| "Olive Oyl, I loves you and your town, but I hates your permanent fees and taxes" |
".... Pacificans currently
pay 6-1/2 percent of electric and gas charges to the city in the UUT
tax. Any changes would have to go to a public vote.
The poll is asking likely voters to consider adding a charge for telecommunications -- land lines, cell phones and Internet -- in the UUT." Pacifica Tribune/Jane Northrop, Staff, 6/11/13. "Pacificans polled about potential changes to Utilities Users Tax." Read article.
The poll is asking likely voters to consider adding a charge for telecommunications -- land lines, cell phones and Internet -- in the UUT." Pacifica Tribune/Jane Northrop, Staff, 6/11/13. "Pacificans polled about potential changes to Utilities Users Tax." Read article.
----
...."Who is paying for this
poll? The city has not held a hearing on any tax hike, so who is winking
to the poll sponsors a new tax is a good idea?" Pacifica Tribune, Letters to the Editor/Dave Alquist, 6/11/13. "New tax rumblings" Read more.----
Related - Popeye Taxman videos: A town kind of like Pacifica, Sweet Haven. 2:52 minutes. "New in town tax", 1:16 minutes, and "Moving in tax" video, 1:33 minutes. IGN.com article/Steve Butts,6/13/2003. "Popeye, it's better than a can of raw spinach but what isn't?" Note: photograph from Cineplex.com
Letter submitted by Jim Wagner
Posted by Kathy Meeh
78 comments:
This tax could be very harmful to local businesses. My business relies heavily on both the internet and cell phones and other businesses need and use their internet a lot more then mine. I will need a lot of convincing to support this tax.
No new taxes. And stop wasting money on these annoying phone polls and other nonsense. Council, what don't you understand? No New Taxes! And you'd better reconsider your arbitrary boundary for those lateral fixes in Linda Mar being fully paid for by the city. That has lawsuit written all over it and the city will lose!
Did anyone see this discussed at a council meeting? Who paid for it and why the blackout on information? This stinks all over the place. Yesterdays paper tells us we have a balanced budget and 1.4M in reserves. What's the tax for? Play money!
Does anyone remember why the council was recalled. A parcel tax for lighting and landscaping.
Lets go down the same bad street.
This council has no clue.
What are the ideas of the "Fix Pacificans" for an alternative to new taxes? Though not in favor for the UUT, I do support a sales tax measure. Having an ongoing stable source of revenue that can't be taken by the state is the right thing to do for Pacifica.
Anon, 8:26, why not build a revenue base?! Fast track remodels so the property tax base rises. Get rid of the monster house ordinance. Actively support and encourage the project that had approval on Fassler and Roberts road. Don't be ashamed that over 50% of our general fund revenue comes from property tax, embrace the obvious and enhance it. Facilitate in fill projects in commercial areas. There's a lot that can be done to increase our revenue flow. It's right in front of our faces.
Revenue producing projects!
What a concept.
Anonymous said...
"What are the ideas of the "Fix Pacificans" for an alternative to new taxes?"
How about getting a real negotiator now that Ritzma is gone and reduce employee costs by a meaningful amount like many other Bay Area Cities have done?
Why should citizens who make on average 45,000 a year be asked to pay more taxes for $100,000+++ salaries with cushy perks?
That meager weak cut in a couple of holidays was pathetic.
Ritzma was a HR person not a finance person. Thus the reason why Daly City, South San Francisco and now Foster City hired her to do HR work. She got dumped into the finance job cause Vreeland got Maureen canned.
Another great move by one of the 3 wise men Vreeland.
Vreeland didn't get Maureen canned. Her reputation and harse way she treated her employees made her the less preferred choice when the positions were combined. Demanding her employees wear certain type of clothing was not considered appropriate for her position and did not make her a fan favorite in the work place. She had no HR experience and Ann had finance experience. How history changes.
Revenue producing development. Here? Do you really see that new planning commission as being pro-development? I don't. How about this council? Nope. They re-appointed 4 from the most-anti development commission this city has ever seen. Was Council showing its true colors or were they just afraid of losing the hippie support without which they couldn't get elected? Would this bunch have true colors? Haha, Digre has always been green.
Council's recovery plan clearly isn't development. It's taxation.
Yours and mine. LOL, that's the revenue stream they want for Pacifica.
The current council is a huge improvement on previous councils.
Anon@12:08, you sound like you'd rather have a council to complain about than a council that solves problems.
If this spending of taxpayers taxes did not go through council, had no public hearing or a vote at council, who winked and nodded at the approval?
