Chamber of Commerce luncheon next Wednesday, 5/22/13, 11:30 AM (two hours). Information and RSVP below.
Pacifica Tribune, 5/14/13. "City council member explains city's infrastructure projects."
Pacifica Tribune, 5/14/13. "City council member explains city's infrastructure projects."
"City
Councilmember Mike O'Neill will discuss various projects in which the
city is engaged Wednesday, May 22 from 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. at Nick's
Restaurant. He has chosen five projects to cover in depth and others
to touch upon as the city moves forward with them. He will tell the lead
agency or city department involved, the cost and the scheduled
timeline.
| City Councilmember Mike O;Neill |
| I'm still looking for a quarry infrastructure on the horizon |
He will touch upon projects that are on the horizon -- the Manor Drive overpass, City Hall, street repairs and maintenance and the plan for the library, hotel, shops and residences at 2212 Beach Blvd., now Council chambers and the former wastewater treatment site.City Manager Steve Rhodes and the wastewaterdepartment head and the director of Public Works will be on hand to answer questions."
The cost is $20 for Chamber of Commerce members, $25 for non-members. Lunch will be served. RSVP to the Chamber at 355-4122.
Related - City of Pacifica City Council, Pacifica Chamber of Commerce, Pacifica City Data. Fix Pacifica reprint articles, Mike O'Neill.
Posted by Kathy Meeh
42 comments:
I have already sign up.
This is the kind of information we all need to understand the cost and impacts of these far reaching projects. I want to thank Mike in advance for taking the time to put this information before the public in a relaxed and less formal manner.
I question the fee s, especially as city staff will be present, but that's our Chamber.
You question the fees, but then you want everyone in Pacifica to spend way more to accommodate your stupid snakes and frogs.
Makes sense.
All one has to do is mention the Chamber, and the hippies will start foaming at the mouth.
I want to see Stone try to hand Mike a script. I'd pay to see that.
What's yer beef, Bray? Afraid it'll become Chamber PAC Money?
Mary Ann and Len are not happy about this. They were pissed enough when Mike voted not to approve the PD contract. They are finding out Mike is his own man doing the peoples will.
So are Mary Ann and Len doing the peoples will.
"So are Mary Ann and Len doing the peoples will."
Which people? Not those living in Pacifica. Perhaps those working for Pacifica?
you better not go there
"Mary Ann and Len are not happy about this."
Yeah, and Ritzma is the next city manager.
Stop making stuff up.
If "Mike is his own man doing the peoples will" and is a minority of 1, he will be just as ineffective as Mary Ann and Len. At least 3 of 5 need to figure out how to work together.
True 454. And haven't we seen the results of city councils unable to work together? I'm no fan of Nihart or Stone but there they sit. Her for another 3, him for ?. Clearly, I don't share Chris P. or Kathy's discomfort with anon comments and I am not suggesting "happy speak", but maybe it's time for all of us critics-and I'm certainly one-to look at the big picture and give all 5 of these people the benefit of the doubt as they try to move us forward. They may not succeed, but somebody has to be in charge or we descend into chaos. There will be other elections, but til then where is the upside for Pacifica in the slurs and too often groundless rumors about council? These 5 are trying to help Pacifica, not hurt it, and unlike us, they are actually in the best position to do so. We put them there.
Just a few days apart, we had Len speak to democrats and then Mike today speak to chamber. I went to both. I want to hear the others speak for as long at similar events!
Good for Mike. He is attempting to explain some of these major projects. We need more openness like this. Bravo!
The difference is Len was free, and Mike requires donations to a lobbying group.
Donation? No proof any of the $20 or $25 ticket covers more than lunch. If Nick's kicks in a discount on lunch then it complicates the accounting required by the IRS for 501(c)(6) groups. No biggie, either way. Surely all involved have accountants.
Hutch, do you get the city has no money???
The taxpayers will not give the city $30+ million in bonds and more debt to build a library. Plenty of empty space around town to put a library.
Pacifica, has a chamber?
It's a coffee club and half a phone book!
The fee was for the lunch. I do not have a "discomfort" with people posting as anonoymoi but find it cowardly.
Shouldn't you be working on the next rate increase!
Chris, I looked at the Chambers most recent IRS form posted on line. The chamber claimed NO expenses for lobbying activity, none. I thoughts that all communications, verbal or written is by law lobbying. I know I've seen you in front of the City Council where you spoke on behalf of the Chamber, supporting or arguing against various proposals, is this activity not reportable? Not accusing anything, just want an explanation, which I'm sure you are happy to provide.
Anon@10:18 demonstrates Chris' point about cowardly posts.
@ Anon 742...I didn't say I agree with floating a $30M bond for a new library. In fact I don't. I don't think Mike said he does either. He's just presenting the facts without taking sides. Something that we need a lot more of.
The good news is the house of cards the Chamber Board (not membership) has been playing with is do for a fact check.
As soon as the highway FEIR is out and available for destruction, attention can then turn on the Chamber Board. It will absolutely be my pleasure.
