Read it hyah
Posted by Steve Sinai
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Pacifica's Economic Plan
Submission and comment policy
Want to share an article or opinion? Unlike some other Pacifica blogs, Fix Pacifica won't bury viewpoints we disagree with. Send your submission, along with your name, to fixpacifica@gmail.com.
People may comment anonymously, but any comments that degenerate into 1) personal attacks against individual blog participants; 2) incomprehensible gibberish; or 3) attempts to turn conversations into grade-school playground brawls, will be removed.
People may comment anonymously, but any comments that degenerate into 1) personal attacks against individual blog participants; 2) incomprehensible gibberish; or 3) attempts to turn conversations into grade-school playground brawls, will be removed.
Search This Blog
Recent Comments
Get this Recent Comments Widget
Historic Sharp Park Golf Course
Blog Archive
-
▼
2013
(754)
-
▼
June
(63)
- City Calendar July 1 - July 7
- Should I stay in Pacifica?
- 4th of July festivities in Pacifica
- What to do next Thursday, July 4th, 2013
- Latest beach water pollution report, we're good
- CHP Closure: SR-1 Lantos Tunnel: Sat 7-7:30 AM
- Nothing unifies Pacificans more than a whole serie...
- Pacifica Fees and Charges for Permits and Actions
- Latest news from Pacifica Five-O
- Fireworks will be allowed in some beach areas
- Is the long awaited economic plan for Pacifica mor...
- Shark bites kayak at Pacifica - man safe
- Full Godbe UUT survey
- Parking fees may be coming to you soon
- Pacifica City Council to Consider Measure to Prote...
- Pacifica Employee Salaries
- Pacifica City council to Address Potential Update ...
- UTT Questions
- Homeless numbers way up in Pacifica
- City calendar this week, June 24 - 28, 2013
- City game plan to sell you several new, additional...
- Too old to paraglide, man seriously hurt
- Appointment of the new Planning Commission, Counci...
- False kidnap attempt, no charges, moving on
- City Council term limits, look back at the Measure
- Path to a city selling a new tax to its residents
- Pacifica PD Attempted Child Abduction ****UPDATED ...
- City Council meeting, Monday, June 24, 2013
- City meetings tonight - Redevelopment Successor, P...
- 2013 Community Survey of UUT Measure, City Service...
- Student photography from IBL's photography class
- Pacifica Five-0 Efficiency Meeting, 6/19/2013
- Millbrae, another city with a balanced budget
- Planning Commission meeting, Monday June 17, 2013
- N.S.A. tracks e-mails to fathers yesterday
- Possible Attempted Child Abduction
- City calendar this week, June 17 - 21, 2013
- Happy Father's Day, June 16, 2013
- Pacifica School District letter to PH1A
- PH1A letter alternatives to Highway 1 widening
- Latest Fresh & Easy rumor
- Daly City to put garbage and recycling contract ou...
- Vote for additional utility user taxes?
- Highway 1 widening is the traffic bottleneck solution
- Fun at the San Mateo County Fair, June 8 through 1...
- 4th of July fireworks issues considered at city co...
- City calendar this week, June 10 -14, 2013
- Bohner/Loeb vs. Route 1
- In San Carlos, a commission that has "not much to ...
- Highway 1 widening is an economic opportunity
- PACIFICA: Scientists find way to improve effective...
- Measure A highway 1 and other city infrastructure ...
- Odwalla headquarters has lost its cool Half Moon B...
- San Mateo County Harbor District appointment, the ...
- New Planning Commissioners soon appointed
- City Council meeting, June 10, 2013
- Public - private partnership converts landfill gas...
- Marin County voter approved desalination plant mov...
- Government in San Mateo County peninsula, week of ...
- San Mateo County Harbor Commission replacement int...
- City calendar this week, June 3 - 7, 2013
- Measure A sales tax may help build our new library...
- San Mateo County voting districts accused of sirin...
-
▼
June
(63)
Visitors:
118 comments:
have to give council member Nihart and Mayor Stone credit, they used taxpayer money ($24K) to ask framed poll questions that gave them the "right" answers to tax the taxpayers more. All without a public hearing to spend the $$.
hey, those two are the dominant penguins in this flock. nobody ever said they weren't smart. and nihart understands human behavior
real well.
