Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Letter to the (Tribune) Editor
Dear Editor:
Fed up by the blight, stagnation and "NO business as usual" in Pacifica? City Council incumbents Vreeland and Digre have had 8--12 years to fix Pacifica's financial mess and have failed miserably. (If you harbor any doubts about our predicament, see Councilwoman Mary Ann Nihart's "My Turn" opinion column in the 10/13/10 Tribune, in which she concedes: "we face running out of money in 2012.")
Mindful of Einstein's definition of insanity (doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result), I am voting for a change in the composition and direction of Pacifica's City Council this November 2nd. I am voting for Barbara Arietta, Susan Vellone and Len Stone.
While watching the candidate forums and reading the candidates' answers to the Tribune questionnaires, I have noticed a few common themes. The incumbents running for re-election are quick to blame the economy as a whole for Pacifica's structural deficit and dire financial straits, even though Pacifica's fiscal crisis pre-dates state and national economic downturns by several years.
I have, also, noticed that, when questioned about the numerous missed opportunities at generating revenue in this town (an empty, scarred rock quarry; a vacant, rubble-strewn old Waste Water Treatment Plant site; Palmetto Street dreams but no money to make those dreams a reality), the incumbents merely shrug and attribute perpetuation of the status quo to the "will of the people." Bunk. If Pacifica's City Council had exercised some leadership and not just passively (cowardly?) allowed the distortions, misrepresentations and outright lies to circulate unchallenged, we could have had some world-class projects on their way to fruition. Granted, the economy may have temporarily stalled such plans, but Pacifica would have been poised to reap economic benefits once overall recovery resumed.
Empty, unfulfilled incumbent promises, misdirected excuses, and repeated failed and misguided leadership (can you say "Biodiesel Boondoggle"--?) have thwarted progress and threatened municipal solvency in this town for far too long. I believe that Barbara Arietta, Susan Vellone and Len Stone share a new vision for Pacifica which promotes smart growth, progressive, balanced and green business development which would, concurrently, respect, protect and preserve our amazing natural resources and environmental gifts. I am confident that these three new council members will work creatively, cooperatively and energetically with Ms. Nihart to not just endlessly "meet and confer" about potential revenue-generating schemes, but actually effect the change Pacifica critically needs to remain a vibrant and self-sufficient community.
Connie Menefee
Park Pacifica
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
87 comments:
good luck with that. too late. you should of done something more in the past.
Babs, yes. But the other 2 are not qualified even in the best of times and nothing can change that in time for this election.
The problem is not incumbents it's the lack of qualified candidates. Real choices would be nice for once.
I would never vote for someone like Barbara Arietta. She is the epitome of what a politician is like that we don't need. Too close to the DNC. Can't think freely. No independent thought to her. Just another vote for the DNC. Nope. No. No WAY!
The problem is not incumbents it's the lack of qualified candidates. How do you know if they are not elected yet? Also the Incumbents are not doing nothing. So don't defend them . If Arietta gets elected, she's got better brains than Digre.Sue Digree doesn't know how to speak in public, she mumbles to much, puts her hand in her face like she bored of been there. We need professional that know how to put Pacifica in better place.
"Too close to the DNC"
LOL
Anon 10:57am City council should have done something more? A lot more, they didn't. More comments referencing 10/20/10 letters-to-the-editor from Connie Menefee and Bill Moore on the ballot measures article.
Anon: 11:18am with regard to experience, the incumbents are technically qualified but inept in providing this city a balanced economy and future. There is a quick training school for new city council members, and the stabilization of city staff which is adept at day-to-day issues, history and research should bridge the new learning curve quite a bit. This city needs improvement, and that need for change has existed for 8-12 years (as stated by Connie Menefee in this article).
Scotty 12:15pm may be pointing out that city council office is non-partisan. What affects this city is non-partisan: we all rise together, or we sink. The latter is the current issue.
Experience counts. Connections count. Confidence counts. Babs!
Don't tell me about experience and confidence. So you agree in the big mess Vreeland puts us through. I am just hoping people in Pacifica say NO to them . give a chance to new, young energetic people . Why to keep thinking in the old saying to vote for the old ones. When I first moved 27 years ago,I was told to do vote for the old ones in the council because of the experiences. I was doing that but not anymore because it has been proven that they all do favors to their friends only.
We are living in the United States of America not in a Communist country.
Anon, 1:09pm true an argument that favors unproductive "open space" oligarchical rule could be made with regard to city council leadership, "friends"-- with conformity for others.
Most of us who patronize Fix Pacifica understand the consequences of "nothing for Pacifica, and have chosen not to conform. "New leadership" is needed.