"lobbying?" Anonymous 10:53 AM
Anyone (any citizen, any group) can speak at city council during "oral communications" about anything, including you (under actual identity of course). And what legislative lobby action are you referring to?
What is the point of all this? Chamber folk on here say the money collected paid for lunch and nothing else. Fine. I'm sure the accounting will reflect that. Is the free-floating sick rage in Pacifica so great that we attack blindly without concern for the consequences? Do we really want to stifle the kind of openness that O'Neill seems to have made a personal goal just so we can get at the chamber? Who the hell does it serve to shut him down? Who? And painting him as some rogue councilman who alone is on the side of the people is very suspicious. Running a city this messed up isn't lilacs and lollypops and council conflict is not inherently bad if it results in better decisions, ends stalemates, creates focus, and makes people accountable. Whatever the reason O'Neill is doing this, it is a good thing he's doing, and that is what is important.
632 anon you have far too much common sense for here and Pathetica. We're like a dog unable to stop clawing its own skin raw. LMAO you chose just this one item from the whine list.
1239 what's pathetic is your comment.
Have to agree with council, speaking at a public meeting to council is not lobbying
yup this town is terminally self-destructive. we wanna be saved money-wise but only by certain people, we wanna be prosperous but only through certain types of activities. we still think we can have it our way and we're willing to go under to prove it. sick puppy.
Hey Todd? Why do you want to go after the Chamber Board...What could we have done to you except speak up for the business community?
Chris I agree anonymous attacks are cowardly, but not every anonymi is attacking you. And, surely you realize you have become a public figure. And a public figure connected in people's minds to a bill they have to pay. It's always open season on public figures. Some very old principles that are fundamental to a democracy are involved there. Be thankful you're not in the UK. They're brutal whether in person, anon, or signed. For what it's worth, I don't think the Chamber has done anything wrong with this lunch and a speaker thing. On the contrary.
Hutch said... "Have to agree with council, speaking at a public meeting to council is not lobbying"
Fail.
Ever wonder WHY you fill out a speaker card at Council meetings? Don't you think you could simply line up and announce your name? Bet you've never thought about it. Guess what... when you speak at Council you are LOBBYING and that card is required by law and that is why you have filled out that card. If you are being compensated (an employee of a Chamber of Commerce for instance) then you are a PAID LOBBYIST and you must be registered as such, and report your activities.
Anon@1:49, you're wrong.
According to California Code 820.39,
LOBBYIST (a) means any individual who receives two thousand dollars ($2,000) or more in economic consideration in a calendar month, other than reimbursement for reasonable travel expenses, or whose principal duties as an employee are, to communicate directly or through his or her agents with any elective state official, agency official, or legislative official for the purpose of influencing legislative or administrative action. (b) For the purposes of subdivision (a), a proceeding before the Public Utilities Commission constitutes "administrative action" if it meets any of the definitions set forth in subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 82002. However, a communication made for the purpose of influencing this type of Public Utilities Commission proceeding is not within subdivision (a) if the communication is made at a public hearing, public workshop or other public forum that is part of the proceeding, or if the communication is included in the official record of the proceeding.
EXCEPTIONS: (a) An individual is not a lobbyist by reason of activities described in Section 86300. (b) For the purposes of subdivision (a), a proceeding before the Public Utilities Commission constitutes "administrative action" if it meets any of the definitions set forth in subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 82002. However, a communication made for the purpose of influencing this type of Public Utilities Commission proceeding is not within subdivision (a) if the communication is made at a public hearing, public workshop or other public forum that is part of the proceeding, or if the communication is included in the official record of the proceeding.
"..when you speak at Council you are LOBBYING", Anonymous 1:49 PM
Yeah, when you speak at city council you fill out a card to prove you're a person, rather than an Anonymous. That's about it.
Its still America, and free speech prevails whatever you're peddling. That includes whoever shows up at city council or other city meetings to speak. Three minutes, the time is all yours. There is no city advisement otherwise, and a City Attorney is present at city council meeting.
Hey but go ahead, try to prove your point with actual facts. So far you have not, so the "failure" (stated in your comment) is all yours.
Sooo, guess Anonymous didn't prove his point, Steve.
Thank you kind Anonymoi for your insight. I do not think most anonymoi are attacking me personally; only the ones who always have to bring in my job on any discussion I have on any topic.
I really don't consider myself a public figure but whatever.
Writing a name on a card doesn't "prove you're a person" any more than typing a name with your comment does here.
Yep, fake Sue Donym 3:37 PM, you'll need to give the city your fake address too. Just as you may have created a fake "lobbying" comment here. Fake information, fake name, no proof fake comment. Enjoy your fake world!
Please enjoy your fake world if you think someone writing a name on a piece of paper means anything.
You fill out a card so the meeting record can show who submitted a card to speak. It also helps the mayor keep track of the speakers and conduct the meeting in an orderly manner.
Post a Comment