Ms. Nihart is feeling pretty frisky because she's in her last term under term limits.
Aww, cute. The penguins are height appropriate. But, what's O'Neill doing there? Maybe it's really Nihart, Stone and Ervin. That's it. The clipboard guy is thinning on top. Rhodes? I love it when art imitates life.
City has a balanced budget. $1.5 million reserves. Police will not be outsourced. Parking meters at Linda Mar Beach. So why do they need more money?
"and nihart understands human behavior
real well."
Hahaha, I think she understands manipulation very well, but people? If only.
This latest tax endeavor (one of many over the last 4 years) highlights the abuses of our city staff and council. Abuses of the revenues they control, abuses toward the residents of the city they manage and the on going abuses to the public process. They have managed to hide behind a couple of cowardly tax/rate increases for our waste hauler and water treatment system, but again that tactic of mail in protests, while technically legal, just underscores the lack of concern for residents by our senior staff and council.
No, sorry, a manipulator is not a person that understand anything, certainly not people. As for the followers on council where blond of spoon fed it's obvious they are just along for the ride and the photo ops.
Mary Ann gets to run again. The term limits initiative wasn't retroactive.
I'll be very happy to vote for her.
Take a deep breath everyone. Let's let the City Council DO THEIR JOB and bring these ideas forward to the community. A tax measure will do just that if it makes it to the ballot. Everyone then gets the chance to vote.
For me, likely a "Yes" vote. I want good things for this city, including a healthier reserve. Enough of dealing budget to budget and not knowing if ends will meet.
A guaranteed source of revenue for the city is a good thing.
Pretty sure Mary Ann is termed out, Steve -- another reason that un-democratic term initiative was just plain stupid and short-sighted.
As I understand it, the funds raised by this proposed tax cannot be restricted for any particular use--that control would require a probably unattainable 2/3 yes vote. So, the funds are available for this council or a future council to use as they please--protected only by a proposed citizen's oversight committee, ie, no protection at all. It also has no sunset clause and would require another vote to change the rate.
As much as I want good things for this city, this is not the way. We should know that by now. This tax will be a poor and ultimately unsatisfactory substitute for economic development and smarter fiscal decisions. I won't vote for it.
Todd, yet another thing we disagree on...in order to be even an average manipulator of people, you need a good knowledge of human behavior. Nihart is a very good manipulator. That's not always a bad thing. It just depends.
Nihart rumors. Is she termed out or burned out?
I think Sinai is correct according to the language of Ballot Measure V (Term Limits) passed by the voters in November 2010. Read the fine print. It is a progressive measure, not retroactive, and because Nihart was in office when the measure was enacted, she can serve two full four year terms. So she is currently in her first full term and can run again in 2016. Boo hoo or whoopee!
Ms. Nihart's first term does not count towards term limits because Measure V was enacted during that term and it is not a retroactive rule. Other than in this specific situation, a partial term would count towards the term limit if it was for more than two years of a four year term.
No, sorry, a manipulator is not a person that understand anything, certainly not people
A manipulator on the west coast is called an Attorney.
A manipulator on the east coast is called a Lawyer.
Heard a rumor the other day that Sue D. is going to run again. I guess her hippies,nimbys, and noobees aren't feeling the love with Mary Ann, Karen, and Lenny.
Sure let the people vote for it. I think they will vote a big no after being force fed other hikes in fees. We don't need more taxes.
This tax can go to anything council wants. I suggest that this tax is probably going to go to hiring new staff to the tune of a couple of hundred K's a year and pay for the increase in PERS cost that is on the way. Mo money, mo money, mo money!
I suggest that this tax is probably going to go to hiring new staff to the tune of a couple of hundred K's a year and pay for the increase in PERS cost that is on the way
Rumor has it they want to pay the new city manager a lot less then what they paid Rhodes. Good luck with that.
The bond measure to refill the empty bucket was pretty much a flop.
Digre cannot run again, thankfully. Unfortunately, neither can Mary Ann.
http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Pacifica_Term_Limits,_Measure_V_%28November_2010%29
Please take the time to read the text of Measure V; both Digre and Nihart may run again.
