City council should make smart, informed decisions

Pacifica Tribune/Guest Columnist, 3/27/12.  The importance of an informed decision" by Paul Slavin

People are fed up, but no tax unless real solutions.

"Reading Dave Mercurio's Letter to the Editor in last week's Tribune reminded me again how poisonous the political atmosphere can get around here. Mr. Mercurio castigates councilmembers Len Stone and Mary Ann Nihart for not supporting an early city-wide ballot measure for a 1/2 percent sales-tax increase, as suggested by the Financing City Services Task Force. It is assumed this money would help bankroll our Police Department, although the Task Force has cautioned that this measure alone would not guarantee the department's survival. Nevertheless, Mr. Mercurio views Stone and Nihart's decision as "shameful, careless and irresponsible." I think he's wrong on every point.

First of all, it is clearly the responsibility of the City Council to explore and evaluate every possible budgetary saving. Our city is going broke; we've cut back to the bone at Public Works and everywhere else, with more cuts looming, and we're passing the hat for the Resource Center.  I think it would be careless and irresponsible not to even look at outsourcing our Police. To do that intelligently we have to have the relevant figures from the County Sheriff, which we should shortly receive. (Why we don't already have these numbers is another question.) This delay has moved the sales-tax issue beyond the deadline required for the June ballot.

Once we have the Sheriff's proposal in hand, we can compare both departments, apples to apples, and make a better, more informed decision. This is not to imply by any means that we should automatically go with the less costly option. There are many benefits in having our own local force, potential advantages in service levels, accountability, response time, and local knowledge, and these must be carefully considered. But, contrary to Mr. Mercurio, there is a price that's put on safety, a very substantial price, including both present salaries and future pensions and benefits. Len Stone quite rightly feels obligated to determine the difference in cost, in actual tax-payer's dollars, between the two departments. Simple due diligence.

Mr. Mercurio, evidently having already made up his mind, feels we should have gone ahead with the ballot anyway, and that Stone and Nihart's actions "took away our say in the matter". But this is going to be an extremely important decision, with long-range consequences, and it only seems prudent to have all the pertinent information available to the electorate BEFORE they have their say.  The fact that Len Stone was supported by the Pacifica Police in the last election is entirely beside the point. He was elected to represent the whole community, all of us, and that appears to be exactly what he is doing, and in very difficult circumstances. Sounds like almost the opposite of "shameful" to me. He may have lost Mr. Mercurio's vote, but his thoughtful, business-like, even-handed approach has won him many others.

I also agree with Mary Ann Nihart's contention that, at this time, a public vote on the sales-tax would be a very chancy affair. Pacifica voters have been very reluctant lately to pass any additional revenues for a Council that has presided over years of financial failure. The last decade has been a litany of stalled development, lost opportunities, a never-ending debate over Hwy. 1 improvements, the bio-diesel fiasco, a neglected sewer system, costly city lawsuits, crumbling infrastructure, and a constantly shrinking bank account. Although the present recall effort seems like an impulsive, half-baked idea to me, I can easily understand the anger and frustration that motivates it. People are fed up. A tax-raising ballot measure right now wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell.
Mr. Mercurio blithely states that, "If the ballot measure was allowed to go through and it didn't pass, then so be it." But an important issue like this, once defeated, would be extremely difficult to revive at a later date, and our financial future might well depend on its' passage. Better here to be more cautious than carefree.

We are all aware of the geographical limits of Pacifica; we have a scarcity of open, stable, buildable land, a decentralized pattern of development, minimum road access, and, consequently, a limited tax-base. That's why it's so important to maximize every opportunity, scrutinize every expenditure, and not make any mistakes. If Mary Ann Nihart and Len Stone are given a chance, and some help, they could form the nucleus of a Council marked by fiscal responsibility and a serious, pragmatic approach to solving our many problems. That could revive public confidence to the point where it might just be possible to raise the sales-tax a bit."

Reference:  Dave Mercurio's  Letter to-the-editor, first Letter printed, Pacifica Tribune, 3/20/12.

Posted by Kathy Meeh