 |
| Over-the-wall delivery of computer, no problem. |
On the first day of Christmas, Pacifica gave to me, a crumbling old Pier, falling into the sea.
On the second day of Christmas, Pacifica gave to me, the Vallemar Conservators, hugging every tree.
On the third day of Christmas, Pacifica gave to me, a long-awaited Dog Park, Phooeee!!!
On the fourth day of Christmas, Pacifica gave to me, broken sewers everywhere and a higher fee!
On the fifth day of Christmas, Pacifica gave to me, Palmetto Avenue, where there'll never be a shopping spree.
On the sixth day of Christmas, Pacifica gave to me, the Planning Commission violating the Brown Act. What hypocrisy!
On the seventh day of Christmas, Pacifica gave to me, the Quarry where nothing will ever be.
On the eighth day of Christmas, Pacifica gave to me, Highway 1 where a traffic jam exists inevitably!
On the ninth day of Christmas, Pacifica gave to me, the old Wastewater Treatment Plant, still sitting empty.
On the tenth day of Christmas, Pacifica gave to me, the Linda Mar Beach Parking Lot where you can still park for free!
On the eleventh day of Christmas, Pacifica gave to me, Sharp Park Golf Course where there's nary a human species.
And finally, on the twelfth and last day of Christmas, Pacifica gave to me, a filing for BANKRUPTCY!
Tod Schlesinger
Posted by Kathy Meeh
47 comments:
That is a top ten LTE and Post of 2011!!!
Todd has been b*tching and moaning for years. Can anyone enlighten me, what has he ever done that has made a positive impact....anything?
Tod or Todd? Both stand-up, use their own names.
Tod has been speaking-out for a better economy in this city for years. A structural better economy isn't much happening in Pacifica, but don't put that on him. And you Anonymous (412)?
Hiding, snipping anonymous people "b*tching and moaning" attacking others is not only unenlightened, it is despicable (in my opinion). Grow-up, we all live here and contribute, and no one made an Anonymous complainer the God of individual human net worth and merit, did they? Think about it.
The person who whines on this blog 24x7 is calling someone a "complainer". That's rich.
My original post about TOD S. has gone unanswered. Other then being a public gadfly, which is a polite way of saying bitching and moaning, has he actually done....anything??? I ask because I want to praise him if praise is due! I suspect the question gets misdirected because that's easier then providing an answer.
The answer to "what has he ever done that has made a positive impact" is nothing.
Anonymous (948), I think you just repeated your original (12/22, 4:12pm) mean-spirited question (939), then answered it according to your own mean-spirited criteria or more likely bias (948). And, this doesn't speak well of you, that you have nothing better to do than attack people anonymously.
As usual, there is truth in what Tod has suggested in the hyperbole of his 12 Days of Christmas prose reconstitute. Of course, such comments would not exist if the city had moved forward with balanced development over the past 10 years-- instead we have 60% open space, a broken down city, and an empty bank account.
I do recall that Tod was one of the first people to advocate for paid parking at the beach lot. He even did some research for the City with, I think, either the Coastal Commission or the State of California, on what the process was to begin charging. I guess that would qualify as an attempt at a "positive impact".
Tod, was also involved in stopping the 5th grade science project of Whole Energy and Vreeland and Hall.
You know the Bio-diesel plant cluster fk
Is Cris Porter seriously shilling for Tod? All he did about beach parking was yell at the council, and Tod yelling at you is NOT an effective motivator! I understand at least one person has a restraining order against him, and he is now being sued for half a million dollars in SF court for doing to his tenants what he does to the council. If you don't believe me, look it up. Anyone who is crazy enough to try to argue "Tod's not so bad" is gonna regret it when his chickens come home to roost.
Do you seriously expect anyone to take you seriously, Anon 849am? "Yelling at City Council" is all we've got, because they (City Council majority) have NOT been doing their core job for 10 years. They have been figureheads protecting significant "no growth" policies against the better structural interest and improvement of this city. The result: we have all the debt, broken-down city infrastructure, and 60% permanent open space to prove it.
Then, without your reference to a tenant court case and the case summary background-- according to you, Tod is "doing to his tenants what he does to the council", hence "yelling". "Yelling", you (an Anonymous comment poster) expect us to believe if true, or not, regardless of the conditions-- that is worth a tenant class action suit in Court of $500,000 against Tod personally. GET REAL! Either you're too lazy to provide credible information, or its not true. And, based upon what you, yourself, have said, I'll vote for NOT TRUE.
Other than your quest to attack Tod, how did you like the "12 Cays of Christmas, Pacifica style"? Guess not. I've known Tod for at least 12 years, and everything I know of him is that he is anti-corruption and a force for good, including the sustainable improvement of this city. Now that's shilling for Tod, count me in.