Ask council who knew and when they knew.
Spelling counts sports fans.
Report back when you get an answer, or a stone wall. Specifically ask for a reply or they will ignore you.
lenstonepacifica@gmail.com
nihartm@ci.pacifica.ca.us
digres ci.pacifica.ca.us
ervink ci.pacifica.ca.us
o'neillm ci.pacifica.ca.us
New taxes? You gotta love the way Stone talks about the UUT tax phone poll and fire and police and which services people want to keep. After Monday night's sell-out, I can think of 5 public serpents whose services I don't want to keep.
@1159 indeed, how history changes.
keep spinning and grinning.
@1159 your nose is gonna grow for that one. shame, shame, shame.
Yeah Sinai, their attendance is much improved over the last group.
Clear winner.
The rest? Guess I just haven't seen the light. And it's a target-rich environment.
1235 how dare you question their eminences! infidel!
I love the clash of principles and reality. Right and wrong meet extenuating circumstances. Either we stop right there and go to war, or, we compromise, reach consensus and announce Problem Solved! Of course, we disarm everyone first.
Council compromised Monday night to solve a problem, but is that compromise allowing a greater problem to continue? This town's anti-development reputation needed a total make-over, but maybe that would have brought serious challenges from the anti-growth crowd? Perhaps council really does feel a broader responsibility. Time will tell if they created balance or simply appeasement.
Common Sense Carl, 9:09am "Anon, 8:26, why not build a revenue base?! Fast track remodels so the property tax base rises. Get rid of the monster house ordinance. Actively support and encourage the project that had approval on Fassler and Roberts road. Don't be ashamed that over 50% of our general fund revenue comes from property tax, embrace the obvious and enhance it. Facilitate in fill projects in commercial areas. There's a lot that can be done to increase our revenue flow. It's right in front of our faces."
Seems the planning department (following up on the recommendations from the Economic Development Committee) have been working on streamlining and improving the permit process. Some contractors have recently noted at public meetings that Pacifica is an easy place to do projects in. I also know someone that is a builder and have reported a great sense of partnership and responsiveness from the department. So, looks like that idea is moving along.
The Economic Development Plan has just been published. Let's see where that goes; hopefully some positive movement with the recommendations.
Pacifica has a balanced budget. Projects are moving forward (Palmetto, Beach Bouldvard Property). We still need an ongoing stream of revenue that stays in Pacifica. It will build a reserve, and lift the City to another level versus chugging along on an austerity program. (Albeit, city salaries should be reviewed just like they are in other sector and adjusted as appropriate to current economic times.)
Oh, kind of like we complained and complained and complained and while we were complaining things were actually changing??? Behind the scenes and without a public flogging. I sure hope so. Time will tell.
Our mayor promised a stream lined planning department. Has anyone noticed a difference?
Improving revenue is great but it will take years to pay off. We need to cut costs soon or face more taxes and reduced services. With 90% of our budget salaries and benefits a small 5% cut across the board will not harm employees but it will save us over $1,000,000 a year.
Negotiations are going on now. Do you think the council will target their friends and co-workers though? Not without a S-load of pressure.
latest rumor is poll and basic tax discussion took place in closed session to avoid public. Anyone vouch for this?
@525 Who cares? I mean, really, who cares? At some point we need to step back and let the people we elected to do the freakin' job, actually do the job. Do it in the best way they can. I thought I've sensed a touch of "hands off, let them work" on this blog from Sinai, and maybe Meeh, and I applaud that. It is by no means a blanket endorsement or deification of this council. We all see the warts and the honeymoon is way over. It's just self-preservation. I only voted for one of the 3 winners in the last election, but as a community we chose these people to lead us. It's insanity to now micro-manage and pick them to death. There will be other elections, but for now, think it through, hold your fire when you can, and let's see where they take us.
335 Salary-envy is not a good basis for public policy. The CA economy has greatly improved. No union is making the deep concessions you dream of, and cities will not be asking for them. Next step? Playing catch-up in cities where deep concessions were made.
Discussion in closed session? Must have been some kind of vote to pay for the poll. Anyone get a call?
Anonymous 6:10 I'll guess I have to say I care. I am all for letting them do the job we elected them to do, but I am going to watch how they do it and give them feedback on the job they are doing. I will praise them when they earn it and encourage them to do better when they fall short.
Anonymous 6:10 Very good post.
These people are trying to help their community. Let's give them a chance without bitching and whining about every single thing they do like a bunch of ridiculous five-year-olds.
