Saturday, April 30, 2011

San Jose police agrees to a 10% pay cut


This post is dedicated to citizen Todd Bray

San Jose probably got ahead of itself and is over-extended as are many cities in California. 

Associated Press, 4/29/11.  "San Jose police officers are offering to take a pay cut as part of a deal to avoid laying off as many as 250 officers. 

The San Jose Mercury News  reports that the union representing the city's officers on Friday offered to accept a 10 percent pay cut that the city wants from all of the unions representing city workers. 


With San Jose facing a $115 million deficit in the coming budget year, the salary cuts for all city workers would reduce the deficit by about $38 million. 

The Mercury News reports that even with the salary cuts, about 600 city jobs would still have to be eliminated, including 106 officers' jobs."


Posted by Kathy Meeh

Friday, April 29, 2011

The Edge knows how to deal with annoying hippies - bribe 'em

Legal bribe from U2 rocker secures pristine clifftop coastal compound


On the day of the royal wedding, a Southern California news story also echoes the notion that the rich can do whatever they like.

U2 guitarist the Edge (nee David Evans) struck a deal with the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy this week that will allow him to build five mansions on pristine Malibu cliffs known as Sweetwater Mesa. One of the conservancy's own advisers called area "one of the most impressive coastal-mountain interfaces in the country." Critics say the mansions will mar an undeveloped ridge line that's visible from much of the Malibu coast.

The government agency dropped its long-standing opposition to the compound in exchange for $750,000 in cash, $250,000 in kind (work provided by a consultant who works for the rocker) and 97 acres of conservation easements. One corner of the compound will also eventually host a short length of public trail.

Posted by Steve Sinai



Don't Fergit: Pacificans Care Casino Night Fundraiser



Submitted by Susan Vellone

Don't Fergit: Fundraiser for Terra Nova and Oceana High Schools, Saturday, April 30 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

A different type of fundraiser for Terra Nova and Oceana High Schools


Test drive a brand new Ford vehicle : Our high schools get $20.00 from Ford!!


Saturday, April 30, 2011 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. at TERRA NOVA HIGH SCHOOL

A different type of fundraiser for Terra Nova and Oceana High Schools.

Maybe you’re in the market for a new car? Maybe not, but you’re curious about the latest vehicles available? Or maybe you’d just like to help Pacifica high schools earn some dollars? Whatever your motivation, please help us by test-driving a new Ford at Terra Nova High School between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturday April 30th, 2011.

Serramonte Ford will have a dozen brand new Ford vehicles available -- everything from the latest gas-sipping compacts and hybrids to trucks -- for test drive at the Terra Nova campus, where every qualifying test drive (one per household) will earn $20 from Ford for our high schools, up to a maximum of $6,000. The event is co-sponsored by Oceana and Terra Nova high schools, each of which will benefit from the funds donated by Ford Motor Co.

As well as Ford vehicles, you’ll be able to test drive a Segway (courtesy of Pacifica’s own Silicon Segway), have your car washed by students while you wait, enjoy delicious food and refreshments, watch the little ones enjoy limitless fun in a bouncy house, listen to music performed live by talented student musicians, and much, much more!

Other than the food/refreshments and the car-wash, everything is FREE!

Please come and enjoy a fun day at Terra Nova High School, while helping our high schools to earn much-need funding in the process. We look forward to seeing you there!



Submitted by Jim Wagner & Laurie Frater

Pacifican on front page of SF Chronicle


novel education work by a pacifica resident....

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/04/28/MNQR1J7UQP.DTL#ixzz1Kw0zBGZW

Principals' Center Collective a model of success

Jill Tucker, Chronicle Staff Writer
Friday, April 29, 2011
On any given day, about 40 students from across San Francisco file into run-down portable classrooms scattered across a flood-prone asphalt yard.
The school, attended by kids sent there under a judge's order, is dilapidated, but the education offered inside is shiny and new. It offers some of the city's most at-risk students a real shot at college or a career.
In fact, students at the Principals' Center Collaborative school have performed so well that district officials want to make it available to any San Francisco teen who wants to attend. It's a novel idea for a school that serves kids who have had run-ins with the law. .........