I take Anon 849 seriously. Tod is being sued by tenants for going nuts on them. This is the second time he's been sued for this behavior. The last one was settled out of court, but this one won't. The trial was going to be in December but was moved to end of April because budget cuts reduced availability of courtrooms. If you doubt, ask Tod about it.
Tod S. "a force for good." a-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha. HAHAHAHAHA.
Well good for you Anon 1227, who may be the same as Anon 849-- without specific detail, you have made some kinds of merit conclusions, repeated as a vague, flaky rumor. Where is the specific lawsuit link, so we can verify your claim? Tod resides on the side of fact, so far all you you 2 Anons are promoting is myth.
And 1) Tod "yelling" at city council for their lack of accountability vs 2) your claim of an alleged unverified, actual unknown-cause business lawsuit? Wow, that not only a stretch, its a leap over-the-moon.
Pretty obvious who posted this?
Think about who had run in with Tod recently!
Who dat?
I'm not taking sides in this online slapfight, but if you go to the SF Superior Court Case Name Search, you can put a name in and party the night away.
Tod is a scream/er. If he turned down the volume a bit and stopped mugging for the camera and those so-called fans who egg him on, his detractors might realize he's no fool. Like my old granny used to say "even a blind hog finds an acorn now and then".
Thanks Fogel. Interesting reading. I know the "love me, love my dog" crowd will conjure a defense but personally I'm glad to learn that Tod's m.o. is consistent regardless of his target and audience. Must be his world view.
Anon (755) no "defense" needed. Tod's business is property management, includes dealing with tenants. The 1 harassment claim appears to be tied to a quit title action. Thanks for the SF Superior Court link Chris (642).
BTW, the 12 Days article above has everything to do with problems in Pacifica-- no comment focus there. Remember the saying "don't shoot the messenger"?
Oh my god, the poor man has to deal with tenants. Imagine the horror. I mean for him, not the tenants, of course. Not to worry though because he's got Ms. Meeh as his personal apologist. I know, I know...no apology needed. Done.
Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco
Case Number: CGC-10-505052
Title: JAZMIN BARRERA et al VS. HARRY E. JENSEN III et al
Cause of Action: QUIET TITLE - REAL PROPERTY
MASTER JURY CALENDAR SET FOR NOV-29-2011 CONTINUED TO MASTER CALENDAR JURY ON APR-30-2012 AT 9:30 AM IN DEPT. 206 DUE TO UNAVAILABILITY OF COURTROOM AND PER AGREEMENT OF PARTIES. ON 11/29/11, DEFENDANT EXERCISED CCP 170.6 PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE AS TO JUDGE CHAITIN AND IT WAS ACCEPTED BY THE COURT. ON 11/29/11, PLAINTIFF EXERCISED CCP 170.6 PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE AS TO JUDGE ROBERTSON AND IT WAS ACCEPTED BY THE COURT. (206)
Kathy, you wanted details of anons claims and you got them but the excuse making continues. Typical.
There are multiple cases listed and at least one restraining order. Make even a partial read through and you can't miss the pattern of behavior unless you want to or have to. Gee, my tenants may not love me but they haven't taken me to court or filed for a restraining order against me. And back in the day when I was a tenant I didn't need the courts. What's Tod's secret?
The court case claims of Anonymous attacker (8:49) do not hold-up, and the civil harassment claim by Jazmin X Barrera which occurred 2/2/11 was denied 2/16/11 here.
Anonymous (918) what does the superficial court "detail" above mean? The quit title action and counter complaint listing Jazmin X Barrera (again) and others continues.
Anonymous (938) with regard to the court action there is no implied or interpreted meaning other than property management business, and subsequently no implied or expressed non sequitur "pattern of behavior". These money and title cases have occurred during our weak economy (2010, 2011), only 1 case occurred in 1994.
Being an "apologist for Tod", I believe him to be a good, fair businessman. And, by comparison, I consider anonymous attackers who have not done their foundational research first to be pond scum. But then aren't anonymous attackers really pond scum to begin with?
Depends on what they're attacking. You, however, are stolidly predictable. Keep flailing away.
Anonymous you are just upset about Tod's poem. He is telling the city council the truth and sometimes hearing the truth really hurts.
Also as much as people criticizes Tod. He is the only one that goes to city council meetings and tells them about how crappy they are.
For his honesty and bravery I really admire Tod. He is my hero.
For those of you playing along at home, this is the guy we're talking about:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMen7MGGv4w
Thats what happens when you let the deadbeat hippies take over a city. Pacifica and SF are perfect examples.
Rent control in the city gives the deadbeats and hippies way too much power
Youtube @735, which guy, then Mayor Vreeland that interfered with Tod's allowed 3 minutes at city council or Tod?