Once again, Babs.
Vreeland had/has lots of connections and experience. He is well connected with the democratic party. Arietta will be the same. DNC in San Mateo is extremely liberal. They are for raising taxes, no developement. That's right NO DEVELOPEMENT! Pay attention.
So if we choose "NO DEVELOPMENT". How do you think we could survive? It has a endless positive impact in our town.
1.) create jobs
2.) people would shop in town
3.) more property taxes -goes to help schools
4.) visitors- tourist -overfill the hotels
5.) Pacifica will be on the map
6.) Youth will give back voultering time to Pacifica because there will be more to do.
6.) Seniors citizen won't have to move out.
7.) etc, etc etc,
I think I'm gonna hurl.
Anon 2:59pm WRONG. Don't equate Arietta with Vreeland, nothing could be further from the truth. I don't know what you think you're saying, but Barbara Arietta is for "smart development", and on such issues votes the same way I do, and suspect you do. On city council Barbara Arietta would be a great asset to this city and improve our image in the county.
Read for yourself, Tribune interview questions 10/6/10, also posted on Fix Pacifica.
Quarry. Barbara supported Measure L quarry development, currently still views that property as "..what a magnificent "center piece" this could be for our town. I envision the quarry to be the potential "smart growth downtown" of the 21st century coastal village called Pacifica."
Beach Blvd/Palmetto. Barbara said "I believe that the entire West Sharp Park commercial area and old wastewater treatment plant should be developed and/or remodeled. Again, just as in the quarry, at the site of the old waste-water treatment plant, I would like to see, perhaps, a hotel (but a small boutique one here) above street level with recessed plazas, hanging gardens and multi-levels, with street-level shops and restaurants, also offering alfresco dining at the oceanfront."
As a citizen, Barbara has been involved with the county transportation commissions for 4 years to improve traffic congestion on highway 1. You may remember that the #1 objection to quarry development was "traffic". She is for green development (that's what smart developers and builders do these days). "Open space"? She was the Chair of Pacifica "Save Sharp Park Golf Course".
Barbara Arietta's views are balanced. She worries that the city might not be able to bridge the financial gap until new "smart development" occurs. Knowing her focus and energy level, she will not stop until this city brings about a balanced economy, including what you or another Anon suggested at 3:12pm. So, in order to achieve the goal you desire, include Barbara Arietta as 1 of your 3 pro-economy city council candidate votes.
Thank you for hosting this blog, it is very interesting sometimes. I just want to say that in all my years of watching elections in this town I have seldom seen a candidate as unappealing as Barbara Arietta. She is so obviously enthralled with herself and her supposed "insider" status, like she knows so much more than the rest of us dumb slobs. Well, she knows how to get her name in the paper. She knows how to take over all those clubs and committees. She knows how to get her way. But for all the stuff she has written, I don't recall much that was very thoughtful, or orignal, or even very intelligent. She may think she's some slick political operator, but she comes across as manipulative, domineering, pretentious and self-centered. Many different people feel the same, but are too kind to say so. Most of my neighbors just roll their eyes when her name is mentioned. How many times has Kathy Meeh had to defend her "ethical lapses"? Shouldn't that be a clue? Barbara Arietta could never win an election in Pacifica. Thank God.
Wow, whole lot of emotion there. I understand Barbara's biggest competition and harshest critic isn't even running this year. I like to do my own research and make up my own mind. Babs 2010!
Nora 4:28pm, what "ethical lapses" are you talking about, you're crazy. Similar to Anon 5:32pm I know a good city council candidate when I see one.
And Barbara didn't get elected by others to all those Boards and Commissions because they wanted to get rid of her. Maybe you can figure that one out.
A Vote for Barbara Arietta is a vote for the sleazey political machine called "The Democratic Party"
Watch what they do, Not what they say. Who are her political mentors?
I have been talking to lots of people of pacifica that voted already. They did not vote for Arietta.
I have been talking to lots of people in Pacifica that voted already. THEY DO VOTE FOR ARIETTA.
Of course, Anon, some people vote against the most qualified. The intelligent people I know vote for the most qualified who can improve the condition of this city. That's what its all about: improving this city. 3 candidates, for sure make Arietta 1 of these.
Anonymous 11:12AM, City council in Pacifica is NON-PARTISAN, as are many other city and county offices. NON-PARTISAN means we ignore political affiliations because these political affiliations are irrelevant to getting the "common interest of the people" job done.
Your vote against "can do" candidates is a vote for "cannot do" candidates. If this is your political strategy, its seriously flawed assuming your goal is to elect "can do" candidates who can work together and win.