 After 19 years educating students in the juvenile justice system, the school's principal, Jim Fithian, is a convert to the Big Picture program for the court-ordered kids.......


mark stechbart

Supervisor Don Horsley schedules Coastside Office Hours


‘Donuts with Don’

San Mateo County Supervisor Don Horsley will be holding Coastside office hours in upcoming weeks at various places in the county in order to provide opportunities for constituents to personally discuss their concerns with him.  

On Friday, May 6, Supervisor Horsley will be at the Sheriff’s Office substation, 500 California Street, Moss Beach, from 10 a.m. until noon.  The supervisor encourages you to drop by, but if you would like to make an appointment, please contact his staff at (650) 363-4569.

On Friday, May 27, Supervisor Horsley will be holding office hours from 10 a.m. until noon at the Puente de la Costa Sur office, 620 North Street, in Pescadero.

There will be no Coastside Office Hours on Friday, May 13 or Friday, May 20.

Future dates and locations for Supervisor Horsley’s Coastside Office Hours will be announced on a monthly basis.

 
Chris Hunter Chief Legislative Aide
Office of San Mateo County Supervisor Don Horsley
Hall of Justice and Records
400 County Center
Redwood City, CA 94063-1662

Tel. (650) 599-1024
Fax. (650) 363-1856

Thursday, April 28, 2011

Rockin' Earthday 2011


Rockin' Earthday 2011 from ian butler on Vimeo.


Submitted by Ian Butler

Save Sharp Park Fundraiser Packs the Room


So crowded you couldn't even move.




Below: excitement at the recent WEI/CBD rally to close Sharp Park
































Posted by Steve Sinai

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Don't Fergit: Save Sharp Park Golf Fundraiser, Thursday, April 28, 6:00 p.m.

 
 

Attend the April 28th rally to Save Sharp Park Golf Course. Don't forget to bring your foursome.

WHEN: Thursday, April 28, 2011, 6:00 p.m.
WHERE: Sharp Park Golf Clubhouse, Hwy. One at Sharp Park Rd., Pacifica, CA.

Complimentary hors d'oeuvres. Cash bar. Raffle prizes.

RSVP
: info@sfpublicgolf.com or Facebook.

DONATE AT THE DOOR, or send checks to: San Francisco Public Golf Alliance, Attn: Lauren Barr, Treasurer, 2840 Jackson St., San Francisco, CA. 94115.






 If you would like to donate via PayPal
Submitted by Richard Harris

Pacificans Care Casino Night Fundraiser



Submittted by Susan Vellone

Mayor Pro-Tem Pete DeJarnatt "..heard the voters, he's just tone deaf."

Pacifica Tribune letter-to-the-editor, 4/27/11, "Missing the point".

Mayor Pro-Tem Pete Dejarnatt, in line to be appointed mayor next year, made this statement at the budget study session: “The public wants cuts, especially to the fire department. I don’t think it’s possible to get through this without cuts.”

Pete, once again, misses the point. This vote had nothing to do with the fire department and everything to do with his mismanagement of our cities’ finances. He heard the voters, he’s just tone deaf. We recognized this vote for what it was, a desperate money grab to shore up the failure of the three amigos, Dejarnatt, Digre, and Vreeland, who are implicit in the collapse of our city.

All three are long term council members that have taken every opportunity to miss an opportunity. We plugged this budget hole six years ago for these three and they returned the favor by giving our fire department away.  Given away with a new million dollar per year endowment, courtesy of the electorate!

And you wonder, Pete, why this latest ponzi scheme was voted down. Get a clue. It is my opinion that you aren’t fit to be mayor next year. To so blatantly misread the public sentiment is a testament to your indifference to the message that over 60% of the voters delivered to you. We need leadership in this city and you are unable to deliver it.


Submitted by Jim Wagner

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Regular City council meeting Monday April 25, 2011; Budget workshop #2, Wednesday April 27, 2011


Monday April 25, 2011, 7pm.  Agenda.

Okay its now Tuesday April 26th, and previously there was no place to post comments about the 2+ hour long city council meeting.  A couple of people noted on the "Vreeland sighting" article that Councilmember Vreeland was in attendance at last night's meeting, but may have wanted to say more. 

