March 03, 2012, 05:00 AM By Heather Murtagh Daily Journal Staff
At 12:01 a.m. Sunday, the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office will take
over Millbrae police in a long-awaited move that aims to save the city
money while maintaining the same level of service.
Sheriff Lt. Ed Barberini led a press conference Friday afternoon
about the transfer of services. While the city’s 14 sworn officers will
remain serving the Millbrae area, they will be partnered with current
sheriff employees.
All services currently housed at the Millbrae police
station will remain there, except for vehicle maintenance, he said.
Familiar faces of the Millbrae Police Department won’t be around
next week, however. The employees transferring to the county will be in
training next week. Sworn employees as well as department volunteers
will be sworn in Tuesday, said Barberini.
Barberini, who will act as the city’s police chief, plans to
reach out to community groups and learn about Millbrae’s needs before
making any changes to the services offered. The staffing of the
department doesn’t change. Barberini added there will be more
opportunities for the department to offer support during community
events and as a school resource.
In November, the City Council voted to contract for services
provided by the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office. Earlier this year,
the council approved the transfer agreements to make it happen.
Contracting with the county for police services will save
Millbrae an estimate $1.693 million in the first year. Those savings
will increase in future years over the five-year contract.
Read more...
Posted by Steve Sinai
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
44 comments:
if those pin heads on financing city services and city staff had any foresight, we could have done this 2 years ago, and saved a ton of money.
This is a real good idea. A game-changer for this town. The projected savings from contracting with the county for police services can protect other vital city services and programs from cuts and elimination. And, of the 3options shown to us, this one allows our reserves to be rebuilt pretty quickly. We can't afford our local PD now and that's not going to change. The window of opportunity won't stay open indefinitely for Pacifica. What then, more taxes forever or contract with Wackenhut?
Now, now, those pinheads were handpicked for with a certain agenda and result in mind. Couple of them have shown a real maverick streak-much to the annoyance of their handlers for sure. And the one member with real expertise (SF Comptroller's Office) recently resigned. She did so very diplomatically shortly after apparently making a comment about city wages and salaries during a meeting. Council could have done what this group has done quicker, but Council didn't want to be the sole-owner of the result. Partners are important if you think the voters might not like what has to be done.
I guess it would be time to ask Julie if we should compare Pacifica to San Carlos, Half Moon Bay, and Millbrae now. She seems to have an urge to always point out we're different (Duh!) however, we now have a chance to emulate her heros. And Colma won't have to send us their sales tax money!
Julie said this during a city council meeting. The rich. Cities should revenue share with poor pacifica
"The rich. Cities should revenue share with poor pacifica."
Interesting comment (913). What then Councilmember Lancelle (and others) seemed to have in mind was a kind of VAT tax for Pacifica.
Summary: 1) This city did not develop its land for economic development, whereas other cities such as Daly City did. 2) Hence, much of our shopping occurs in other cities. 3) Therefore, other cities that have developed their land and benefit from our sales tax revenue should send their point-of-sale tax revenue to our city.
Make sense to you? The other cities build the infrastructure (including roads and parking), Pacifica would benefit from being the lazy, poor member in the region.
Senator Leland Yee, seemed to go along with that unusual tax benefit notion while visiting Pacifica, but of course the State legislature would never pass such a bill, nor would the people of California ever pass such a measure. Eco-version of "thinking outside the box" I guess.
Julie never talked about a VAT tax. She wanted the state to change its tax code so that sales taxes were apportioned according to city population, rather than where the transaction occurred.
"..sales taxes were apportioned according to city population.."
Steve (1206), your understanding of the tax past City Councilmember Lancelle was suggesting does vary from my recall. My understanding was Pacificans spend money in other cities, but send the sales tax monies to Pacifica. That way, Pacifica would not have to be burdened with development.
Confusion in the "kind of VAT tax for Pacifica" comment? Designating these out-of-city sales tax monies directly to Pacifica was side-ways humor on my part.
Your recall could be correct, or mine is. At this point, I'm not willing to give-up what I said, and will wait for additional confirmation. Either way, no way would the state of California approve either 1) city direct or 2) city proportional-size sales tax revenue income.
From my view, past city councilmember Lancelle was just trying to find an alternative revenue source for this "open space" city promoted by then 10 year city council 4. Can't blame her for trying. Of course had Senator Yee not gone along with this "doomed to failure" tax notion at his meeting, or otherwise-- that would have been better.