This city has major neglected infrastructure problems caused by the inaction of the current city council to fix. Okay vote the incumbents (Vreeland and Digre) out, but put-in candidates that will be effective. Get a grip!
Exactly. Get over the petty ego crap that holds us back every freaking time. Put the best, most qualified people on the job. Get serious because we haven't seen anything yet. The worst for CA and us is yet to come kids.
Sure you do. HaHaHa! What a joke.
Barbara Arietta 2010.
I saw the future. I saw it coming. I tried warning everyone. No one would listen. Now , you are asking the people of pacifica to vote in Arietta who is part of the same club that got us in this mess? All current city council are democrats. I don't trust Arietta. She is too involved with the Democratic Party. Vote all rats out of office. Give others a fighting chance.
If the same type of people get elected in office and your world comes crashing all around you, don't blame me. Don't ask me for any money. Don't call me. Don't knock on my door. Remember, 2007. And now look at us. It never got better, did it?
Anon 12:34pm, who do you want to "give a fighting chance", those who know nothing?
Kathy Meeh
You may discount my concerns about Barbara Arietta, but I and other elder residents take them seriously. Character is important. And old folks vote! Any politician can say what you want to hear. Grow up! Barbara Arietta is loud and ambitious. Her craving for the limelight is so obvious I almost feel sorry for her.I am sorry that you backed her, with your money too, but you shoud have known better. She is just too self-centered. Also she has never done a thing for our schools, the Planning Com. or the Chamber of Commerce. No glory there, I suppose. Again I say, she will never win an election in this town
Nora, NONSENSE, think you need a nap. "Nor a" do I take your comments seriously. Your "self-ascribed" smear campaign is not of good character, ugly.
Barbara's character is just fine, and she is positive on "elder citizens" and the contribution people of all ages make to improve our city. Barbara is efficient and effective and will work to assure this city has the best possible outcome. That's who she is. Barbara will make a huge improvement impact on this community, and that deserves support.
Nora, maybe you should get a dog to occupy your time and thoughts.
I echo what Nora said. With Barbara -- it's all about Barbara. We do not need this kind of egotism right now. We need folks who can work well with others. Barbara does not. I have experienced this many a time and I know several others who have had similar experiences.
I've worked with Barbara in groups and on issues with zero problems. I've seen her save the right direction in meetings where there were potential problems. She also shows-up. Your experience is quite different from mine Anonymous people.
This city needs intelligence city councilmembers who can grasp city issues and move this city forward. We do need that. I'll continue to support and vote for Barbara Arietta. So, echo away "folks" (sounds like city councilmember Vreeland when he's getting ready to sell our citizens snake oil).
I don't want them to all get along. Are you nuts? Getting along and being dominated by one councilperson is no good no matter who the "one" is. I want people with ethics and backbone to speak up and demand answers. Demand. Change the culture on the council.Barbara is honest and she has the balls to pursue the facts. No shrinking violet.So who cares if she offends the status quo lovers or those with something to hide. Go get' em Babs! All pols have big egos or they wouldn't run. Some are just slicker and more manipulative at disguising it.
Kathy
This is certinely a stimulating conversation. I will not take offense at your suggestion that I take a nap or get a dog. I can understand how upset you are, politics can excite extreme emotions. My husband spent a lot of money over many years on politicians, some good and some bad. I learned a thing or two. Barbara Arietta, I'm afraid, is bad. You are betting on what the boys used to call a "non-starter". I don't mean to be offensive, but most politicians are only in it for themselves, thinking only of the power and prestiege they can achieve. and how they can use it. This is more apparent on the state and national levels, but Mrs. Arietta shows all the obvious signs on the lowly level of City Council! My husband wouldn't give her a dime. I stand by all the comments I made in my prior note: Mrs. Arietta is manipulative, domineering and pretentious. She wants desperately to be among the big-time pols, and would gladly sacrafice anything that got in her way.
Myself and my friends, having seen a good bit of life, believe that character is important, that it strongly influences how you relate to people, how you work with them, and how they work with you. Kathy, you are the only one so far who says you get along with Mrs. Arietta in a working environment. Many other people have indicated otherwise.Why are there so many stories about her obstructive behavior? Where there's smoke, there's fire.
