Dave Pine appears to have taken the open San Mateo Board of Supervisors seat in unofficial results:
| MEMBER, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, 1ST DISTRICT |
| Completed Precincts: 549 of 549 |
| Vote Count | Percentage | |
| DAVE PINE | 21,504 | 27.2% |
| RICHARD HOLOBER | 20,565 | 26.0% |
| GINA PAPAN | 20,346 | 25.8% |
| TERRY NAGEL | 7,979 | 10.1% |
| MICHAEL G. STOGNER | 5,896 | 7.5% |
| DEMETRIOS NIKAS | 2,683 | 3.4% |
Measure C, the high school parcel tax, has gone down to defeat, with a
decline in support from last November A much lower vote total this
year was in evidence:
| JEFFERSON UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT MEASURE C (2/3 APPROVAL REQUIRED) |
| Completed Precincts: 92 of 92 |
| Vote Count | Percentage | |
| YES | 7,983 | 59.5% |
| NO | 5,432 | 40.5% |
Last year's election results were:
- Yes: 21,146 (65.83%)
- No: 10,975 (34.17%)
41 comments:
Measure C is going down and so too our schools. The minority has spoken.
Can't even pass gas these days. Welcome to California.
Channel 2 said "turnout" was 24%.
Measure C WAS NOT A BOND.. it was a parcel tax.
Parcel Tax funds are used to support school programs, instruction, and materials. Bond Measure funds may only be used for facility improvements such as the physical buildings, classrooms and grounds.
Lionel said it was ok to change "bond measure" to "parcel tax" in the original post, so I did.
Pacifica sucks.
1125, please explain what you are referring to: 1) the parcel tax did not pass, or 2) there should not be a reason for a parcel tax, or 3) people don't have the money to pay a parcel tax at this time??? What?
Definitely #1
EPA (generally considered the lowest income area in the county) voters passed the Ravenswood parcel tax by 68.5%:
$98 for 7 years and we could not support $98 for 4 years.
Emde, Bray etc. like to bemoan how "impoverished" we are here in P-town. You know, i am starting to think they might be right.
Impoverishment does only describe how much money and property you have. It also includes things like vision, community-spirit, and generosity, too. I used to think Pacificans had that. I am losing my faith.
Many people are struggling. Self-preservation is in the moment and rarely has the luxury of vision and generosity although it often comes with a large dose of distrust.
A and B pass, C fails. Ah Pacifica, our reputation remains intact.... stupidity breeds stupidity.
Correction:
Impoverishment does NOT only describe how much money and property you have. It also includes things like vision, community-spirit, and generosity, too. I used to think Pacificans had that. I am losing my faith.
Vision? Any long term city council (DeJarnatt, Digre, Vreeland or formerly Lancelle) ever expressed "vision", other than "save Pacifica property" by selling it into permanent "open space", then deliver it to the GGNRA?
Years ago (2003), during the city council recall effort, I heard from a large parcel property owner who was intimidated over several years by a key city staff member, asking this family to gift their property to "open space" and take the tax break, because the intend develop that family wanted for their property was not going to happen.
Comment from one of our city council leaders a few years back: "Don't you think its nice to pay some taxes... for all we have". The equally lame reason (excuse) this city does not have adequate funding: is all the fault of Proposition 13. Whereas, we all know the 88 acre quarry cash advantaged redevelopment property has sat empty for 25 years.
I agree with you Anonymous(1125, 230, and 347)) "Pacifica sucks". Until the old guard city council members are gone, improvement is unlikely, and losing your faith is reasonable.
Anon (319) this city has been sold a "no growth" bill of goods", and very "large doses of distrust" are justified.
I reluctantly voted for C because I didn't want our kids and their futures to suffer. It's defeat however, is no surprise.
Pacifica is beyond impoverished. It's beat up, sick of being lied to and fed up with Pacificans for No Growth who demand that we subsidize their lifestyle.
We need to be free of their welfare mindsets long enough to build a sustainable economy which will adaquately fund our schools, repair our infrastructure and restore vital services.
Their puppets (Veeland, deJarnatt and Digre) need to be thrown out of power.
Pacifica could easily become the jewel of the visitor serving San Mateo County Coastline but we need leaders who are interested in making that happen.
Pacific sucks - until everyone finally realizes we have to stop complaining and get off our bottoms and work together. Doing one committee and not having everyone listen or trying to get appointed to something one time is not enough to quit. Some how these people keep getting elected so they must know something or maybe the other side just can't find an electable hardworking candidate.
See Pacifica sucks
"Pacific sucks - until everyone finally realizes we have to stop complaining and get off our bottoms and work together."
Anon 533, "work together"? In this city, that must mean give-up, and cultivate frogs and snakes where "they saved Mori Point".