I think Steve's recall is correct. VAT wasn't part of it. Lancelle's idea has been kicking around for 30years or more and certainly not just in Pacifica. Smaller communities, bedroom communities tend to do the bulk of their shopping elsewhere. One way to share the wealth and pay for city services is to share the sales tax revenue. Never got off the ground in Sacramento.
I believe that Kathy is right because that was the beginning of stores asking for your zip code at point of sale.
"kind of VAT tax for Pacifica", humor because the sales and users tax would go to the zip code, namely Pacifica.
Anon (343), maybe you're correct with what another anonymous commenter would call a "commie" shared tax solution, but I still don't think so.
FYI,stores asking for your zipcode predates Lancell's tour on Council.
Initially collected for use in marketing, advertising, expansion.
The idea was as Steve says to distribute sales tax by population, in the same way the San Mateo County Transportation Authority distributes "Local Share."
Sales tax sharing has always been a Pacifica fantasy.
sales tax allocation by location of the sale has always been the practice. Tax by sale location rewards towns who had an economic development plan and actually approved projects that generated retail sales. Build the store and you have a local economy. Towns who don't pay attention lose.
Towns like Pacifica have no plan and did poorly with retail sales (poorly with everything else--high tech, biotech, office, any manufacturing, research, etc., hence no local economy). What little car sales, larger appliance, home furnishings, movie theater, larger clothes moved to Colma, elsewhere while various City Councils slept.
So towns who made the retail effort work real hard to keep what they have approved. Majority of state legislators come from towns/regions who have a sustainable local economy. Towns like Pacifica beg for tax sharing, which they will never get.
A hard lesson to live with what you have wrought.
The trans funding is allocated by town as buy-in to get a majority vote for the 1/2 cent sales tax add-on. Merely a device to spread the $$ around and appear fair.
oh sure
Pacifica can't support the retail community it has and that's nothing new. As for all the other types of industry mentioned...what CEO in their right mind would locate a company facility of any size in an out-of-the-way location, in a coastal town with all the coastal regs, one road in and one road out, and not on the transit corridor. Particularly when prime industrial and commercial locations are just over the hill? Let's get real about growth and pursue aggressively the types of business we are suited to. For example, senior housing of all types. The collateral spending that would develop around them can actually support retail and food businesses. It could be Pacifica's niche. We already have a great start on it with 3 or 4 facilities.
"..senior housing of all types. The collateral spending that would develop around them can actually support retail and food businesses."
Have I've got news for you Anonymous 723, older people frequently have specialty bland diets, don't eat much, may not eat-out much either. Older people need a pharmacy. They don't usually spend much on clothing. They don't usually drive far. Their doctors are not in Pacifica. They may not have a whole lot of discretionary income, and little energy or desire to spend their money.
As a city, we already bought into that "we can do nothing plan", and thus defeated multiple retail and housing developments which would have improved this city. We can't even get our highway out-of-town improved.
This is one of the few cities with zero population growth over 10 years. At the same time, there is no longer much land left beyond permanent "open space". We have the poorest per capita revenue of 20 San Mateo county cities-- and that is not the result of location. Pacifica is a gateway-to-the-coast city. Located in this metropolitan area. We should be productive, "with it", and "swell". However, that is not what has been happening over this decade and last.
Time to do something else. We need to do "all of the above", including increase the volumne of our sales taxes. Mainly we need an effective city council that will move this city forward.
brilliant - hopefully Pacifica will be next, but I don't have any faith that our council will do the right thing and eliminate the police dept., they rarely do the right thing....
Yeah, if we'd only had a different city council, the limits of our location and geography would have been overcome. A pro-development council would have done something about half our market area being in the Pacific Ocean.
"the limits of our location and geography" Anon (748).
What you say is utter nonsense, and the kind of spin that has kept this city going nowhere over 30 years. The "we can do nothing" claim doesn't work. The ocean and geography has its own natural and marketing advantages, one being beauty. Unfortunately, your friends over 30 years have worked to rid this city of productive land. Still, this city may survive with adequate planning.
Know where Kings Mountain is? Its just a bump on tree lined Skyline Boulevard (Woodside). On their home compound, an Ken Fisher built a nationally and internationally recognized investment company. This company provides whole lot good paying jobs and donations that improve their local area and our county. There was no natural advantage to build that company on Kings Mountain, other than walk to work for Ken.
This city rid itself of areas where there should be business parks and commerce. The result, only 12% of people who live here can work here, 88% cannot. Balanced city economy? I don't think so, but you blaming the Pacific ocean is way off. There is no rational reason to keep this city poor and stupid. The population bought a bill-of-goods. We need to fix what we can.