I'm sure you are as sincere in your concern for Pacifica as we are, but I think you have made a serious misjudgment in character. Pacifica needs a new hand on the helm, but not that of Captain Bligh. I don't want to politicize this message (more than I have!) but I'll say I am not voting for any incumbants and I am certinly not voting for Barbara Arietta. Thank You. (This message was written with the help of several friends)
P.S. Kathy, one of the "ethical lapses" I earlier referred to was the time, about a year ago, when Mrs. Arietta wrote a big, half-page story for the Tribune, lavishly praising herself, and neglected to sign it. Everyone thought it was the work of an ordinary reporter. You yourself did, as I remember. Then the truth came out (as it does) and you had to spring to her defense, and attack that poor man who raised the issue. We wondered then, as now, why doesn't Mrs. Arietta speak in her own defense?
Well Nora, we could debate who actually is making a misjudgment of character. Currently we have a city council that "works together" and the ideology defeats the economy of the city. I would consider that to breach city council "ethics" against "the good of the people" of this city.
In your P.S. "ethical lapses" commentary, guess you missed the part where the Pacifica Tribune Editor manages the newspaper. Thus, sets-the rules, approves, sometimes recommends posting of articles. Barbara not signing a Tribune article had nothing to do with Barbara-- so, the thrust of your commentary is misdirected. Further, many articles in the Pacifica Tribune are not signed, particularly when authors are not staff journalists. This is easy research, consider opening the newspaper and see what is signed and what is not signed before you attempt to tether others with false accusations.
So, the reason I would "spring to Barbara Arietta's defense" is because she is highly qualified to step into city council and help improve this city. You may also want to read or re-read the comments made by Anon, 10/22, 9:29pm-- maybe you'll understand the issue better.
Anyone who gets things done makes enemies. Anyone who is in the public view makes enemies.
Barbara has enemies. So what? They can ask their husbands who they should vote for and cluck about that terrible Barbara Arietta. Petty, petty stuff. An obvious and well-orchestrated smear campaign has been going on from the moment she announced she'd run. Politics as usual in Pacifica. We're going to get exactly what we deserve. I'm voting for Barbara because I don't want to just moan about change, I want it to happen.
I've been in plenty of meetings with Barbara, and even though we disagree on some things, I've never had any issues with her. Her personality obviously rubs some people the wrong way, but there's nothing mean-spirited about her. She's very open to hearing differing opinions, and when she decides she wants to get something done, well...you better get out of the way.
I agree with some others who think that's what Pacifica needs at the moment. Sue Digre and Jim Vreeland can be very personable, but that hasn't translated into tangible accomplishments.
Well said. We either get smart, stop being manipulated, stop nit-picking personalities and start voting for people who can get things done and are willing to work or we will never see any improvement. And we will have done that to ourselves. She is a do-er not just a talker. Vote for Barbara!
Kathy,
I'm not contrasting Barbara Arietta to the present City Council members. I told you I would not vote for the incumbants. I am comparing Mrs. to the remaining candidates, three of whom are as easily well qualified, probably more intelligent and certainly less burdened with controversy. These are people who could actually win an election, and that is the first step in "fixing" Pacifica.
However, Mrs. Arietta's excuse for trying to deceive people with her shameless newspaper story - "It was the editor's fault, it had nothing to do with me" - shows she may well have a future in politics. Just not in Pacifica.
I noted the 10/22/10@ 9:29 posting. How quaint, an anonymous letter expressing admiration for ethics and backbone.
Also noted the anonymous Arietta supporter who complained about the "obvious and well-orchestrated smear campaign." The ladies and I are honored.
"An obvious and well-orchestrated smear campaign has been going on from the moment she announced she'd run." It's not a conspiracy, it's people expressing an opinion that's different from yours. You seem to have a problem with that.
Oh very funny. We're all expressing different opinions. That's why we're on here. I think anon is right. It's just too relentless and one-note. It's all personal and, yes, anonymous, too.
Nora@4:28 The ladies and I are honored. Really?
Sounds like a conspiracy to me. Well you ladies just keep on conspiring. What did she do, catch you snoozing at PHS? I'm anon too. No whackpack attack for me.
Actually the current council members do not get along all that well. Vreeland has issues with getting along with others and for that reason I am not planning on voting for him either.
Getting along well with others does NOT mean you have to agree -- it does mean you need to be civil with others (which Barbara is OK at) and you have to have some regard for the thoughts and needs of others (Barbara is not shown herself to be good at this). If its not about Barbara and/or there is nothing in it for her, its not worth her time.
You do have to have a certain amount of self-confidence to run for office but too much ego is a problem when having to work with others.
Signed,
Not Nora
(but I agree with her/him)
Nora 4:28pm, maybe you just don't remember the reason for the newspaper article--it was an announcement of Barbara Arietta to the San Mateo Transportation Authority Citizens Advisory Committee. Generally a person's background (resume) is mentioned in such an article.