Wednesday, April 27, 2011, 6pm.   City council budget workshop #2 (for fiscal year 2011-2012) at City Council Chambers (Beach Blvd),  Budget Workshop #1 was televised on channel 26.  Take a chance, this one may also be televised, or attend if you have time and are interested. 

Any comments you wish to make for either last night's regular city council meeting, or Wednesday's budget workshop may be easily made here.  Have fun!

Posted by Kathy Meeh

Finders keepers? No.


Beyond ethics, there is a California Code for finding money.

"The law's answer is clear: California Penal Code Section 485 stipulates that if you find money you need to make "reasonable and just efforts to find the owner." Otherwise, you're "guilty of theft." If you find even a quarter, you're technically obligated to turn it in," says Sgt. Michael Andraychak of the San Francisco Police Department. He acknowledges that no one at the department recalls any "significant amount" of cash being turned in, but that the property division has received found money in amounts ranging "from $1 to $200 or so." Really, $1? "  The entire article is a good read SF Gate 4/26/11.

Posted by Kathy Meeh 

San Carlos plans to form a joint fire department with Redwood City


The current Fire Services jurisdiction with Belmont will dissolve October 12th, 2011.
Belmont plans to form its own stand-alone fire department.
San Carlos City considered Wackenhut private fire department management (the experiment), but that was ruled-out. 



KTVU.com 4/26/11, article and embedded video.  After two hours of at times emotional debate, the San Carlos City Council late Monday unanimously voted to seek a partnership with Redwood City for its fire protection and rejected a plan to outsource the service.Officials said they would attempt to reach an agreement with nearby Redwood City to form a joint fire department. However, they added that if those efforts failed, outsourcing would once again be on the table.San Carlos city leaders say the cost of fire services is up 30% over the last five years. Now the city is facing a $3.5 million budget deficit.

On Monday night, the city council discussed the controversial idea of hiring a private company -- Florida based Wackenhut Corporation -- as its new fire department.Resident Joe Caprioni was incredulous."Fire to a contractor? A low-bid contractor? What happens if they fail," asked Caprioni. "Will any of you guarantee my house will be saved in a fire?"Chris Dennebaum was also appalled."What's next? Blackwater for our police deparment? Halliburton handling our public works?" said Dennebaum.Questions were raised about Wackenhut's abilities and it's priorities."They have a responsibility to their stockholders and their job is to maximize their profits," said Ed Hawkins of the San Mateo County Firefighter's Union.

Wackenhut representatives argued they have a long track record of providing fire services at major facilities including Cape Canaveral. They also said they'll have to perform if they want to stay employed."As a private contractor, you audition for your job every day," said Rick Tye of Wackenhut Corporation, "If we don't live up to our contract, the council can replace us."The city could save a million dollars or more a year and the savings could grow over time. A few residents thought the money saved might be worth a try."  Note: this article is copyrighted by KTVU.com, but the permission link is blocked, and allowed postings are twitter, facebook, myspace, google, blogger, etc.. The above picture is not from the article, but from the San Carlos fire engine collection. 

Other reference articles 4/26/11: 
San Carlos City council meeting decision to join with Redwood City San Mateo Daily Journal,
Belmont will establish its own stand-alone fire department, mediation with San Carlos failed Friday 4/22/11San Mateo Daily Journal.

Posted by Kathy Meeh

PG&E rate payers will not pay CEO retirement


except for $46,000 we already paid, which may be reimbursed.

Payout to retiring CEO Peter Darbee is $35 million.  This is a 6 year retirement package, but this time the bill will be paid by STOCKHOLDERS.    


pge logo1 139x150 Top 10 Largest Chapter 11 FilingsMercury News 4/25/11.  "Less than 72 hours after Gov. Jerry Brown said he didn't want PG&E ratepayers to pay any of the costs for the $35 million retirement package for outgoing PG&E CEO Peter Darbee, the company's board announced Monday that its shareholders -- rather than the public -- will bear all the costs. "Renewing public faith is critical to our future," said Lee Cox, a PG&E board member who will become interim CEO, president and chairman May 1. "Today's decision is another opportunity to show customers, regulators and others that PG&E is listening closely and taking action to earn back their confidence." But exactly how or when the 6.1 million California customers who pay monthly PG&E gas and electric bills will be made whole remained unclear Monday. On Friday, Terrie Prosper, a spokeswoman for the California Public Utilities Commission, the state agency that regulates PG&E, said ratepayers would be asked to pay $9.6 million of Darbee's $35 million retirement package. The $9.6 million is Darbee's pension, and was approved by the PUC as part of a wider pension program in 2009, she said. Most of the rest of Darbee's retirement will come in the form of company stock. But on Monday, in the wake of PG&E's announcement, Prosper said in an email that the PUC will direct PG&E "to credit $9.6 million to ratepayers in its accounts immediately, provide an audited accounting of the credit, and return that amount to ratepayers." 