[b]Measure V was not retroactive[/b] and councilmembers are only limited to two full terms served [b]after[/b] the 2010 passage of the measure.
Nihart may run once more (in 2016)
Digre may run once more (in 2014)
O'Neill may run twice more (in 2014 and 2018)
Like Fogel, Sinai, 1047, 1121 said.
Nihart can run again. Just read Measure V from election November 2010. Couldn't be clearer.
Bray, Nihart and Stone must understand something about people and behavior because they have manipulated and maneuvered there way into running things. Their little sub-committees are kicking some butts!
Fogel you sure about O'Neill?
Oh forget it Fogel, I get the O'Neill thing. Forgot his first term was as a replacement for 2 years. He'd be running for 4 year terms in the future.
That survey seems fishy. I've never seen one like it. The answers look like they just made them up. There's no mention of an audit or certification of the results. No breakdown of who they called in what parts of town, how the questions were framed. Very fishy. Did anybody get a call from these people?
Really? The survey says they found 69% are in favor of senior transportation but 61% are in favor of Homework study programs for youth and teens?
Did theymostly ask older people? Because families with kids would not have answered that way.
But we don't know because there's no breakdown of who they called on the city site.
http://www.cityofpacifica.org/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=5888
Hutch, don't be questioning that fishy poll. you could end up sleeping with the fishies. or having to read and comment on the 500 page ppd efficiency report.
Bernie, is the only member of the "gang of yes" that got off his butt and did something.
Kudo's to Bernie!
Hutch, there isn't a list of questions asked, either, that I can see, just a set of opinionated results.
I had an email request this morning from someone who identified themselves as the chair of the UUT campaign who wanted to meet and talk with me. I declined but asked who the other officers were. The reply was a rather prissy personal attack and a CYA lecture about not wanting to divulge who the officers of the UUT.
That there is supposedly an organized campaign for the UTT is one more reason to not trust advocates of this latest farce.
Todd, who was the email from?
One requirement for me to vote yes would be a time limit for the tax of five years or less.
I want to see the city wean itself off of these types of taxes, and instead increase the commercial tax base.
Here comes the committee! When have one of these tax or bond measures not had a committee working to get it passed? Council members are certainly familiar with how that works since most of them have spent lots of time chairing, steering, working on these things. Gather the usual group, maybe a few from FCSTF, get some hippies, the chamber, school crowd...a nice mix. Reach out to people who make their opinions public, like Bray, to talk about the issue, learn the objections, de-fang if possible. Here we go again.
I don't think the UUT allows for a sunset clause, does it? The new rate continues until changed by another public vote. Isn't that clever? Simple 50% plus 1 will pass it. No restrictions whatsoever as to how the funds are used. From the poll you know what the sales pitch for this thing will be. I've learned my lesson. No, thanks.
Steve, who it was is not important. That there is an organized YES committee already on deck before the UUT report is heard at council is what is important. It's shameless. It underscores the abuse of process our staff and council have come to rely on to increase taxes against us. And I mean against everyone.
For me the only solution is a one percent wage cut for every $10,000 earned. Always has been and always will.
The people pushing this tax are the same people who were for the sales tax and against lowering employee salaries. Also the same one's who wanted to bury police outsourcing. Am I wrong? This reminds me of that lame mail in poll they did last year.
Todd, if you can't tell us who it was, then I'm assuming you're making the story up.
Wait, isn't Todd the one who just made things up, and then insisted they were true unless Chris proved him wrong? I guess he's exempt, though.
which part/s is untrue? that todd bray got such an email or that a Yes on UUT committee exists?
Once again conspiracy theories fly.
If you think the survey is fishy, will you be at the City Council meeting on Monday to hear the full report?
Give everyone huge wages? Where has that been discussed? At meetings I've heard about the need to build back the reserve.
Who said the council only wants to increase taxes and do nothing about longer term economic development? The budget reflects adding a position for economic development and multiple projects are underway (Beach Blvd., Palmetto).
A steady stream of revenue is needed now, while economic development work takes place for longer term stability. I'm for a tax that will support Pacifica. Not sure if it is the UUT tax or a half cent sales tax, but for something.