Then, Ms. "ethical" Nora, you changed the Editor's policy "rules" to "It was the editor's fault..". You referred to the SMTA/CAC announcement as "shameless", and stated Mrs. Arietta's...was "trying to deceive people."
For others, not you, here are 3 major improvements for Pacifica, Barbara Arietta supports, and has worked to affect, and involved others (of course there is much more):
1. Quarry development (including measure L).
2. Fixing congestion on highway 1 (hastened funding for studies 2007, pushed for DEIR, appointed to County citizens Committee.
3. Save Sharp Park Golf Course, Chair, worked on that 3+ years, attending SF meetings.
Not Nora agrees with Nora, and people who oppose the 3 items above also oppose Barbara. The rest of us would do well to get Barbara Arietta elected to city council.
Kathy
Just to refresh my memory, I looked up the original correspondence in Fixpacifica about Barbara Arietta's Tribune article, and found them in the archive for Friday, Jan. 8, 2010. I don't believe I read all of these at the time, but I have now. I feel more than ever that this qualifies as a definite "ethical lapse", and suggest that anyone who doubts that review the archive.
As "Concerned Citizen" points out, the newspaper story was grammatically written in the third person singular - Mrs. Arietta never had any intention of signing her name to it. She knowingly let readers naturally assume it was written by an impartial reporter. This is what I consider "shameless". Whatever the policy of the paper might have been, Mrs. Arietta allowed this self-serving deception to occur. I noted that some of the bloggers at the time did not consider the matter too serious, or not unexpected behavior from Mrs. Arietta. That is sad indeed. The girls and I were most impressed with "Concerned Citizen's" last letter where he offered some insights into Mrs. Arietta's long list of civic Accomplishments. Well worth reading.
To those who say we are nit-picking personalities or over-emphasizing trivial incidents, we say we have had enough nonsense from egotistical, power-hungry, grasping, tax and spend politicians, and those who think otherwise are simply being naive.
"Concerned Citizen", if you are reading this, we would be honored to welcome you into our "obvious and well-orchastrated smear campaign". You sound like our kind of guy!
If the city council is non-partisan, why is it important, to most candidates, they get the democratic endorsement? or why it even gets mentioned on their political mail they send to all pacifica voters?
I save all the political mail. I have gone through all of it. They sure do like to mention all their endorsements. So, to the person who said city council candidates are non-partisan is another lie.
Watch What They Do, Not What They Say.
Nora, you're back! You are "nit-picking, you are "over-emphasizing (immaterial) trivialities". Policy and oversight is clearly set by the Pacifica Tribune, not Barbara. To justify your continued obsession you cite comments from another anonymous blogger identified as "concerned citizen", (another complainer who very well may be you).
Was the Tribune article you reference false, did it list achievements not accomplished by Barbara Arietta? Did you even include the archived article here? Answer: No, no and no. Got ethics?
Why Barbara's extensive, highly qualified and accomplished background is a stumbling block for you is beyond my comprehension. From all I know of Barbara, her intent is to make our city better, and she has the background, potential, desire and capacity to do that.
Here's a definition for "tax and spend". Whatever you are referring to, that's not Barbara.
Anon 4:40pm. The position of city council member is non-partisan, look at the ballot literature mailed to you or try e-voter for dummies. Here's the goal in electing city council members this time: Vote for and elect qualified people who will improve this city. If you cannot get beyond your ideology the city will continue to fail.
Key word @12:32 is 'obsession'.
If this "shameless Tribune article" (oh dear me) and your endless " but I don't like her" rant is all you got, then you got nothin' ladies. Take a nap.
I just reviewed the archives and it's really not a big deal. And frankly, reading Barbara's article, you'd have to be an idiot not to know she wrote it. Those sentences that go on and on and on, the paragraphs that go nowhere. Sorry, Nora, they'd throw you out of court.
The local Democratic party endorsement means nothing to me, as I'm a Decline-to-State, but Pacifica is something like 56% Democrat and 16% Republican. That means it likely matters to lots of people. Anyway, the people on council act more like Green Party members than Democrats.
The only endorsement I pay attention to is the Sierra Club endorsement. Years ago I used to look at it favorably, but given how much damage Sierra Club-endorsed candidates have done to the city, it's almost guarantees a "No" vote from me.
Ditto on the Democrats or any other endorsements, Steve. There is a reason the smartest apes on the planet have a big brain.
No need to neglect the advantage.
I always thought Barbara was OK, a little strange but nothing too out of line. But Kathy acts like she's the only one that can save Pacifica and I'm not so sure about that. Barbara might be good, but then she might make a circus out of city council for the next 4 years.We know Len Stone and Sue Vellone woundn't do that.