Specifics unclear. Neither Prosper nor PUC Executive Director Paul Clanon returned calls Monday, however, to explain whether the money would come in the form of a credit on ratepayers' bills, or some other method, such as a slight reduction in the profit the PUC allows PG&E to earn in a future year. PG&E last year reported a $1.1 billion profit. PUC President Michael Peevey, a former president of Southern California Edison, also did not return calls to clarify the issue. "I am hopeful that this is the first step in a series of pro-consumer actions that will signal a new chapter for PG&E as it works to rebuild trust and confidence with its customers and the general public," Peevey said in a statement.

Confusion reigned Monday over the specifics, however. Brian Hertzog, a PG&E spokesman, said PG&E's customers so far have paid only about $46,000 into a trust fund that covers one portion of Darbee's pension. If the company credits customers for that amount, the difference the average person would see on their utility bill would be "minuscule," he said. The company will seek to have the pension costs eliminated from customers' bills in two or three years when the PUC again deliberates what rates PG&E can charge, he said. Meanwhile, consumer groups and political leaders who blasted PG&E for awarding what they called a lavish send-off package for Darbee said it is a promising step that PG&E will apparently pick up the whole tab. "PG&E didn't anticipate the problems that were created by this, and they should have," said Assemblyman Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo. "They have enough PR staff and a crisis management team that they should watch this stuff. I want them to build credibility. I want to have faith in them again." Added Mindy Spatt, a spokeswoman for the consumer group The Utility Reform Network: "The PUC should move quickly to assure customers these costs have indeed been covered by the shareholders and that any money already paid to PG&E to cover Darbee's pension will be returned."

A series of setbacks. Darbee, 58, announced his retirement Thursday. During his past year at the helm, PG&E has been rocked by a series of major setbacks and failures, including spending $46 million to bankroll Proposition 16, a defeated June ballot measure that would have reduced competition from green-energy providers; bungling the rollout of millions of its wireless SmartMeters; and having one of its major gas transmission lines explode in San Bruno on Sept. 9, killing eight people and destroying 38 homes. Darbee, a former Goldman Sachs vice president, was given $8.4 million last year in compensation from PG&E. In addition to his $35 million retirement package, he also will receive a $4.25 million grant of stock-based awards that will vest in the next three to five years. PG&E's board made that award to Darbee in March as part of a long-term performance incentive program, but he will still be able to keep it despite leaving the company.

Dave Ashuckian, deputy director for energy at the division of ratepayer advocates, a branch of the PUC that lobbies on behalf of consumers, said he'd like to see the commission offer rebates to customers for Darbee's pension costs -- even though they might be only for a few dollars each. "In general we like to see rebates done in a lump sum all at once and preferably in the summer months when bills are highest," he said. "We're happy that they're not going to charge ratepayers. We certainly think that $35 million in retirement for six years on the job is a pretty hefty payout, especially given the dismal."
 

Reference:  Peter Darbee education background and business biography information:   Bloomberg businessweek, and Forbes people.

Posted by Kathy Meeh
  

Monday, April 25, 2011

Reminder: April 28 Rally to Save Sharp Park Golf Course

 
 
Tee'd off at the anti-golf extremists????

Then do something about it:  Attend the April 28th rally to Save Sharp Park Golf Course. Don't forget to bring your foursome.

WHEN: Thursday, April 28, 2011, 6:00 p.m.
WHERE: Sharp Park Golf Clubhouse, Hwy. One at Sharp Park Rd., Pacifica, CA.

Complimentary hors d'oeuvres. Cash bar. Raffle prizes.

RSVP
: info@sfpublicgolf.com or Facebook.