Ginny Jaquith, Julie Lancelle, Bruce Banco, Sue Velone, Kalimah. There's more. Looks like a mix of the failed finance city services committee and Pacifican's Care cadre. They have been talking tax for 3 years. The bogus committee was set up to set the table by only focusing on a tax as Pacifica's saviour. BS.
Oh, and our PG&E 6.5% Utility Tax that was supposed to go away, is now how old? I'm thinking we are pushing 20 years for this "temporary" fix.
Deja vu all over again.
Last week it was city salaries, the week before it was Recology, this week it is alleged emails,(that may or may not exist.)
Anyone want to start a pool and put in a couple bucks what next weeks rants is going to be?
Pete, also said the city had 7.5 million in reserves, so he could get re-elected.
To those who think the survey looks "fishy": the purpose of the survey was to see if there is support for a UUT, because the city doesn't want to put money and effort into a measure that won't pass. The School District did the same thing with the parcel tax, which turned out pretty much as predicted. The goal for a survey like this is to be as accurate as possible so the city can make informed choices. It would be self-defeating for it to be manipulated to come to a pre-ordained conclusion.
""Ginny Jaquith, Julie Lancelle, Bruce Banco, Sue Velone, Kalimah.""
So the UUT committee is made up of public officials past and present, and public employees past and present and a wnna-be or two?
The nerve of you, you, you people! Questioning the intentions of our elected public officials. Blasphemy! You'll burn for that. Probably on the 4th!
the tax on the nov 2013 ballot is a done deal. All the decisions have already been made. the poll is pure cover...If council was honest, they would have asked voters one or 2 serious questions, like "would you support a tax if you knew the city had a balenced budget, the police will NOT be outsoruced and the city has a $1.5 million surplus?"
What's fishy about it? If you've been paying attention, this has been coming since way back when they did that town-hall thing at the community center and presented all those options. That got the city some really useful info about what services people valued.
Lots of the attendees were seniors and lots of the respondents to the phone poll are probably seniors because they are more likely to vote. Link a proposed tax to things like emergency services, meals on wheels, keeping the cops local, and you have instant support from a group you can count on to vote...senior citizens. It will pass. Council thanks you very much and they promise to spend every penny.
I don't know if I would call FCSTF a failure. They were discouraged from any fix but a tax measure so they recommended a tax measure. Then they were dumped. I think they served their purpose perfectly.
Council put out feelers re campaign volunteers for "a tax measure" before FCSTF was dis-banded. Way before.
@1122 "if council was honest". You mean our little Shadow Council of Two? Seems unlikely, doesn't it?
Anon 1123 - That survey last year was biased and asked leading questions. It was not just fishy it was a joke.
I want to see if this survey is just as slanted. I was just informed by Cathy Oconell that that the documents behind the survey are only available by coming down to city hall from 8:30 -1:30.
Hopefully the Tribune will have more info on this next week.
I'm surprised the city didn't claim attorney client privilege
Don't waste your energy. The survey is just a prop. This tax has been in the works for a long time. Carefully plotted and staged for just the right moment. But, really, what else do you expect council to do? They can't print money and economic development on a scale to make us self-supporting is an absolute fantasy.
Want to see documents? Take a look at the completed council ballots for Planning Commissioners. They're part of the prior meeting minutes with the agenda for 6/24 council meeting. I think O'Neill voted for just one of the 7 that were appointed. Tough when birds of a feather flock together.
here's a new secret meeting sunday to discuss strategy among the secret campaign group. This Sunday 4PM in Susan Vellone's Seaside Spa, Park Mall shopping Center. Len Stone and the pollster plus campaign committee will be priming speakers for Monday night's council show to bless the tax.
Mere citizens are not invited but you can hang out and watch who attends.
Or get a bikini wax?
Shadow Council.
actually, this is serious biz and not about waxes.
Never before has this town seen a stealth campaign paid for by taxpayers money go to this extreme to con people into paying for a tax that is not necessary.
Town has a $1.5 million surplus. What more can they possibly need?