3 votes for city council members, Anon.
The "circus stick to Barbara" idea you are promoting is a delusional myth in your Republican brain-- your bias against any one who is a Democrat, however most qualified, and however non-partisan.
Be careful, what you are saying is false, in meetings Barbara is very cool and frequently "saves" good ideas and the direction of the meeting.
Vellone, Stone and Clifford and Tanner are also good candidates. City council is non-partisan. Who can be effective (qualified) and win? That's something for you to think about and vote for-- 3 votes.
Yeah, let's keep everything non-partisan while I sit at the back of the bus.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101025/ap_on_el_pr/us_obama
Love how he is President of all the people.
Via The Hill:
Latino voters, the president said, would have an opportunity to send a message to Republicans, who Obama accused of “politicizing” immigration reform and the border security debate. Obama said “pressure has to be put on the Republican Party” if immigration reform is to become a reality.
“And if Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, we’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us, if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s gonna be harder — and that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2,” he said.
Priceless.
Lois' last post convinced me...
Obama's not getting [i]my[/i] vote for City Council!!!
Glad to hear that Anonymous, I already have more then enough competition with the other eight candidates for city council.
Lois, “pressure has to be put on the Republican Party” if immigration reform is to become a reality. This is a long over-due issue. Good idea, but probably not a good idea to invite Meg Whitman to that table.
(Unless I missed something, the link does not support the quote).
12 years republican Congress until 1/2007, 8 years republican president until 1/2009. Thanks Republicans, but now it would be nice to have more of you "on the bus" helping to clean-up the mess.
You are too funny...I just figured if you can bring up the Republican "delusional myths" thing of always pigeon holing people because they don't think the same way you do, I can bring up whatever I want whenever I want. I love that free speech thing.
President Obama did say it...you look it up. Let's sue some more states for trying to protect their borders. Let's waste some more taxpayer monies.
Get rid of Barney Frank, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That would be my first step of helping to clean up the mess. Wasteful, wasteful, wasteful...
Lois, "delusional myths" was directed at not every "Republican", just that "Republican" who has yet to figure-out "saving Pacifica" is not a partisan issue.
I have no problem with what President said, or with your quote, and I agree with Anon 2:14pm, and Thomas (vote for me) Clifford 3:02pm.
Kathy, if a Republican had told the Democrats to get in the back...we would never hear the end of it.
I pretty much don't agree with anything you or the President say - so what?
Speaking of "delusional myths", what was Barbara's explanation of "The Sharp Park 12" as noted in a Sept. 28 @ 3:27 comment to the Sept. 27 posting of "Barbara Arietta's Kickoff Party"? Can she at least tell us who the other eleven are?
How does Barbara stand on Measure R and Measure V?
Lois you are too funny!!!! Just wondering why you, like Mr. Simons, can't let go of Pacifica?
"How does Barbara stand on Measure R and Measure V?"
She's pro-Measure R. I'm pretty sure she's also pro-Measure V.
Anon@12:17 we don't know any such thing. We're doomed. They're a buncha puppets.
Gee, Anon, because I don't live in Pacifica, I can't have an opinion? I sold many homes to people who still do live in Pacifica so I do care very much what happens in the town. I have over 30 years of history in Pacifica, so get used to me giving my opinion whenever I feel like it.
You are too funny...I just figured if you can bring up the Republican "delusional myths" thing of always pigeon holing people because they don't think the same way you do, I can bring up whatever I want whenever I want. I love that free speech thing.
In a blog post about Pacifica's city council race you bring up totally unrelated comments President Obama made.
So instead of adding anything to the debate about Pacifica's city council, you derail the discussion with your white noise.
We're the funny ones? Riiiiiiiiiight.
You're absolutely right, Flemish Painter. Let's get back on track. Who, exactly, are the other eleven members of "The Sharp Park 12"?
Kathy,
I realize of course that you are a whole-hearted supporter of Barbara Arietta, and a tenacious one at that. I admire your conviction. But I would be disappointed to think that you were deliberately misunderstanding me. As I clearly stated in my letter of Oct. 25, "She (Mrs. Arietta) knowingly let readers naturally assume it was written by an impartial reporter. This is what I consider 'shameless'." It was NOT the original newspaper article that I considered "shameless", nor am I questioning the information in the article, but the fact that she let us think that someone else wrote it. Is that clear, Kathy?
As for the weak excuse that it wasn't her responsibility, I said, "Whatever the policy of the paper might have been, Mrs. Arietta allowed this self-serving deception to occur". And apparently it would have been a succussful deception, if not for the much vilified "Concerned Citizen". The nerve of that man!