DONATE AT THE DOOR, or send checks to: San Francisco Public Golf Alliance, Attn: Lauren Barr, Treasurer, 2840 Jackson St., San Francisco, CA. 94115.






 If you would like to donate via PayPal

 We are on Twitter (@SFPublicGolf), Facebook and our website
Submitted by Richard Harris

Easter leftovers


The conversation continues... but can't find  fix Pacifica solutions, not even close. 

 





















Posted by Kathy Meeh


Sunday, April 24, 2011

The Unintended Consequences of Environmentalistm


I'm reading a book called, "Triumph of the City" by Harvard Professor Edward Glaeser, wherein he talks about why high-density, urban living is the most environmentally beneficial way of living.  In one of the chapters, he writes about why so many antigrowth policies are bad for the environment. He also offers plenty of statistics regarding the relationship between carbon emission and population density, such as how "gas consumption per family per year declines by 106 gallons as the number of residents per square mile doubles," and how residents in California urban areas use so much less energy than residents of urban areas in the American south.

Given that so many locals justify blocking local development by invoking global warming, I thought it would be interesting to share the following summary from that chapter of the book:

*******************

So how should we interpret all this data? Simply put, if we wanted to reduce emissions by changing our land-development policies, more Americans should live in denser, more urban environments. More Americans should move to coastal California and fewer should live in Texas. California is blessed with a splendid natural climate that doesn't require much cooling in the summer or heat in the winter. Living in Houston or Atlanta requires a lot more energy for habitability, so then why aren't more Americans living in California?

The answer certainly isn't overcrowding. California's coastal areas are remarkably open. The drive along Route 280 through the heart of Silicon Valley is like a drive through an open Eden. There are about 2 people living on each acre in Santa Clara County. Marin County, just north of the bay, has more than one-and-a-quarter acres per person. By contrast, Montgomery County in Maryland has about 3 people per acre. Manhattan has 111 people per acre, and that isn't counting the vast crowd of workers that comes and goes each day.

Coastal California could house many millions more than it already does, but the growth in these coastal regions has fallen dramatically from its postwar heyday. Between 1950 and 1970, the population of Santa Clara County more than tripled, from fewer than three hundred thousand to more than one million. But between 1990 and 2008, Santa Clara County grew by only 17.8 percent, less than the national average, from 1.5 million to 1.76 million. Over the last seventeen years, Silicon Valley has been one of the most productive places on the planet, but its population growth has lagged behind the rest of the nation's.

Coastal California hasn't grown because it hasn't built much housing. An area that doesn't build much won't grow much. Coastal California's construction declines don't reflect a lack of demand. In 2007, the National Association of Realtors median sales price passed $800,000 in both San Francisco and San Jose. Even after the crash, these places remain the two most expensive areas in the continental United States, with average housing prices around $600,000 in the second quarter of 2010. Prices in California are kept high by draconian limits on new construction, like the sixty-acre minimum lot sizes that can be found in Marin County. These rules are joined with a policy of pulling more and more land off the market as protected parks and wildlife areas. By 2000, one quarter of the land in the Bay Area has become permanently protected, that is, off limits to building.

Many environmentalists see the reduction of development in the San Francisco Bay region as a great triumph. The pioneers of the Save the Bay movement, which formed to block development around the water, have become iconic figures in American environmentalism. The Friends of Mammoth case, which imposed environmental reviews on all new California projects, is seen as a watershed victory. The advocates of California's growth limitations are often put forward as ecological heroes. But they're not.

The enemies of development in California are quick to point out that restricting construction is necessary because of the state's sparse water supplies. Yet California would have more than enough water for its citizens if it didn't use so much of it irrigating naturally dry farmland. California's cities and suburbs use about 8.7 million acre-feet of water each year for irrigation. America is filled with wet regions that can raise crops. By redirecting water from farm areas to cities, California could easily provide enough water to sustain much higher density levels, which would reduce America's carbon footprint.

While limits on California's growth may make that state seem greener, they're making the country as a whole browner and increasing carbon emissions worldwide. Houston's developers should thank California's antigrowth movement. If they hadn't stopped building in coastal California, where incomes are high and the climate is sublime, then there wouldn't have been nearly as much demand for living in the less pleasant parts of the Sunbelt.