Wait a minute. We have a poll paid for by the taxpayers, approved in secret, by council that has been silent on the matter, and being fed to us rectally. Nice! When did they vote, when was the discussion, what were the questions, and what are they going to use the money for? Damn, the PG&E tax is bad enough, can you imagine paying that on your land lines and cell phones. What about our businesses? Nice economic stimulis plan, council.
Anonymous at 11:30am said...
"I don't know if I would call FCSTF a failure. They were discouraged from any fix but a tax measure so they recommended a tax measure. Then they were dumped. I think they served their purpose perfectly.
Council put out feelers re campaign volunteers for "a tax measure" before FCSTF was dis-banded. Way before."
I felt the FCSTF was disappointed that the council didn't put a tax initiative on last year's ballot. They spent months - years reviewing city finances and came to the realization that revenue generation is needed to build the reserves and provide stable footing until longer term economic development projects kick in.
All campaigns do polling these days. Why would it be any different for Pacifica?
Ian Butler at 9:55am stated it well:
" ian butler said...
To those who think the survey looks "fishy": the purpose of the survey was to see if there is support for a UUT, because the city doesn't want to put money and effort into a measure that won't pass. The School District did the same thing with the parcel tax, which turned out pretty much as predicted. The goal for a survey like this is to be as accurate as possible so the city can make informed choices. It would be self-defeating for it to be manipulated to come to a pre-ordained conclusion."
I think the underlying message in this is that we have no other options to raise revenue. We really don't. This stuff about the OWWTP and Palmetto Main Street generating significant revenue is fable. Pure fable. Political gold but you can't run a city on that. And there's nothing else in the pipeline. Besides, do you know the massive scale of development required to pay the bills and create a reserve? It just isn't in the cards. Nihart and Stone aren't stupid. They know what's up. Whatever their strategy if they can get this passed then for a while our problems are solved. Maybe that's the best we can hope for and they know it. What else is there? Bray's employee haircut and bringing in the Sheriffs? An oil-strike in the OWWTP is more likely. Maybe I'm a cynic, but this may be our best shot and maybe we should let them take it. We can always run them out of town later.
FCSTF disappointed? That's putting it mildly. But, guys, here we are a year later with a tax measure! You were ahead of your time, but absolutely right.
So Nihart and Stone conjur up this gig on their own!
And spend 25K or our taxpayers money, and gin up secret meetings with invite only people. Come on, how can this be right? Who knew about this, you Ian? And if our budget is balanced and we have 1.5M in reserves, why the money?
oh save the outrage. the expenditure was probably on some consent agenda under communication tools or some such. you have to watch these people. they are politicians. now that they've started let's see how far they get. things aren't peachy and it may be the best "longer-term" fix we can hope for.
Anonymous 7:16pm said...
"Never before has this town seen a stealth campaign paid for by taxpayers money go to this extreme to con people into paying for a tax that is not necessary.
Town has a $1.5 million surplus. What more can they possibly need?"
What more can our town possibly need? A reserve aka money set aside for emergencies, another financial downturn, etc. Citizens have worried and whined, even here on Fix Pacifica, about a lack of appropriate reserve funds.
How about not needing to continue to nickle and dime everything to provide our seniors with services, programs for our kids, support for our neighbors in need, and maintained streets and city properties. How about for supporting a locally controlled police department. How about staff that can focus on economic development?
Note: No mention here of large salary increases or not continuing to be expense conscious. But let's not be so frugal that we don't lift ourselves to a higher level and just keep scraping by.
I think Pacifica has managed to stop the hemorrhaging, but there's been no local recovery and, if we're honest about it, there's none in sight.
This tax or a sales tax might be our only shot at getting on track for the first time in decades. Decades. I'm not going to quibble about the "presentation" if the idea works. Let's get on with it asap with the truth from all involved. Put it to a vote. That's what we do in this country.
746 like the part about running them out of town later. it could come to that.
I agree with Steve. Let's give the city some income with a very fixed shelf life so that they're encouraged to build a tax base before it expires.
Those of you who've been asking for a new council should put your money where your mouth is.