City Committees? If chosen by city council, the odds are likely be skewed 70% anti-growth friends of city council majority vs. 30% the rest of us. And, serving city council majority within prescribed guidelines, also means being "shut up". No point to that from my view, except to monitor the trail to the hypothetical/probable known-in-advance committee conclusions. Giving committee members a coloring book to fill=in the spaces between the lines might be more fun for all concerned (just a citizen comment for the "suggestion box").
The "getting elected" issue. You are aware city council majority has the forum, and to a large extent controls the ongoing "dog and pony" show, including meetings, media, appoints commissions, committees, task forces; controls citizen "going along to get along" and the spin locally, and has county influence.
It seems much of this city either doesn't know the difference, or has given-up expecting anything better. Too many challenger candidates run for city council office diluting the vote, and their supporter seem to be no better at unified strategy or counting the obvious.
Perhaps Pacifica will continue to "suck" until it can be a city no more.
"Emde, Bray etc. like to bemoan how "impoverished" we are here in P-town. You know, i am starting to think they might be right."
I would ask people to remember how long it has been since we had a finance director in the city government. I'm not speaking of the present administrative director, who had never run a municipal finance department before, and was appointed by an interim city manager going out the door.
That was four years ago, before the last big round of employee contracts were signed. Look where we are now, financially. Sense any lack of a rudder steering the ship???
Yes mr emde how much money did you just cost us taxpayers? Can you say disingenuous?
I publicly pledge to vote for the utility users tax if Digre, DeJarnatt and Vreeland resign before then.
Anon 1018, regarding your Lionel attack, transparency trumps being Anonymous every time. So "transparency" is worth some city "chump change", and sure beats the cost of consultants with the focused purpose to further tax our citizens.
As our friend Mike said several weeks ago "Develop the damn quarry". And as Steve said (1041), with some hope this city can improve, the utility users tax would pass.
Anon@10:18, again with the attack on Lionel Emde? Personal? Hit a nerve with you, did he?
It isn't the money that bothers you, it's the fact that he pursued it and prevailed. Emde saw something he felt was wrong, tried to go thru channels and got shut down by those in power. Fed up with the run-around and bullying from city hall he pursued his complaint legally because he felt he was right and he knew people were being misled and poorly served by the mutts we blindly elected and the trash company they fancied. People like Emde shine the light for the rest of us. I don't think that works for you.
I'm calling recurring bullshit on anon10:18. Sounds like they're over on the darkside.
I'd vote for a utility tax if we just had an experienced, talented finance director but while you're at it Great Oz, we'd also like 3 new council members each having courage, heart and a brain.
Emde cost the COP several thousands of dollars to make HIS point about an area of the law that is legally fuzzy (statute is not clear and the courts have not interpreted the issue).
Just like his insistence that employees take more cuts NOW given the city's fiscal sitch, couldn't he have put the brakes on his urge to until the economy was a little better to TRY to prove his point?
Lionel had a disagreement with staff over 218. He repeatedly asked the city change its policy regarding 218. Staff hubris caused the city money not Lionel's lawsuit. And he has brought a certain amount of democracy to the process that was up until now an act of sovereignty by staff and the previous waste hauler.
Steve Sinai said...
I publicly pledge to vote for the utility users tax if Digre, DeJarnatt and Vreeland resign before then.
I'll second that.
Oh no, I want them to suffer thru this disaster along with the rest of us and in public. Then kick 'em to the curb.
anon1230May5, more BS, you're unbelievable. Sounds personal rather than political. How long do you think Lionel should have waited? This city's finances aren't going to improve for years and that has nothing to do with Lionel Emde and everything to do with people at City Hall who have taken advantage of fuzzy legal issues, sweetheart contracts, political shenanigans and general incompetence in order to screw the public--if not intentionally then by negligence.
Ian said "The minority has spoken". Ironically, that’s what I find myself saying after each of several past elections where council incumbents get re-elected. In 2010 Digre & Vreeland garnered 14% & 13% respectively. Measure C received 59% of the vote. Your statement is not applicable.
I voted yes, but didn’t expect the measure to pass. IMO, this was not a vote against schools. Property owners are fed up, tired and broke having to bare much of the cost of running this city, due to lacking commercial tax revenues. Owners are looking closer now at council’s and appointee’s actions and spending priorities. I doubt most are happy with what they find.
Measure C failure is likely a voter’s indictment of past actions by council’s majority 3, largely responsible for the financial fix this city finds itself in. I doubt voters will vote for additional assessments, fees or taxes until there is a change in city council majority. We need people on council with a more balanced vision.
Marcus (1100), thanks for proving we have a minority run city. Think we can count and vote for the right number of candidates next time? Probably not.
On Riptide, Carl May said requiring a 2/3 vote for the parcel tax was not "democracy", but I think he may have forgot that a selective group (parcel owners only) are paying that bill.
To Markus @ 11:00 a.m.