6:39 The economy is hardly back and California cities continue to teeter on the verge of bankruptcy and Pacifica is one of them. We are still just a lawsuit away. The unsustainable state pensions are still bringing cities to their knees. Just because the stock market is up now means nothing. California's unemployment rate is still at 9%, the countries 4th highest. The pension funds have routinely over estimated expected return on investments and it's come back to bite them on the ass. SF, LA, SJ and several other Ca cities are about to be downgraded by Moody's any day now because of severely unfunded pensions. The S is hitting the fan.
Hey 825 we've had years of incompetent irresponsible non transparent councilpersons with their own agenda. Excuse us if we want to watch every move they make.
Yes, excuse us if we want to whine and second guess their every move without ever offering any solutions, much less providing any civic service like the people we complain about.
We're problem solvers that way!
Hey Tom, again, not a blanket endorsement or blind adoration of this council. Certainly not. There's a difference between a vigilant, concerned person who offers legitimate and constructive criticism and the crap-mongering, bottom-feeder @525. A touch of schadenfreude now and then on here.
@825 Don't forget North Korea and that new flu strain. See if that can be worked in to those labor negotiations. Imminent demise of the planet ought to be worth 15%.
Yoohoo 941 And this bunch could be their clones. Nonetheless, posts that start with "the latest rumor" and offer nothing but the latest rumor (probably hatched by the poster at that moment) are not the product of someone who actually wants things to get better. They have every right to hatch and spread rumors but responsible people should neither encourage it nor confuse it with keeping an eye on city hall. That's not what it is.
Oh please, somebody, anybody, please sue this city immediately so Dr. Doom @825 will stop.
It's the only way because city employees are never going to accept a salary cap of $35,000 per year and a 2 year waiting period for self-pay benefits and a tiny pension collectable at 85 and only in Mexico or a Texas border town of your choosing. Please sue.
It amazes me that these wingnuts can even work a keyboard/phone/tin can/whatever.
1100 let's not get all crazy. we only have proof they can operate a keyboard, kinda sorta. baby steps. today, a keyboard. tomorrow, public office.
1056 How about a pension at 65 of $3000 a month which is more than most Americans on SSI, a $100,000 salary cap which is twice what the average Pacifican makes, and Medicare not private healthcare for life. That right there would give us many millions a year in surplus. But no, lets tax poor Pacificans on $1000 a month SSI so we can keep paying $6,000-$19,000 a month salaries to city employees. That makes more sense.
@805 of course it makes sense. it came with the job. and you didn't have to settle for less. but you did and now you're whining. reasonable cuts have been made, two-tier pensions, employee contributions have been increased on benefits and pensions. you just want to even the score for your personal situation. get over it. that kind of anger will kill ya!
805 Sounds like poor, elderly in-law syndrome. Lot of that going around. Don't plan on retiring any time soon.
i would suggest sending an email or letter to council letting them know what you think. it's great to throw a bunch of thoughts out here, however, those that make the decisions probably don't surf this site. if you're for or against a new tax, let council know. probably would take less time than posting here. i'm sure they know how i feel because i let them know.
"...those that make the decisions probably don't surf this site"
Oh, I bet they do even if they don't admit it. I always thought it was funny how many people tell me they don't read the blog yet somehow seem to know in great detail what's being discussed.
Still, it's more effective to send council a note directly rather than comment anonymously on something.
341 said "you just want to even the score for your personal situation"
Can you read? Then you can see that the median income for Pacificans is less than $50,000. So it's most people that make way less than the overpaid city workers.
But that's ok, their whole unsustainable pension system is about to collapse and we're not bailing it out again.
@913 more to the point can you read? can you think? can you turn off the anger long enough to process the facts? why do public employees have to be as poor as you are or as poor as you think they should be? it's old news that public pension reform was needed and pension reform is underway-even in Pacifica. salary cuts have been made and jobs lost in Pacifica and at the county level. even council has taken a rather large cut--all in response to public pressure.
it's probable that no amount of pension reform, lay offs and salary cuts will fix your problem. perhaps another socio-economic system would be better for you?
Right, let's reduce people's disposable income because they make too much money compared to somebody or other. That will work wonders for Pacifica's struggling stores, service providers, restaurants, home sales, etc. Hey, make it a national policy and I bet we can put ourselves in another recession. Brilliant!
I think council and even city staff are all over these blogs, reading and anon-posting. Human nature. Curiosity. They'll never admit it.