People who fight development don't get to choose the amount of new construction throughout the country; they only get to make sure it doesn't occur in their backyard. At the national level, a principle that could be called the law of conservation of construction appears to hold. When environmentalists stop development in the green places, it will occur in brown places. By using ecological arguments to oppose growth, California environmentalists are actually ensuring that America's carbon footprint will rise, by pushing new housing to less temperate climates.

The 1970 California Environmental Quality Act was a pioneering piece of legislation, which mandated that any local government project have an environmental impact review before it went forward. In 1973, an environmentally activist California Supreme Court interpreted this act to mean not only projects undertaken by local governments, but also projects permitted by local government, which means pretty much any large construction project in the state. In 2008, California's regulations generated 583 environmental impact reviews, considerably more than the 522 impact reviews that occurred nationwide in response to federal guidelines. These impact reviews add costs and delays to new construction, which ultimately make it even more expensive.

The great flaw of environmental impact reviews is their incompleteness. Each review only evaluates the impact of the project if it's approved, not the impact if it's denied and construction begins somewhere else, outside the jurisdiction of the California Supreme Court. The incompleteness of the reviews stacks the environmental deck against California construction and makes it seem as though it's always greener to stop new building. The full impact would note that permitting building in California would reduce construction somewhere else, such as the once pristine desert outside of Las Vegas. Assessing the full environmental cost of preventing construction in California would make that state's environmental policies look more brown than green.

********************

Posted by Steve Sinai

Saturday, April 23, 2011

Easter Weekend


Yesterday April 22nd was a day of reflection, and an annual religious day:  Passover, Good Friday, Earth Day. 


In any event its now Easter weekend, enjoy!


Posted by Kathy Meeh

Friday, April 22, 2011

Pacifica Patch looking for official bloggers


Pacifica Patch is launching a blogging platform on May 4--strong community voices are needed.

The blog will be more free-wheeling than the Pacifica Patch homepage, and although I will have the final say on what is posted, for the most part anything that is legal, goes. I want the bloggers to own their blogs.

Pacifica Patch will not own the blog content, meaning you can repost stuff on other sites. Bloggers will be unpaid.

If you are passionate about anything in Pacifica, whether it's education, fishing, government, shopping or pets (literally, anything), are a prolific writer and have a strong voice, then you should write for Pacifica Patch's new blog.

Send me an email at camden@patch.com if you're interested.

Camden Swita

Pacifica's Climate Action Plan Preliminary Draft posted


Thanks to Gil Anda for the heads up.

http://www.cityofpacifica.org/government/committees/climate_action_plan_task_force/default.asp

Posted by Steve Sinai

Thursday, April 21, 2011

Terra Nova & Oceana Fund Raiser



A different type of fundraiser for Terra Nova and Oceana High Schools

Test drive a brand new Ford vehicle : Our high schools get $20.00 from Ford!!


Saturday, April 30, 2011 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. at TERRA NOVA HIGH SCHOOL

A different type of fundraiser for Terra Nova and Oceana High Schools.

Maybe you’re in the market for a new car? Maybe not, but you’re curious about the latest vehicles available? Or maybe you’d just like to help Pacifica high schools earn some dollars? Whatever your motivation, please help us by test-driving a new Ford at Terra Nova High School between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturday April 30th, 2011.

Serramonte Ford will have a dozen brand new Ford vehicles available -- everything from the latest gas-sipping compacts and hybrids to trucks -- for test drive at the Terra Nova campus, where every qualifying test drive (one per household) will earn $20 from Ford for our high schools, up to a maximum of $6,000. The event is co-sponsored by Oceana and Terra Nova high schools, each of which will benefit from the funds donated by Ford Motor Co.

As well as Ford vehicles, you’ll be able to test drive a Segway (courtesy of Pacifica’s own Silicon Segway), have your car washed by students while you wait, enjoy delicious food and refreshments, watch the little ones enjoy limitless fun in a bouncy house, listen to music performed live by talented student musicians, and much, much more!

Other than the food/refreshments and the car-wash, everything is FREE!

Please come and enjoy a fun day at Terra Nova High School, while helping our high schools to earn much-need funding in the process. We look forward to seeing you there!


Submitted by Jim Wagner & Laurie Frater

Funding Pacifica and open forum government


from a Pacifica Tribune guest column article "What's really going on with the Fire Department?"