Every other ocean-front city takes advantage of their location. Only in Pacifca do some NIMBYs desperately claim it's a disadvantage.
Steve that course was set 50 or more years ago when houses, rather that hotels and a boardwalk, were developed in Sharp Park.
Regardless of your feelings about development, Pacifica's course was set before you and I were born.
"... houses, rather that hotels and a boardwalk, were developed in Sharp Park."
Interesting point Todd (1107). There is still an opportunity to develop some ocean front property, including in Sharp Park. Of course there is no potential for Mori Point (now open space). But, the quarry is available and really must be built (economic necessity for the city).
Much land has moved out of this city's jurisdiction in favor of "open space" during the past 15 years. Thus, I don't see how 50 years past set the extreme "open space" destiny of this city. I remember driving to Linda Mar more than 45 years ago when there was no Shopping Center, just a gas station about where McDonald's is. Building the shopping center has been an asset and a big improvement for those of us who live in the south part of Pacifica (and the mid-coast). If only half of the quarry can be built (unknown), the parcel size is about the same as the Almaden Ranch property that San Jose planning just approved.
What you call "nonsense," commercial developers and corporate planners call "market area." Put the point of a compass on city hall and draw a circle around it with a 5-mile radius. What's in that circle? Half of it is the Pacifica Ocean. What's in the other half? How many people? How many households? This is why we should be pleased that Walgreen's and Fresh & Easy opened here. It's also the reason why we'll probably never have a Trader Joe's.
Let's focus on filling some of the many empty storefronts with small businesses that can survive in a small market area.
This city is wasting some prime beach front property. And it's not because of houses. You have the Quarry and old sewer plant, the recycling center and auto shops right on the beach.
I hope the Beach Blvd project get the green light in whatever form it will take. Pacifica should be a destination and there's no reason it can't be with the right planning. If you don't think people will come to Pacifica then look at the RV Park which is a huge success.
Again, a modest adjustment to city compensation, for now, will allow for these things to happen in some form. Our senior staff. department heads fire and police are acting very short sighted.
No it won't. The problem is much bigger and complex. You offer another band-aid and it's the same one that's hashed out at the bargaining table. Inadequate.
Hutch there is no Beach Blvd project. No one has bought it and nothing is being built. It's not listed for sale. All that's going on is this city is once again spending money it doesn't have on public relations to pacify residents and look like they are doing something to promote development. It'd be a lot cheaper and really effective to just can the entire Planning Commission. Just need one more election to turn this around.
It's only prime beachfront property if somebody wants it. You see anybody lately?
If I were a developer, I wouldn't bother with Pacifica given the no-growth councils of the last 10 years.
If the council changes, expect a renewed interest in Beach Blvd. and the quarry. That's still prime beachfront property.
Anon@823on3/5
Are your comments autobiographical?
It's true we're all headed for the Big Dirt Nap. Also true that the Pacifica debate on growth and development, frankly more idealogical than economic, will grind on ad infinitum. But meanwhile, back here in the real world, at least 8 facilities geared to seniors have sprung up in Pacifica. Offering everything from independent living to skilled nursing care no fewer than 8 facilities of an in-demand industry within a town of less than 40,000 is significant. With this towns scary inability to recognize a good thing or capitalize on it, we're probably real lucky that no one noticed this town actually developing a niche industry. Clearly, market forces have decided that Pacifica is a good place for these types of businesses. And, make no mistake, they are businesses. Taken as a group, they provide a hundred or more jobs for locals and others, tax revenue of several types, much needed in-demand housing and care for seniors, and-- quite the contrary to your grim depiction of seniors and their families--collateral spending for goods and services throughout this community.
There's room and demand for more and even now the Oddstad Assisted Living project languishes at city hall. Certainly, we should pursue all realistic types of business growth but we would be stupid to overlook an industry that is already here, destined to grow, and
ready to build now. So far economic growth in Pacifica has been haphazard with no real strategy or expertise to attract business to this town. It's left to chance, amateurs and word of mouth. Hiring an actual Economic Development person would be a sign we are serious and want to do more than argue. Add an an all-new Planning and Development Commission and it's a brand new day Pacifica!
Dream on, Steve Sinai, dream on.
Oh dopey old Pacifica, joke of the county. When will we learn to do what we can with what we have where we are?
I'm not sure what's more ridiculous: Todd Bray's assertion that he hasn't obstructed development and thereby directly contributed to our fiscal mess, or his scaled wage reduction plan that ignores every rule of market economics.