It's like people saying they could never watch TV because it's just such a waste of their time, but then they know the schedule and all about those low-brow TV shows they never watch.
City Attorney
Pacifica
City Attorney
$292,665
Fire Battalion Chief
Pacifica
Fire
$204,744
Deputy Fire Chief
Pacifica
Fire
$195,559
City Manager
Pacifica
City Manager
$195,126
Fire Battalion Chief
Pacifica
Fire
$185,388
Fire Battalion Chief
Pacifica
Fire
$179,558
Administrative Services Dir.
Pacifica
City Manager
$172,250
Paramedic Coordinator
Pacifica
Fire
$170,985
Wwtp Plant Manager
Pacifica
Wastewater Treatment Plant
$166,635
Police Sergeant
Pacifica
Police
$163,598
Dir Of Pw/City Engineer
Pacifica
Engineering
$162,433
Pw Superintendent
Pacifica
Public Works
$162,210
Police Sergeant
Pacifica
Police
$162,136
Police Captain
Pacifica
Police
$161,980
Operator III
Pacifica
Wastewater Treatment Plant
$160,705
Police Captain
Pacifica
Police
$160,384
Police Sergeant
Pacifica
Police
$155,380
Fire Captain
Pacifica
Fire
$155,141
Police Captain
Pacifica
Police
$152,638
Field Services Manager
Pacifica
Public Works
$151,691
Police Sergeant
Pacifica
Police
$151,315
Police Sergeant
Pacifica
Police
$147,990Police Sergeant
Pacifica
Police
$147,821
Dir. Of Parks, Beaches & Rec.
Pacifica
PB&R - Administration
$144,775
Dir. Of Planning/City Planner
Pacifica
Planning & Building
$143,620
Operator III
Pacifica
Wastewater Treatment Plant
$142,945
Corporal
Pacifica
Police
$141,597
Dir Of Wwtp-Coll & Plant Oper
Pacifica
Wastewater Treatment Plant
$140,639
Corporal
Pacifica
Police
$139,836
Fire Captain
Pacifica
Fire
$136,826
Fire Captain
Pacifica
Fire
$136,060
Operator III
Pacifica
Wastewater Treatment Plant
$134,974
Assistant Finance Director
Pacifica
Finance
$134,925
Wwtp Asst. Superint. - Maint.
Pacifica
Wastewater Treatment Plant
$134,070
Fire Captain
Pacifica
Fire
$133,878
Wwtp Collections Sys. Manager
Pacifica
Wastewater Treatment Plant
$132,843
Corporal
Pacifica
Police
$132,276
Fire Captain
Pacifica
Fire
$130,733
Mis Manager
Pacifica
Finance
$129,678
Corporal
Pacifica
Police
$128,660
Corporal
Pacifica
Police
$128,655
Pw Superintendent
Pacifica
Public Works
$127,931
Police Sergeant
Pacifica
Police
$127,308
Corporal
Pacifica
Police
$127,173
Police Sergeant
Pacifica
Police
$126,241Operator II
Pacifica
Wastewater Treatment Plant
$126,145
Police Officer
Pacifica
Police
$124,034
Firefighter-Paramedic A-6
Pacifica
Fire
$123,107
Police Officer
Pacifica
Police
$122,418
Police Officer
Pacifica
Police
$122,328
Police Officer
Pacifica
Police
$121,428
Operator II
Pacifica
Wastewater Treatment Plant
$118,992
Police Officer
Pacifica
Police
$118,601
Firefighter-Paramedic A-6
Pacifica
Fire
$118,374
Fire Captain
Pacifica
Fire
$118,205
City Clerk/Executive Assistant
Pacifica
City Manager
$117,456
Police Officer
Pacifica
Police
$116,277
Firefighter-Paramedic A-6
Pacifica
Fire
$115,984
Police Officer
Pacifica
Police
$114,010
Police Officer
Pacifica
Police
$113,754
Operator II
Pacifica
Wastewater Treatment Plant
$113,728
Police Officer
Pacifica
Police
$113,230
Laboratory Supervisor
Pacifica
Wastewater Treatment Plant
$112,681
Police Officer
Pacifica
Police
$112,627
Police Officer
Pacifica
Police
$112,538
Police Officer
Pacifica
Police
$112,465
Pw Supervisor
Pacifica
Public Works
$111,690
Firefighter-Paramedic A-6
Pacifica
Fire
$111,506Firefighter-Paramedic B-6
Pacifica
Fire
$110,896
Systems Specialist
Pacifica
Finance
$110,506
Firefighter-Paramedic A-3
Pacifica
Fire
$110,495
Associate Civil Engineer
Pacifica
Wastewater Treatment Plant
$109,802
Police Officer
Pacifica
Police
$109,310
Associate Civil Engineer
Pacifica
Engineering
$107,497
Public Safety Dispatcher
Pacifica
Police
$107,107
Pw Supervisor
Pacifica
Public Works
$106,927
Associate Civil Engineer
Pacifica
Engineering
$106,284
Systems Specialist
Pacifica
Police
$105,675
Police Officer
Pacifica
Police
$105,298
Operator II
Pacifica
Wastewater Treatment Plant
$105,061
Police Officer
Pacifica
Police
$104,441
Associate Civil Engineer
Pacifica
Engineering
$103,730
Associate Planner
Pacifica
Planning & Building
$102,085
Firefighter-Emt B-6
Pacifica
Fire
$101,389
Gee, I thought that's who that was.
