Attend in person, 2212 Beach Boulevard, 2nd floor. Or, view on local channel 26, also live feed internet www.pct26.com. The meeting begins at 7pm (but usually starts a few minutes late). Agenda, 1/23/12, 66 pages.
A. Closed session (6:15pm)
1) Labor negotiations, Waste Water Treatment Plant, Local 856. Conference with labor negotiator
 |
| Building our city revenue 1 car at a time. |
B. Open session (7:00pm)
Call to order, salute to the flag, commission liaisons, closed session report (if any).
Consent Calendar (pass through), pages 1-2.
1. Approval of cash disbursements.
2. Approval of Minutes (meeting of 1/9/12).
3. Amend city franchise tow franchise agreement. Add a $50.00 city fee per police citation tow, which is expected to generate $25,000 city revenue per year.
4. Adopt off-leash dog park ordinance, 1220 Linda Mar Boulevard.
Special Presentation
Recology of the Coast update - Chris Porter
Public hearing
5. Two challenge appeals from San Pedro Creek Watershed Coalition and Neighbors Concerned about Pacifica against the Assisted Living Center final EIR certification. Recommend to continue to the next meeting, the appeals for the Assisted Living Center cannot be heard. There will not be a city council quorum at this meeting..
6. Appeal of denial of business license for Cannabis Wellness Center, Patient Resource Center and Dispensary.
Consideration
7. Request for Proposal (RFP) professional auditing services for city's CAFR fiscal year 2011 audit. Periodic rebid audit.
C. Adjourn to joint city council/redevelopment agency meeting
Consideration
7. Request for Proposal (RFP) professional auditing services for city's CAFR fiscal year 2011 audit. Periodic rebid audit.
C. Adjourn to joint city council/redevelopment agency meeting
1. Approval of minutes 8/8/11.
2. Dissolution of Redevelopment Agency. 1) Resolution that the city serves a successor agency. 2) Resolution adopting an enforceable obligation payment schedule. 2004 Bonds debt service total -$2,626,325. Borrowed from Agency 1985-1994 total -$6,209,971. Grand total debt to be repaid: -$7,749,971 (as of 6/30/11). See pages 56, 57, 65, 66.
2. Dissolution of Redevelopment Agency. 1) Resolution that the city serves a successor agency. 2) Resolution adopting an enforceable obligation payment schedule. 2004 Bonds debt service total -$2,626,325. Borrowed from Agency 1985-1994 total -$6,209,971. Grand total debt to be repaid: -$7,749,971 (as of 6/30/11). See pages 56, 57, 65, 66.
Posted by Kathy Meeh
40 comments:
Can someone clarify that $7.7 million to be repaid? Repaid to whom? By whom? I ask because there have been statements from usually credible sources that the amt to be repaid by the city is about $35,000. Entirely possible both numbers are correct and refer to different types of debt. Any experts out there?
So Kathy, is this redevelopment debt a new obligation? Is this in addition to our current deficit?
No quorum for item 5. Nice touch.
Guess Pete's recused, Jim MIA, and who else?
Somebody please explain the 7 million in red and with a minus sign "total debt to be repaid".
More funny city accounting or just moving the beans from one pile to another? I don't speak "gov't accounting".
Len Stone leases office space in the Mall.
Is Vreeland ducking a vote or what? Assisted Living project stalled again. This is a project every Pacifica resident should support if close to retirement or with a senior in the family. It's simply the right thing to do. The project generates salaries, new jobs and property taxes--a clear example of how Council can help both the local economy and our own residents.
It's time Vreeland was called out for these continuing absences. He either represents Pacifica voters and does his job or he has to step down. He got elected to make the decisions, not be a no show.
My take on this is that the Redevelopment Agency itself transfers to the city along with the accumulated debt (loans made by the Redevelopment Agency).
Detail given is described in the Agenda summary. See the link on the article above, from page 52. Accounting numbers are shown on pages 56, 57, 65, 66.
Why were monies borrowed? A portion went to planning, road structure, and Agency fees. What else? I don't know, not much was developed there, was it? Maybe city council will discuss the use of these borrowed monies at their 1/23 meeting. But, probably not when there is no city council member quorum, and the MO is "duck and cover". We'll just have to learn more about this.