Kathy attacks others for not doing the research when they provided info that is available online. Then she completely makes up what she imagines these cases are about. There is a case going to jury trial on April 30. You can read the complaints by clicking on view at Nov-3-2010 and the amended complaint at Aug-11-2011. This is not about money or title. The tenants are saying that Tod harassed, threatened, and intimidated them. They are seeking treble and punitive damages. Kathy makes erroneous assumptions and guesses while attacking others who reference real info.
Anon (931), something for you to think about: The hostile attack on Tod, began prior to the information link from Chris Fogel, 12/27, 6:42pm. No effort was made to discuss the article, the "big elephant in the room", broken-down city issues. Consider, do you think sniper harassment attacks from you or others are reasonable, fair behavior? And, if so why have a dispute justice system to make such determinations?
Admittedly, (not being that technologically savvy), previously I did not realize my computer pop-up blocker could be easily over-ridden for viewing these court complaints, nor are some of us as interested in this case as you are for whatever reason. How far out-of- your-way did you have to go to find such tangential distraction, or is it possibly that you are the attorney for the Plaintiff?
IMO, the reason the Plaintiff's case is in itself inadequate for advance conclusion is: 1) the actual particulars other than those alleged by the Plaintiff are unknown, 2) the Defendant's case (Jansen III and Schlesinger) response has yet to be presented, 3) the Defendant (Jansen III and Schlesinger) may be considering a counter-lawsuit, 4) court ruling on this case has not taken place.
Having said all that, since this case is "in our face", thanks for the directed pop-up information, and the Plaintiff's 8/10/11 court filing update. Meantime, I have every confidence that Tod is a "big boy", and he won't be crying about this case, however the determination.
Now presentation of factual information is "sniper harassment attacks."
Consider, some posts are anonymous because Tod's M.O. is to threaten, harass, and try to intimidate by bullying.
The legal record speaks for itself and it speaks volumes. But as we've seen here it can be interpreted through the reader's perspective and/or loyalty. Oh my! If you start publishing "poems" you can expect attention and scrutiny. I think Tod loves attention and he is probably well aware he can't control where it leads. And some of us can predict with near absolute certainty how Tod will be interpreted and defended and by whom. The poem? Nothing new there. Anybody actually doing something about it other than blogging mostly to the choir? No, and that's nothing new in Pathetica.
Dear Everyone and Anonymous, I normally don’t respond to unsubstantiated attacks but the mere fact that Anonymous is unwilling to identify himself or herself is a clear indication that Anonymous has much to hide. Being vocal and bringing up important issues, to my knowledge, is not a crime nor have I ever been convicted of one. Last but not least, I strongly suspect Anonymous is Ian Butler as he has nothing better to do than sit around and check the Register of Actions in a feeble attempt to discredit me, absent the facts. Anytime Anonymous or anyone else wishes to identify himself or herself and debate me regarding Pacifica and/or any other pertinent matters, you know where to find me. I am not hiding under a pseudonym.
"How far out-of- your-way did you have to go to find such tangential distraction"
It must be so, since it comes from the Queen of Tangential Distraction (2:08 PM)
Yes, Tod. We can tell it's you by the way you intentionally misspelled your name, as you always do.
*Gasp* The POTUS is posting on this blog. If you don't believe me, click on Barack Obama @ 10:08 and it takes you directly to the White House.
Everybody whose name is on their post must be whoever they say they are.
I am not Ian Butler.
Queen of Tangential Distraction? Not to go off on a tangent but can we include in her realm all that weird punctuation and ESL sentence structure? Really stunning at times.
I am not Ian Butler.
I removed the comment that was purported to be from Tod, since it looked phony.
If Tod or Kathy let me know that it really was him, then I can restore it.
I am impressed that Barack Obama follows the blog.
Steve, comment from Tod is real. Better to be prudent as you were on this. Thanks for restoring Tod's comment.
In this response, I was going to add an extra "e" to my last name, but didn't get approval from the White House (POTUS).
The proof is in the pudding!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9d3lclQM34&feature=related
Interesting that Tod's accusing me of making an "unsubstantiated attack" is itself an unsubstantiated attack. In contrast, thanks to Chris Fogel's link, the lawsuit against Tod has now been very much substantiated. The charges appear to be quite serious, but since the trial is not yet underway this is not the appropriate time for a public discussion on the matter. I'm sure that when the time comes many Pacificans will be following the proceedings with keen interest.
If Plaintiff gets the judge to view one of Tod's council appearances the case is over. Impossible I know but such a money-saver for the court.
Tod, with one D, you're not that important! Get over yourself. You are responsible for the council makeup as it looks right now.
Thanks for the "strategy".
Jeezlaweez Jester, now you've gone and told
Tod S. that he's a political king maker! What were you thinking? And thank you for the strategy.
Post a Comment