Pacifica Tribune 4/20/11, My Turn  article.  "Like its tax predecessor, the May 2009 Measure D sales tax increase, the Fire Safety Assessment went down in flames last week. Both tax-and-grab measures lost by two thirds. Perhaps a little honesty and transparency are in order. The fire tax was nothing more than a political move to increase the General Fund by more than a million dollars a year. To mask it as a "Fire Safety" fee assumes the public are fools. The numbers beg to differ. Now to threaten the fire department with decimating cuts and re-organizations is tantamount to spanking the electorate.


Let's take a look at what is really going on. Six years ago Pacifica passed a parcel tax to protect the fire department from threatened cuts. Fire personnel and citizens took to the streets and helped the city fill a budget shortfall.  Along with that came the expectation that the City Council would work for the next five years to increase our revenue. We were promised a plan. Five years later, nothing. In fact, the city laid off three firefighters after promising us no such thing would happen. Trust. That is what killed these tax-and-grab measures. We deserve some honesty from our city officials. How many of us truly understand what Pacifica's role is in the Daly City run fire joint powers authority (JPA)? Pacifica wants to cut one battalion chief, move the other two to 40 hour work weeks stationed in Daly City, lay off one firefighter, and demote several others.

Where does that leave us? Where will the on-site supervision come from for a fire in Pacifica? When Pacifica had its own fire department, acting fire battalion chiefs were utilized when a battalion chief was off, negating the overtime that seems to be a real bone of contention. Is it true that the current Daly City Chief, Ron Myers, will not allow that practice? Wouldn't it seem prudent to substitute a senior captain when a battalion chief was off, thus saving overtime and providing valuable hands-on training for that captain? How are our firefighters trained? Our department used to provide training for not only our own fire personnel but for other cities' firefighters as well. Has that been eliminated?
Speaking of overtime, doesn't the State Office of Emergency Services reimburse Pacifica for all the time our firefighters are called to other parts of the state? If so, where does that money go? Back to the fire department or to the General Fund? 'Wouldn't that make the overtime look excessive even though we are reimbursed by the state? And who is responsible for policy about excessive overtime? Our city? Daly City?
Has the Pacifica fire department sold any equipment? If so, where did the money go? We were told that joining the JPA would save Pacifica $750,000. Has that ever been substantiated? What if Daly City decides to leave the JPA? Will Pacifica be left with any semblance of a fire department?

Last, but most importantly, what about safety? How will Pacifica be affected by the two in two out laws (two manning the engine and 2 in the structure) on the books that require four firefighters to be on scene before they can enter a structure?  How much will Pacificans' safety be compromised? We laid off three firefighters after the last parcel tax; now we are going to lay off one more and transfer two battalion chiefs to desk jobs in Daly City. That leaves us down six firefighters. What's left?

Lots of questions need to be answered. We would request that Chief Myers, Mayor Nihart, City Manager Rhodes, the rest of Council and Finance Director Ritzma conduct an open forum before any decisions are made to make their case and answer these and any other questions to the satisfaction of the electorate. We suggest that this forum be held at the Community Center and televised. Open government is not too much to ask of our council; however, it seems to come very very slowly to Pacifica. In the midst of the gravest fiscal crisis this city has ever faced, with draconian fire safety cuts looming, open government is still lacking. We have called for robust posting of all agendas, minutes and documents for all meetings. Council held a budget workshop last Wednesday, April 13, where $1.5M in cuts were discussed. No agenda was posted prior to the meeting. No budget documents were posted ahead of the meeting and are still not up on the website. No minutes are available now after the meeting.  Transparency and open government are not too much to ask of our council.  We deserve at least that!"


Submitted by Jim Wagner and Mark Stechbart

 

Environmental groups appeal Moss Beach project to Coastal Commission

Updated: 04/20/2011 12:07:40 AM PDT
 

A coalition of environmental advocacy groups made good on its promise to appeal the controversial Big Wave development in Moss Beach to the California Coastal Commission, which could hear the appeal as early as next month.

The group includes the Committee for Green Foothills, the Loma Prieta Chapter of the Sierra Club, the Surfrider Foundation, the San Mateo County League for Coastside Protection and the Pillar Ridge Homeowners Association, a mobile home community next to the proposed future site of the Big Wave development.