A large portion of the money to be repaid [$5,000,000.00 or more] is what the redevelopment Agency owes to the City of Pacifica general fund as repayment for a loan that the city made to the R.D.A. The five million dollar question is will the State honor the debt? If it does our money problems get slightly better. Since the Agency was not making payments to the City the actual impact on our current budget is zero.
Is this the same redevelopment issue that just caused Oakland to have to lay off 200 city workers?
Hutch the short answer is yes but in Oakland the money was going from the R.D.A. to the general fund to pay for jobs City wide. No R.D.A. = lost City of Oakland jobs.
Dejarnuts can't vote on this. Stone can't vote on this. So what happens to the project! That's classic. How come Vreeland votes on the trail behind his house? The one the city just wrote a $50,000 check for? Oh, not to worry, he won't be around to vote for that either. Where is he? Was there rapture and and he got the golden ticket?
My limited understanding of this debt is that it is loans from the city's general fund to the RDA.
Because the RDA has not produced the tax revenues that would hypothetically pay off the debt, we (the taxpayers of Pacifica) are left with the debt.
Now, the city is faced with dissolution of the RDA, and must come up with a repayment plan for the developers of the site.
If others have a better understanding of this, please comment.
Unless Vreeland resigns the only way to dislodge him is by recall because it appears that his sporadic attendance is due to real medical problems and his absences are excused. There's a convenient election coming up in June. Piggyback the recall on that ballot and avoid the cost of a special election. There's not a moment to waste because of filing requirements. I have sympathy for his problems and the community has been patient but what about Pacifica?
What are the odds the state is going to make good on the five million dollars Tom Clifford mentioned? There must be quite a few cities in the same leaky boat. Can't wait to hear the spin on this agenda item.
More confused than ever on this $7.7 million dollar agenda item. Perhaps after the meeting we'll all know more, or not. I believe there will be a quorum for this issue but not for the assisted living item because Pete and Len are recused from only that item. Or not. Then again a sink hole could open up and swallow the entire mess.
Since the State ended the R.D.A.'s to capture tax revenues from the Cities I'd bet that State never covers any loans those Cities made to their R.D.A.
Vreeland has missed EVERY meeting of significance for almost 2 years!
When is the rest of the council going to grow a pair and remove his ass. What is the adult care facility supposed to do, wait for Vreeland to rehab/medicate/abdicat! It's costing these guys a lot of money. The radical "green goblins" must be secretly slipping Vree some stay away medicine. We all know this is bullshit. Vreeland has no morals or character. He'll never resign. This is nuts. We're nuts to allow this council to get away with what they do. Vreeland, DejarNUTS, and Digre caused this economic mess and now they run and hide. Mayor Pete, what's your vision for 2012? Come on, you're strutting around being "mayor".
The old council is useless. I think Hihart is the only one worth keeping.
Therese Dyer had a letter in the Trib saying there is an effort to recall Vreeland Digre and Dijarnet. Her number is 355-9568.
Anyone know anything more about this?
Taxpayers have to cover an unfunded $7 million RDA debt??
Guess that old utility users tax gonna be jacked up to 60% of your bill and extended for 20 years!!
I'd be interested in knowing what the RDA bond in 2004 was for. $2,000,000 floated for what purpose? Anyone remember any "redevelopment" that year? What's the city do with the indebtness. Declare the RDA bankrupt? Can't do that. The city incurs the debt with no RDA to ever pay it back. What are the payments? What part of the budget do they get buried in? DeJarnett, Digre, and no-show Vreeland are directly responsible for this debacle.
what exactly is the total debt for the city? All of us will end up paying for it.
The financing city services committee is producing another grand report the end of Feb apparently explaining everything. Add this request:
1. total city debt by item
2. total pension debt
3. police station debt
4. sewer plant debt.
5. yearly interest on each of above.
I miss anything??
Recall Vreeland. No time to waste to make the June ballot. He's an easy target but it'll take a very capable team to get it done in this town.
here's a good background story Re RDA $2M bond from the Tribune.