I don't think the UUT tax rate change can be given a shelf-life. It appears that once the rate is changed it would require another vote to change it again, up or down. Any experts out there with more info on that? Council may have focused on the UUT for that reason and also because with a general tax the funds are unrestricted and passage requires just a simple majority. When a tax is for a specified purpose, funds are restricted to that use and passage requires a 2/3rds vote and it can be for a specific time period, ie, a sunset clause. As I understand it, anyhow.
The new one is kinda like the old one, but that may be our lot in life. We're nuts to expect any of them to walk on water. We voted them in and if this is their best advice, why not go with it?
Ha. Gosh never thought of taxing poor people to pay rich people would attract activists, fanatics and zealots. Makes me wonder what kind of victory party would that be?
"Yeah! We taxed the s@#t out of those utility users!!!"
"Oh man, nothing feels as good as making them folks pay to line my pockets!!"
This UUT increase is just too funny. Shameful, abusive and regressive, but funny none the less.
I think Todd should be our taxpayers representative at this secret meeting. Ask them how come at the budget approval Ritzma laid out how the surplus would go up from the 1.5M every year for 5 years. Just what is Stone planning to use all that new money for?
Ha. Gosh never thought of taxing poor people to pay rich people would attract activists, fanatics and zealots. Makes me wonder what kind of victory party would that be?
Isn't that what your democratic party is all about. Modern day Robbin Hoods. Rob from the rich and give to the poor?
The tax is almost as funny as the moronic idea to slash everyone's salaries without paying attention to the most rudimentary laws of a free market.
I wonder if those on council, today, who are pushing this tax increase understand their only achievements so far have been rate increases? Was it their intents, as individuals, to become an elected board of tax and rate hikers for the benefit of 85 plus public employees earning well north of 100K a year in our little town?
If our revenues were not so lavishly squandered on our senior staff, department heads, fire and police would these same council members still want to tax us? I doubt it. I don't believe any of them ran in order to tax residents who make 2,3 even 4 times less than the 130 full time employees do in order to continue to pay these employees compensation that was negotiated out of public view without public oversight or input.
All the same, the activists, fanatics and zealots that will so rally around this latest tax hike have shown me one thing. Regardless of the issue campaigning is a drug to them, a narcotic high. That there is now a tax hike contingent, a recognizable group who are habitually involved in tax hike campaigns, like the pro built out folks or pro environmental folks, does "broaden" the local political landscape somewhat...
Obstructing any progress in this city, such as the much-needed highway widening, seems to be the drug of choice for another contingent.
Anon said "This tax or a sales tax might be our only shot at getting on track for the first time in decades."
You mean besides getting some real concessions from the unions like many of our neighboring cities? Pacifica still has a much higher average city wage than a dozen or more Peninsula cities. So the argument about not paying "market rate" doesn't hold up.
I won't vote for another tax. We need to cut out of line employee wages and bennies much more.
Anonymous said...
Obstructing any progress in this city, such as the much-needed highway widening, seems to be the drug of choice for another contingent.
June 22, 2013 at 10:39 AM
People like to lump everyone into large categories, but it's not always that easy or finite.
I'm FOR a revenue measure. AGAINST highway widening.
Good luck with this. They squandered all the money. No new taxes!
you're dreaming. this council isn't going to do that. no political will for it. plenty of political will for a new tax and lots of helpers to deliver the votes. find a way to embrace it. that way you'll feel better when you start paying. and remember, in the immortal words of Julie Lancelle "maybe we have to pay more to live in beautiful Pacifica" or words to that effect. BTW, I believe Ms. Lancelle will be shilling for this tax for her good buddies on our new council.
Before we ask poor and senior Pacificans to pay more taxes we need to seriously trim senior staff salaries. Especially those making $100,000-$200,000+. It's true that Pacifica pays more on average than several local cities. We just can't afford it.
You're on a dead horse, Hutch. Council has no interest in the Bray Solution or anything similar. They'll just go along nibbling at contracts til it becomes catch-up time--and it will become catch-up time, even in Pacifica.
You need to consider that there's growing support for a new tax even on here. Not enthusiasm, but definitely support. People see we've run out of options. If there's support on here, where the words 'new tax' were used the same way as hippie/nimby/nobee, then that tax has an excellent chance of passing. Just like the handy little survey said. The effort to lead us to this has been patient and on-going.