While I appreciate your "Yes" vote for Measure C, I'm concerned by your statement that "Measure C failure is likely a voter’s indictment of past actions by council’s majority 3, largely responsible for the financial fix this city finds itself in."
Measure C was put on the ballot by the Jefferson Union High School District, which serves Daly City, Colma and Brisbane as well as Pacifica.
(Incidentally, if Measure C had passed, about 70% of the funds raised would have come from outside of Pacifica, but - with 2 of its 4 traditional high schools here - Pacifica could have benefitted disproportionately!)
Although the JUHSD works closely with all of the cities and the elementary school district within its boundaries on matters of mutual concern, it is a completely separate entity, with it's own school board and management, so punishing the school district because of dissatisfaction with city management would be a bit like punching me because you want to hit my neighbor! I hope that wasn't anyone's motivation!
Unfortunately Laurie that seems to be the case. Most folks don't know just how many government agencies there are in town. A lot of folks don't know the school and water districts have their own elections, boards and budgets and that our local city government has nothing to do with any of them legally or financially.
Markus,
Your math on the city council member's votes is off. Since each voter can vote for 2 or 3 council members depending on the year, the percentage of voters who voted for each candidate is 2 or 3 times higher than the percentage shown. So Jim Vreeland and Sue Digre each got votes from about 45% of the voters.
That is still a minority, but it's a lot more than 15%, and the important point is that the got more votes than the candidates that lost. In the case of Measure C, the 60% of us who voted for it lost, and the 40% who voted against it won.
Laurie,
While I was marking my ballot Yes, what kept running through my mind was the incompetent, welfare minded, one-sided and dishonest city council we have. With the help of their no development friends they have wrecked every opportunity to create wealth in Pacifica and they continue to try to raise taxes in order to subsidize their lifestyle choice. In better times, cities all over the country contributed discretionary funds to their local schools, particularly from their redevelopment districts. To my knowledge, Pacifica has never done this, even when deJarnatt and Vreeland were lying about a $7,000,000 reserve to secure incumbancy.
Rational or not, I had to ignore these feelings in order to vote Yes on C because it also felt like a vote to continue enabling this Council.
Now our kid's get to subsidize these rotten council people and their friends.
Confused? Or willing to say just about anything to make a point?
On Measure C, many people just said no because they think they can't afford it, some said no because they have no kids in school and don't see the value for society, and a scary number of confused voters let their anger towards the city council color their attitude about schools--seeing them all as one big incompetent, free-spending mob. The losers? The kids and the communities they live in.
Once again, my comment was deleted from this blog. Bunch of lying hypocrites.
Anon 9:07pm, mainly attacks are spammed. Comments like the one you just made, for example.
Outside our control, google periodically spams comments, so that may have happened to your two comments. Pending Steve (blogmaster) review, I am restoring these.
If the comment you're referring to was the one about someone being confused - yes, I deleted it. It wasn't a comment. It was an insult posted by an anonymous coward.
Steve, I think one of the comments I saw in spam (unrelated to the "confused" attacks) was that of Officer McFall response to Todd Bray. And, that was a public employee view comment worth posting as an article.
I don't remember seeing the McFall comment in spam prior, and was surprised in attempting to find it in restored form, it was a several day old comment. So, that may have been the google spam poltergeist at work, which happens periodically.
Thanks Steve, for your guidance in keeping the unwelcome personal attacks down, and the blog forum moving in a mostly positive, serious city dialog direction. Citizen comments and article postings are for the most part thoughtful, honest, high quality, and respectful. Perfect!
So of course you'll delete the unwelcome personal attacks on Vreeland, DeJarnatt, and Digre - "thoughtful, honest, high quality, and respectful. Perfect!"
I have deleted over-the-top comments about some of the council members in the past, but for the most part, politicians are fair game when it comes to criticism. My concern is in not allowing Fix Pacifica to become an echo chamber, where only one viewpoint is heard because anyone who presents an alternative perspective is chased off by personal attacks.
I won't pretend that all comments here are "thoughtful, honest, high quality, and respectful." Any forum where people are allowed to post anonymously will result in lots of low quality comments, with a few higher quality ones mixed in. Hopefully, people can recognize and filter-out the former and focus on the latter.
Anon 12:04pm, the factual track record of public employees and consequence as the results of their actions (or avoidance of actions) leading in City to improvement (or lack there of) is fair game.
My commentary 10:56pm was related to Fix Pacifica blogger policy specifically, but you knew that because your statement is a twist.
Here is Fix Pacifica posting guidelines (also viewable in the upper left side of this blog as stated by Steve Sinai, Blogmaster): "People may comment anonymously, but any comments that degenerate into 1) personal attacks against individual blog participants; 2) incomprehensible gibberish; or 3) attempts to turn conversations into grade-school playground brawls, will be removed."
Hopefully your comments will be more thoughtful in the future. Steve just posted his response, but I'm also posting mine.
Post a Comment