebody gets Kathy going I get this image of a darling little poochie chasing its tail faster and faster in smaller and smaller circles. Just wanna hug her and say it's gonna be ok.
"...little poochie chasing its tail.." (Anon 10/7, 10:49pm).
And every time I see another tangential, crazy comment like this, I think another undescribed Anonymous cannot stay on topic, and cannot advance a serious conversation in any sustained, intelligent manner, (this conversation being highway 1 widening).
So far adrift Anon's thoughts wander to diminished images of "a little poochie chasing its tail". At the same time, Anon assures the public his intentions are benign. Kind of reminds me of a cat purring while attacking whatever.
Anon, let us know if you have something to say rather than nothing. And, maybe consider using your given name, rather than none. When you attack a commentator rather than address the topic, having the courage and integrity to use your real name seems only fair, (otherwise, as Ian Butler says "..you give Anonymous a bad name").
"And every time I see another tangential, crazy comment like this, I think another undescribed Anonymous cannot stay on topic, and cannot advance a serious conversation in any sustained, intelligent manner, (this conversation being highway 1 widening)."
Why Blog? Why Now? Post by Jeff Simon.
Sorry Kathy Meeh. I guess most of did not know that this post from J.Simon was really about HWY1 Widening. My bad.
Tell that to Jennifer Ball, who decided to randomly post her comment on an article from two years ago.
you think she doesn't know
Post a Comment