Last I heard vellone and lenny were feuding over vellone not getting support or help from lenny in the last election.
"People like to lump everyone into large categories, but it's not always that easy or finite. I'm FOR a revenue measure. AGAINST highway widening."
You act like that's a big news flash. Apart from Todd with his pay cut OCD, every NIMBY is.
Maybe Stone and Vellone made up? Besides, this tax issue is big and will probably pass. Everyone will want to be on that team. How long has Stone been pro-tax? Mrs. Vellone was ready to campaign for a tax way back when FCSTF first recommended one. She strongly supports local PD and at that time there was a lot of outsourcing talk.
Guess it was just the wrong time to put a tax on the ballot back then and we all know what happened to outsourcing. Well, somebody knows. And now, it's tax time! If it will stop the constant municipal groveling, why not?
Yeah 754, isn't that the very definition of a nimby? You pay for their run down, dysfunctional vision of a town. Nimby sighting!
712 it wasn't his fault. he didn't have permission.
Of course the non home owners will want a new tax.
You people have short memories. After prop 30 was passed. The county got the sales tax increase. Do you think the taxpayers will give this city any more money to squander?
Yes.
Dream on!
Wait and see.
You start vaguely threatening emergency services, senior programs, the PRC--even though they are empty threats-and you'd be amazed what voters will accept. Didn't Stone at some point explain this poll as "we need Pacificans to tell us which services they value, or something to that effect? It's easy to prey on people's fears. There are lots of consultants who'd love to help.
Funny to read some of these comments now. Retrospective is good. Hope these fools have learned their lesson and don't go for a sales tax.
The next big push will be for passage of a library bond measure.
Just what a broke city needs, take out a 30 million $ loan (bond) for an outdated institution. They need to remove the library and new council chambers from the Beach Blvd project. Let council meet in the Community Center.
The library bond vote doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell of passing. Homeowners and taxpayers are tired of more taxes and less services.
That would be too bad, Chris. I think all it would take to shoot that down would be to publish a property tax payment slip with all the current add ons to make folks just say enough is enough. There are a lot of things to address locally before a library bond unfortunately, or fortunately depending on how you roll.
SAVE SANCHEZ LIBRARY!
It's already in motion with the Friends having formed a 527 committee in October, although their strategy relies in large part upon the passage of SBA 7 which would reduce the measure's threshold to 55% for passage.
The new library is the cornerstone upon which the Beach Boulevard buildout will occur, so to those of you who wish to see the City capitalize on the space, this is a vital component of the project if it is to move forward.
It will be a tough sell; among many of those who would otherwise support the bond, the loss of Sanchez library is a deal killer.
We should have been leasing out council chambers to a restaurant for the past 12 years.
I don't see the library bond passing. Yes it is a crucial component of the Beach Blvd project. And that's why there have been no interested developers. Open that entire parcel up for commercial. Include public use areas and the Coastal Commish will go along.
Hutch
Did you miss the part about the coastal commission saying even with the library there isn't enough "public" area with the old waste water treatment plant.
What you see is what you get, an ugly eyesore empty dusty dirty lot.
Chris you are correct that a single library is a deal killer. Tom Ball (head librarian) promises a mobile library for the valley but a converted bus isn't a brick and mortar library where there are meetings and other activities. Tom is a great guy (if you ever interview him) His 3 sons helped me with the murals and wood graining at the Hilton Library years ago. Great family. Extremely community orientated.
And as one poster above has commented the CCC doesn't consider a library on the old WWTP site as public serving.
The concept of libraries is going through so much discussion right now because of the internet/Google/Wikipedia, it begs the question what and why are we still thinking one site? Especially a site as controversial as the WWTP.
Lots of empty store fronts in town for a library.
Eureka Square
Fairmont
Park Mall
Sanchez School
Oddstad School
This library tax will never happen.
No 7:00, I didn't miss the fact that the CCC wants more public space. That's why we should nix the $30,000,000 library and include more true public area's. Not an un-needed building only for residents and a part time city council.