I'm sure your anonymous lapdogs will howl some more (what brave follows!) and wisely point out that all this doesn't matter, there are more important things to do, and we are "obsessed" with Mrs. Arietta. We are obsessed with Pacifica, and we don't think Barbara Arietta could ever win an election here. It's late . Good night.
Nora, there was no deception or attempt at such, just Pacifica Tribune Newspaper policy. In retrospect, a clarification comment might have been requested of the Tribune at that time.
Hopefully we will get "new change leadership" on city council. And, of course I will hope for the improvement of this city that 1 of the 3 elected will be Barbara Arietta.
Sic'em boys.
Kathy
The attempt at deception was obvious. The attempt at avoiding responsibility, of passing the blame, is pathetic. In retrospect, a clarification should have been offered by Mrs. Arietta.
But that is water under the bridge. Our little group has been doing some informal "polling" around town, talking to people at lunch and at the market, and we have found very little support for your candidate. To paraphrase Tricky Dick, "We won't have Barbara Arietta to kick around any more!" Next time you back a politician, take a good, close look at those "character" issues.
This will probably be our last note before the election, and feel it fair to say who we ARE voting for. All five are voting for Sue Vellone and Len Stone. Then there are two votes for Tom Clifford, two votes for Heather Tanner, one vote for Leo Leon.
The problem with Kathy Meeh is that she does not look closely at any of her candidates. All she does is reitterate the "talking points" from their web sites. To Kathy, everyone who disagrees with her is a bully and a liar and then she starts accusing people of impersonations. I suggest to all of you with intelligent well thought out and researched comments come try Pacifica Riptide instead. Personally, I would like to read your valuable opinions without Kathy Meeh's nonsensical comments.
"I suggest to all of you with intelligent well thought out and researched comments come try Pacifica Riptide instead."
that has to be the funniest damn thing i've read in a long time. thanks for the chuckle!
Nora, it clear to me (and should be just as clear to others) that your ongoing castigation of Barbara Arietta (a well qualified candidate of excellent character) is a "personal", loathsome political ploy.
This is America, you get "free speech" too, however misdirected and abhorrent. As Anon 10/23, 2:34, says "Anyone who gets things done makes enemies. Anyone who is in the public view makes enemies."
So, you're one of those "enemies", meantime
Barbara Arietta has a laundry list of efforts, accomplishments, and endorsements-- all good and worthwhile improvements for this community.
As for the non-issue newspaper article you've obsessed about, any clarification might have been offered by the managing newspaper editor, had the issue been consequential, not the article writer (Barbara Arietta). Apparently the Pacifica Tribune did not think their policy should be questioned, qualified or clarified.
Nora and Friends:
Thanks very much for the two votes! I really appreciate your support!
"Fed up" 2:27pm, personally I find no reason to like you, because you are not credible, and you now insist that you are not an "impersonator"-- with a name like "Fed up with Meeh"? So, your name, and the "news flash" you made yesterday (found no where else) comparing Buffington/Arnott to Bernie Madoff was all true?
About Pacifica Riptide, of course my first impression was to agree with Anon, 2:27pm. But, just to be fair....I asked the question: "can it be true that 'Fed up' never gets it right"? And, void of no "talking points" in front of me, the only default answer I could come up with (talking to myself) was "give the guy (you) a break". So here are the Pacifica Riptide results when viewed:
1. Riptide: 5 day list of "hot comments", times posted, and "timely articles":
10/28: no comments yet.
10/27: 9:39pm, Vote Leo Leon, a paid ad.
10/27: 9:18am, No on 23 Pacifica Climate Committee, a paid ad?
10/26: 8:50am, Giants Baseball article.
10/26: 12:38am, No on 23 (above)
10/26: 12:36am, Moss Beach stop big wave development article.
10/25: 4:37pm, Police officer nails child molester article.
10/25: 2:58pm, Runaway Dump Truck
10/25: 8:27am, same as above
10/24: 8:47pm, same as above
10:24: 4:57pm, same as above
2. Compiled data:
1) 5 days: lots of scintillating articles, most of which appear to be paid ads with hot topics not found on Fix Pacifica.
2) Total: 10 posted over 5 days = 2 comments per day average.
3. Conclusion:
1) Your statement as it applies to YOU: "I suggest....intelligent well thought out and researched comments come try Pacifica Riptide instead."
2) So, you must be right "Fed up", Pacifica Riptide is waiting for you to post there.
a) You can "get clean", and change your name to whatever it really is (Morrison I think).
b) You will be appreciated for continuing to posting what you consider to be "intelligent well thought out and researched comments".
c) You will not have to deal with "Kathy Meeh's nonsensical comments".