On the salary front, a better cost-cutting plan is to eliminate some supervisory positions.
Ridiculous? Anonymous using the name Adam Smith (747), what is more ridiculous to me is someone calling-out, criticizing someone else under a fake name. Ridiculous is relative, isn't it?
I appreciate Todd's comments here under his own name. Todd offered solutions in keeping employees. Something to think about, and consider in the total picture. In private industry without contracts, Todd's employee downsizing suggestions might be considered brilliant. Did you make any suggestion in an attempt to find solutions, other than remove employees and/or outsource?
Of course I agree with you in my observation as well, Todd has aided in obstructing development in this city along with others. The important others are primarily 4 city council leaders from 2002 where actions, appointments and votes count.
a) Prove my name isn't Adam Smith.
b) There are obvious instances where you've posted anonymously because no one can duplicate your poor grammar and misguided attempts to bait the tea party people, so stop being a hypocrite.
c) According to your friend Babs' overly-long article in the Trib, Pacifica's public employee salaries are not only in the lowest quartile in the bay area, but the lowest quartile in the entire state. Given that we have a much higher cost of living than the vast majority of the state, I would assume that means that our public employees already have one of the highest cost of living to wage ratios in the entire state, which makes a scaled wage reduction even less appropriate.
"..you've posted anonymously.." Smith Anon (804)
Yes, I'm worn-out with all the Anonymous no name comment, and have optionally decided to respond in like kind. Does a "no name", unidentified person such as yourself deserve the consideration of being responded to by a named person?
Attacking blog commenters with names under an anonymous name is an ethics violation from my view. Therefore, something I do not consider doing. Challenging ideas with or without names is a separate lesser issue, name preferred. I know, "Adam Smith" impersonator you're like a bad penny, obsessed with what you consider a) good grammar, b) hypocrisy of others, c) merit and value judgements of others, but I view these as your "non-economic" problem. (Oh you're the real Adam Smith (1723-1790), show us your birth certificate).
In repeating the city salary comment from Barbara Arietta in her Pacifica Tribune article, what you have said about county and state wage cost may be true; but, counter-balanced against this city is broke. Nothing new, it took 10 years of city council "no growth" planning to affect this reality.
Easy search/quick view of relative city employee cost within the county was made in a 8/26/09 Grand Jury report to South San Francisco, posted here. This report, however, does not reflect the current changes and conditions today, 2+ years later. BTW, there is a reason Barbara is President of the county civil grand jury, and so many other accountable offices.
Adam Smith, subsidizing your life style as a public employee and attempting to make your wages some sort of status symbol by comparing it to other communities is a hollow make believe dream.
Grow a pair my friend. Go get a real job where you are not working in a government protected bubble. Get a real job that creates wealth like a trades person or retailer.
Your wages are not comparable to anything other than the municipality you work in. Rather than throw fellow public workers under the bus take the cuts you must to save each other.
In the end behaving like a spoiled brat that feels he is owed by all of us gets you where, exactly?
Anonymous 316 said...
"It's only prime beachfront property if somebody wants it. You see anybody lately?"
-------------------
It's been prime real estate all along. The problem has been with a no growth council, not with the property. It looks like that may change soon I hope.
"We get what we pay for"
Try telling that to the residents of Bell.
I don't care if Pacifica has the lowest employee wages in the entire friggin nation. We still can't afford these high priced union contract wages and benefits. We need to cut across the board, not just department heads. And we should not lay off to reduce expenses. And for people saying we will lose good people, Hello? Where will they go. Practically every Bay Area city is laying off, not hiring.
The Soviet Union circa 1970 just called. They think your plan is really groovy and would work way better than letting the labor market decide, comrades. They also toasted your idea to double down using the ideas of someone who contributed to the city's current dire situation by obstructing any and all growth. А дело бывало -- и коза волка съедала.
Fine, let the labor market decide comrade. Cut and let the chips fall where they may.
This ain't the 80's anymore. The time of Unions demanding huge wage and benefit packages are over. Unsustainable underfunded pension obligations have come to take down Pacifica like so many other cities.
You don't believe me Gorbachev? Read for yourself http://royceprinting.com/jobs/FOSarchive/2010FOS/05_06_10_PacificaFOS.pdf
doveryai, no proveryai
The very idea that public employee unions are somehow subject to market influences is absurd. If they were cops would be making $60,000 a year tops, and fire fighters would be working a regular 8 hour day. Absurd.
Hutch you hang on to that dream. Don't let reality intrude.
Post a Comment