The Granada Sanitary District and the Montara Water and Sanitary District were also expected to file an appeal by 5 p.m. Tuesday, the appeals deadline.

The groups argue that Big Wave -- by far the biggest development ever proposed on the Coastside, with a home for developmentally disabled adults and eight new office buildings -- is inappropriately situated between Half Moon Bay Airport and the ocean, with one narrow access road. The site lies within a county tsunami evacuation zone and next to a major earthquake fault.

Now they will argue that the development, which was approved in March by the county board of supervisors, also violates the planning rules laid out in the county's own Local Coastal Program as well as Coastal Act policies pertaining to public access and recreation.

Read more...

Submitted by Todd Bray

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Stop the Garbage Rate Hike

by Lionel Emde
 
 The latest outrage in bleeding the impoverished Pacifica public is an 8 percent increase in garbage rates. But this time, the public has a legal process for protesting. A written letter of protest, containing the street address of the Recology customer and his or her signature is all that's needed. Any customer, renter or property owner, whose name appears on the bill is eligible.  I have created a downloadable letter in pdf form which can be accessed here at Fix Pacifica:
 
 
 The latest rate increase takes us back to the bad old days of unaudited rate increases. That's not my opinion, it's stated by HF&H, the city's longtime consultant in waste collection matters: “Additionally, HF&H’s scope of services does not include auditing of information provided by Recology such as customer account data, tonnage data, or revenues and expenses reported from Recology’s general ledger. Therefore, we have relied on the data provided by Recology in our analysis.” 

 The public is promised yearly rate increases as far as the eye can see. In an article for the Pacifica Tribune, Recology General Manager Chris Porter attempted to justify the sky-high rates paid in Pacifica: "One of the biggest contributing factors to lower residential rates is ... having a large commercial base to help cover costs." Sounds reasonable, doesn't it? Until you know that residents in Montara and El Granada pay less than half of what Pacificans do. According to published waste collection rates in 2008, residents south of the Slide were paying $12.50 per month for collection of a 32-gallon can while Pacificans paid $30.19 for the same service. 

 Funny thing is, Montara and El Granada have even LESS commercial activity than Pacifica, and are serviced by the same company with the same trucks run out of the same place on Palmetto Avenue. I'll bet it's because they have governing bodies that actually give a hoot about ratepayers and negotiate on their behalf. Pacificans get the shaft-o-rama. 

 If anyone thinks we can afford this type of gouging, keep in mind a few facts dug up by Pacifica Resource Center:
A. One in 10 Pacificans earn less than $25,000 per year.
B. One in four (!) Pacificans are eligible for -- but often do not receive -- public and private benefits.
C. The majority of people served by the Resource Center are single mothers and their children.
Add to these stunning facts the seniors on fixed incomes who lost their senior rate on garbage collection when Recology took over, and you have a more complete picture.
 
 Pacifica was knocked out of first place in highest residential garbage collection rates in San Mateo County only very recently by new Recology contracts in Atherton and Hillsborough. Nice to know we're in that league, eh? But our commercial rates remain among the highest in the county. So the next time you hear our elected officials talking about how they support local business, ask them why they got a no-bid contract from Recology when other carriers might have given us a better deal.

Save Endangered Sharp Park Golfers

 
 

"Endangered" Sharp Park Golfers Arise!  Attend April 28 Rally!

When & Where:
Thursday, April 28, 6:00 PM
Sharp Park Golf Clubhouse, Pacifica, CA

The Chronicle calls Sharp Park Golfers an "Endangered Species."

Show the world that golfers are alive and kicking and that we can save Sharp Park Golf Course!

See you April 28!  Bring a foursome!
  • Free hors d'ouevres
  • Cash Bar
  • Raffle Prizes
Please remember to RSVP at info@sfpublicgolf.com or on our Facebook Page.


 If you would like to donate via PayPal:


Or contribute by check, payable and sent to :
San Francisco Public Golf Alliance
Attn: Lauren Barr, Treasurer
2840 Jackson St.
San Francisco, CA 94115



 We are on Twitter (@SFPublicGolf), Facebook and our website

Submitted by Richard Harris