No point in any further discussion.
That list is a bit old. We haven't even had a city attorney on payroll for the last several years.
that's 2011 data, the most current on the state site.
http://publicpay.ca.gov/Reports/Cities/City.aspx?entityid=437&fiscalyear=2011
Sorry if I offended government workers
Hey Tom
You are one of the few who actually apply common sense.
Kudos to you.
Thanks for the list. It doesn't tell the complete story and you might even know that. The city has made salary cuts. Not as big as some would like, true, but going in the right direction. More importantly, and not on your list, employees are paying a bigger share of their benefits and pensions and 2-tier pensions have been implemented in some job classes. The number of employees is down by at least 15%. Council itself has taken a significant cut as a group. All accomplished at the bargaining table and all of this in response to our economic reality and to public pressure.
I applaud this council and the one just prior for putting the brakes on a runaway payroll train--without derailing. Well done and thank you!
We need to recognize the strategic changes made and to be realistic and fair in our expectations. And factual. This is the SF Bay Area, in the top 10 on the expensive to live in charts. It's not the Midwest or Deep South. Expenses and Income are going to chase each other. Suburbs take on the expense characteristics of the city they surround. Knowing the changes that have been made and are being made, I have no problem with these salaries in this town, just as I have no problem with my own or those of my neighbors--and none of us are in the public sector.
Continuing to shift the cost of benefits and pensions from the employer to the employee without counter-balancing on the salary side is crucial for this city. Particularly glad to see the elimination or reduction of cafeteria cash which always smelled like a scam on the public.
Now, keep it up, Council, and apply yourselves to the other side of the ledger...creating revenue.
The days when civil service jobs made up in stability and pension what they lacked in salary are long gone. They're not ever coming back. One of the benefits is that the caliber of employee has risen as competition for jobs with competitive pay and great benefits grew. Cities need to balance the budget, and as we've learned in Pacifica, that requires revenue, but having a skilled, stable group of employees is a good thing.
You and your neighbors may have no problem with it but the average person living here is making about $45,000 per year. Many seniors are getting by on very little. Why should they be asked to pay more taxes so city employees can make 2 or 3 times what they do? I have no problem with what they are being paid either as long as they aren't cutting services and trying to raise taxes. If you can't make payroll without raising taxes you need to reduce payroll.
The city is on the right track with payroll, benefits and pensions. They need to stick to it and not allow or agree to any catch-up provisions or give backs. The other side, without which we are doomed no matter how much we cut payroll, is economic growth. That planning commission thing was appalling. Political pandering at its worst. Nonetheless, let's hope that the political will really is there and the council majority will pursue growth whenever and wherever possible. I want to believe that it's there.
You people have no grasp of simple market economics. The guideline is not what their neighbors or seniors earn -- it's what people in like positions earn. We can afford to pay a little below market because we live in such a gorgeous place that also happens to be 10 miles from one of the greatest cities on the planet. You can't just arbitrarily pick salaries for these jobs out of your butt, though.
Some of you sound like the stupid hippies who woke up one morning and decided that their ability to paint or write bad poetry somehow qualified them to engineer traffic problems better than Caltrans.
Why should our cops be making what they do in SF, Oakland, San Jose? Have you read the police beat? Speeding tickets, vandalism and petty theft, that's all they really have to deal with. No daily threats on their safety at every turn. No shootings, no real gang activity. There are plenty of cops willing to work in a much stressless less deadly environment for reduced salary. Speaking of San Jose they cut pay 10%. We cut 3% if even that much. No there hasn't been nearly enough cuts to salary.
"There are plenty of cops willing to work in a much stressless less deadly environment for reduced salary."