This is a good day for everyone. Good luck and good bye!
I think Barbara used to be a republican -- and only recently converted to Dem. Just like Don Horsely. Right?
Whatever. Change is good. We need new council members. No more Freeland and Degrees. The planet earth is getting too hot.
Vote them out. On Nov 2, 2010
Thanks for the scintillating bickering and in-fighting. We're pretty new in town, and, in fact, to California. All I have to go on is facts, not years of personal animosity.
Right now, based on my research, understanding of issues, reasons we chose to buy a home in Pacifica, I'll mostly be voting against the suggestion of folks here. It's hard for me to put my faith in poorly presented notes with scads of personal attacks. Is my computer the only one with spell check? The little red squiggly lines mean you did something wrong.
By the way, many years ago I was a junior reporter and student at a small, local paper. The introduction pieces like the one for Barbara Arietta in the Pacifica Tribune were usually based on the individual's press kit. Sometimes my editor would ask me, the kid, to simply shorten and clean it up to be more like an article. The essence was written not by me, but by the person being featured. I think that's what may have happened here -- and, yes, those pieces were completely self-serving to the individual. A whole lot of journalism ain't hard-hitting reportage.
The above anonymous has an interesting point. If you take the time to write well-reasoned, edited, and factual posts, over time they have much more influence on people's thinking than the diatribes, insults, attacks, and general wackiness that pervades this blog.
That's free speech, baby. If you don't like it, go to Riptide where only the editor's point of view is allowed.
Ah, Anonymoose, very well written and well reasoned. Clearly, there are only two possibilities "free speech," which I guess in this case means typo-ridden poo flinging, or the Riptide.
Anonymoose, that's ineffective speech. Keep it up. I don't care. I was only pointing out that the more you do it, the more meaningless it becomes.
"Poo fling" Anon 4:39pm take your choice. I suspect Anon 3:44pm is really not someone new to this city, and may be you.
Anon 3:44pm, bickering? Maybe consider getting over it, vote for the best challenger candidates if you want this city to have a future. Otherwise, be happy with much higher taxes, or city default with higher fees.
Generally the serious issues here are not about "behavior", they are about about 8+ years (up to 30 years) of "no growth" city neglect vs. an expected balanced city economy. This blog tends to favor "balanced economy". And, that view is shared by "tea drinkers" who have dropped-in to talk about national and state politics.
Want placid, try the other city blog, pretty pictures, not much scrapping because of the lop-sided "no growth" view, "controlled" and "edited" by the moderator. Once in a while something fine, fun and intellectual may happen here, almost never there.
So, you also took a poke at Barbara Arietta regarding the announcement as Transportation Vice Chair. Oh, terrible thing Barbara has such a long list of accomplishments.
As you mentioned Pacifica Tribune is a community newspaper-- not much that is "hard-hitting", and not much funding either. You also commented that the oversight for what is printed occurs from newspaper staffing, bingo! It can't be easy to produce a interesting-to-everyone weekly newspaper in this (divided) city. The credit for doing that goes to Elaine Larsen and her staff-- I think they do a great job!
Kathy,
FYI. I am both poo fling anonymous and the one at 3:44 claiming to be new to the city. I am new. Just had the two year anniversary of buying our house.
I didn't ask for placid, and you need to breath before assuming an attack. What I meant in writing about Barbara, who I have never met but may vote for tonight, was to clarify the so-called ethic lapse. I was on your side. Common journalistic practice at the Tribune and every small-town paper to rely on the press releases, etc.
I came here for some local information and color, because I don't want to be a frivolous voter. I got a little, so thanks.
Your schooling has only been mildly irritating, however Kathy, rather than informative. I posted anonymously, because I'm lazy and on work equipment on a work connection (where I tend to not engage on the Internet). Now, I'm anonymous so if we ever meet you won't fly off the handle too soon.
Thanks, all, though. I'll keep plugging and maybe some day someone will be writing here about what a social deviant I am. Although for now, I'll vote rather than run for city council.
Sorry, me again. Quick correction. I meant some day WE'LL be writing here...
Anon 6:39pm, thanks for your further clarification, and welcome to Fix Pacifica. Nice to have people commenting who don't make typos, I do so that creates an average.
When people are unfairly smeared it almost always makes me angry. Some of us have been trying to affect structural improvement in Pacifica for 10 years, but without a pro-economy city council majority of 3 that can't happen. We'll see what challenger candidates win later tonight.
Post a Comment