Pacifica Tribune
the link leads to the complete story, which fix can reprint in is entirety
pacificawatchdogs.home.mindspring.com/fire_assessment.htm
Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - The City of Pacifica expects to generate ... The new bond will not eliminate all of the debt and the RDA will have to ... The two allocations were about $83000 for the Resource Center and $159542 for the libraries. ...
Another brilliant fiscal move by the morons on council. Shows just how much they've learned in 8 years. Let's float another bond, FOR WHAT, PRAY TELL!! I thought that bonds were placed for very specific reasons and had to pertain to a certain course of action. They refinanced the COP then took cash out. That cash is paying for the EIR on the OWWTP. At least it's not paying for the vreelanater's Taj Mahal City Hall on the beach.
And this council wants to tax us to pay for all these bonds and the mismanagement of the majority of this council. I say bring it on! You want to see a pissed off election, throw a tax on the ballot.
City council took $2 million in RDA money and plowed it back into the city budget in 2004. That's my take on the Tribune Wednesday, June 30, 2004 article link posted above.
Another bond we did not vote on that we get to pay for. I am really looking for a clear explanation about this RDA back-room financing from Monday's Council meeting.
I read somewhere a couple of years ago that the city had a total indebtness of around $120,000,000 dollars! I don't think that counted the $22,000,000 that they recently floated for the pension bonds or the $7,000,000 in RDA bonds. Wow! The city will have to listen to the Beatle's "Tax Man" for more ideas. Idjutts!
$120,000,000! What in the hell is worth $120,000,000 in this city. I thought they had to have some ability to retire these things rather than just keep refinancing them. If you were a bond company, would you lend these 3 culpable parties, Vreeland, Digre, DeJarnett, any money!
Someone needs to ask "Sneaky" Pete, what happened to the big surplus he spoke about?
Him and Jimmy V, where claiming how much money the city had?
LMAO, "sneaky Pete" Are you talking about Dejarne or Loeb? Ha.
Council and crackerjack senior staff confused RDA with ATM. This along with other bonehead moves will cause Pacifica to be DOA real soon. FYI and RIP. Skip the flowers and keep sending your hard-earned cash.
Hey, let's have a contest!
Consent calendar was passed-through without discussion, including the new $50 towing fee.
Recology brought the city an approximate $164,000+ check, thanks to a recycling clause in our contract, (sorry I don't remember the exact amount, someone else will).
Budget? The failed Redevelopment Agency with a big debt will become part of our city budget. The State may pay some legal fees, if not we will pay those too.
The Cannabis Wellness Center denial was handled with grace by all. At this time such approval is too complicated by legal and oversight issues for this city.
Some citizen notes. Tod Schlesinger spoke on every issue, and advised that Vreeland is in (drug/alcohol) rehab. Therese Dyer gave notice she intends recall city councilmembers. She left city councilmembers 10 questions about their unfulfilled promises over 10 years.
Thanks for the update, Kathy.
I take it Vreeland was absent. Were the other four present?
(Sorry, I don't currently have access to the PCT26 videos right now.)
Chris, yes you're correct. Vreeland was absent (as has been frequently the case), other Councilmembers were there.
I didn't see the meeting. Was Schlesinger serious when he said Vreeland was in drug/alcohol rehab?
"Was Schlesinger serious when he said Vreeland was in drug/alcohol rehab?"
He seemed to be, and no one on city council blinked.
In a town of drunks its amazing that Vreeland is the first to be in rehab.
The President is talking about fraud in banking at this very moment. Our city budget bond boondoogle is legal at this moment. So were deceptive lending practices. There are more twists and turns in the notes on long term debt than a DNA strand. You know what, they can turn a debt into a item that doesn't show up on the balance sheet. All you gotta call it is a "Trust". Want a headache, figure this out. Balance sheet says thirty-something million in debt. I don't believe it. I think it's more like a hundred million dollars! Maybe more. Government accounting is not like real accounting. If you look at this stuff, remember that.
these days they send you to rehab if you are addicted to coffee. Shhhh....
Our community organizer president worked hard to get citibank to offer loans to the poor and disadvantaged. Now that he is in the big house he is calling those very same policys illegal???? What are we missing here??
Post a Comment