Man, it must be nice in your head. I wish in the real world I could just make things up and pretend that meant they were true.
Somebody nailed it...suburbs (like us)do take on the economic characteristics of the big city of which they are a suburb. That's SF for us...where everything costs more than just about anywhere else in the country. Among the SF 'burbs we're a little isolated and run down so we get away with slightly cheaper housing and slightly lower city salaries. Of course we want and have our big city amenities like PB&R, senior services, childcare, our own PD, etc. Pacificans have high expectations for services based on the cities around us. Those services and the people who provide them come with a price tag determined by the market we're in.
don't waste your time. there's one guy on here who thinks a city job should go to the lowest bidder.
pointless to argue with that mentality.
yeah 858 and we both know that plenty of cops start their careers here to gain a little experience and then move out and up to better money. we're already the low end of the salary market in the Bay Area.
No 10:08, government Union salaries aren't determined by the market. That's the problem. In The free market private sector labor Unions do not enjoy the pensions of public government Unions. That's because politicians like our city council or Gov Brown approve sweat-heart contracts in order to get votes, appease the Unions or help their friends. It is a totally broken system. This is why so many cities have had to file for bankruptcy. Do you read the news? There are more Ca cities teetering on the edge. Pacifica is still one of them. It's not doom and gloom it's fact. You don't want to believe it just keep your head in the sand.
Cheap labor. I get why the 1% are in favor of that, but when it's some dope making $50,000 a year and trying to live in this area, I am mystified. Licking the boot that's planted firmly on your neck?
Keep believing your fat cat union bosses. The bottom of the troth is about to fall out.
I wouldn't call $100,000 a year cheap labor.
10:17 said "we're already the low end of the salary market in the Bay Area."
Really? Talk about making stuff up. SF cops starting salary $90,000, all our PD starts at the same thing and all of our cops now are making way way over $100K.
This new tax was Mary Ann's and Len's idea.
Remember that next election and vote these wreckless tax and spenders out of office.
Fortunately Mary Ann terms out (god willing). Since taking office the only thing I've seen from Mary Ann is some grandstanding about "how hard I'm working," and various ideas and committee's to increase taxes on property owners and shoppers.
This coming year we have a chance to get rid of two very pro development council members. Being a pro growth proponent cost the tax base money as it stresses an already strapped work force and infrastructure. The argument it brings in revenues is delusional, simply uninformed delusion.
Mike O'Neill, a highway widening proponent while on the school board is up for re-election as is pro widening council member Len Stone. Stone loves mentioning a $35,000,000 amount of money the city will get to manage for the widening. That idea is also delusional, as is Mike O'Neills Polly Anna-ish "I haven't made up my mind about the widening,". Mike as a school board member has voted in favor of the widening more than once.
Election season in 2014 will be much more lively than in the last couple of election cycles. If you want a totally gross over built Pacifica the choices will be clear.
I never believed in aliens, till I moved to Pacifica!
Todd
Your friends in the gang of NO voted Mary Ann into office so I doubt they will vote her out.
Can you tell me someone in town you do in fact, like?
Vreeland didn't get Maureen canned. Her reputation and harse way she treated her employees made her the less preferred choice when the positions were combined. Demanding her employees wear certain type of clothing was not considered appropriate for her position and did not make her a fan favorite in the work place.
Obviously you are not in the know of what goes on down at City Hall. Ann, wasn't very well liked by people down at City Hall.
Spin baby spin!
If you want a "totally gross city" with potholes in the streets, tweakers on the corners, and homeless people begging for aid the PRC can no longer offer, please support Todd and his band of NIMBYs' candidates.
They don't understand how to balance a budget, but they can do a mean twirly dance!
Mary Ann and Len are not the problem. Do I agree with themon everything? No. Sue Digre now there's a problem child that needs to go. Sorry we are not going back to an environmental council anytime soon. The people are fed up with a stagnant city that came from turning everything into open space and trails over the past 25 years. The voters spoke loud and clear in this past election by voting in Mike O'Neill in a landslide over the enviro candidate even though the vote was split 3 ways. This is a different Pacifica from even 5 years ago. If that very close Quarry vote were held today it would pass easily.
It was Sue's turn to be mayor and no one would let her be mayor.
That speaks for itself.
ANON Said "If you want a "totally gross city" with potholes in the streets, tweakers on the corners, and homeless people begging for aid the PRC"
Don't we have his now?
Yes. Thanks, NIMBYs who apparently can't do simple math.
Post a Comment