The Library bond will not pass if put up for a vote. If the city did a real poll they would see that. I just hope they don't waste a ton of money on it like with the measure V fiasco. They's already made the mistake of using Godbe for their polling. I hope it ends there but I doubt it.
Pacifica's next city council member is sitting on the school board right now.
Don't say it's Kalimah Salahudin. She doesn't have a chance in hell after being a major part of the measure v fraud team.
Mike O'Neill will easily be re-elected. Who else is up Sue?
12:12...get the right one of the two school boarders I see as logical choices to run, and get some others to run, or not run, and you may have two or even three new faces on the next council. An interesting new thread for fix pacifica could be "Who should run in 2014 and how would they do if they ran?", but perhaps premature. Are people pleased with the three incumbants? Maybe if its not broke dont fix it, but alas there are plenty who think it's beyond broke, its bankrupt. What difference would it make who is on council really..?
A $30,000,000 Ocean Front City Library is almost as silly as Vreeland's Ocean Front City Hall.
Let's get real about this property.
It's a perfect spot for a high-end boutique hotel with restaurants and connection to the golf course, trails, beach and pier.
Why oh why do we try so hard to keep Pacifica down.
3 incumbents are up for re-election in November: Len Stone, Mike O'Neill, Sue Digre.
I'm perfectly happy with four of the five incumbents. The only person I'd like to see replaced is Sue.
4:07
You claim to be a really smart guy. But if you can not see Mary Ann, is the same as Vreeland, nothing we can do for you.
Forget City Council candidates from the Pacifica School Board. They all endorsed V as well.
Vreeland was a NIMBY, Nihart has shown she's not though she does try to play different sides. She did push through the highway one vote. As it stands this council voted that they prefer the landscaped version. Vreeland would have sided with Sue and sent Caltrans a mixed message. I was disappointed that Mary Ann and Len were so gung ho behind measure V but you can't have everything. Bottom line is the NIMBY's would love to see Len and Mary Ann gone. That's good enough for me to vote for them.
Oh brother. Scratch Nihart and you get the updated model of a Nimby. Slicker, harder to pin down on anything, and not yet as worn-out as the Vreeland-era Nimbys. These new Nimbys seem more cynical and much less idealogy-driven, but maybe that's what makes them so embraceable. However, I suspect that their vision for Pacifica, realistic as it may be, is one that any of the old-line hippies could embrace. So, we end up with a library dominating a rare piece of prime oceanfront real estate instead of development that would create revenue for this town. Another save! Like placing the WWTP in the quarry or this sewage tank planned adjacent to LM Shopping Center or all the land given away like Mori Point. So what? It's a coastal thing and we never really lose our Nimbys. We just think we do. Oh well. Is it time to think about a legacy? Names on a library plaque or a bench on Palmetto or wage an honest fight for economic survival of your town? LMAO.
@530 No one gets elected in Pacifica without the so-called Nimbys behind them. Pity the poor candidates. They kissed so much arse they got blisters.
1:11 Are you serious? I call total BS. How about O'Neill? He won by a landslide on a pro development, pro business platform. Campbell the NIMBY's candidate lost by a landslide. WTF are you talking about?
The NIMBY's and hippies are no longer relevant. We've proven that. Now we must make sure our representatives represent the majority here now and not kowtow to a very few loudmouth nature freaks.
316 Right. Poor Campbell. He's lucky he wasn't run out of town. He'd have missed being reappointed to the Planning Commission by his supposed idealogical opposites. Whew!
I know it's difficult for you to think of your candidates being supported in word, dollar and vote by nimbys, but these things happen all the time in the real world. Candidates certainly know where their support came from. Once someone is elected, the burden and challenge to find ways to represent the entire community takes on even greater political and ethical weight.
And beyond that, O'Neill always had the edge because of name recognition at the ballot box. Works almost as well as being an incumbent or having a vote splitter in the mix.
517, An elected, paid council seat is a lot different from a volunteer appointment on a city commission.
Campbell got tromped at the polls. It was a clear message that Pacificans have had enough of enviromental radical NIMBY's holding us back. Go ahead, try and spin it though. You guys are good at that.
Upcoming election we will get rid of the last enviro-nut.
Post a Comment