Attend in person, 2212 Beach
Boulevard, 2nd floor. Or, view on local television or live feed Pacificcoast.TV, (formerly pct26.com). If you miss civic meetings, view on PCT 26 You Tube! The city council meeting begins at 7 p.m., or shortly there following. City council updates and archives are available on the City website.
| Item 10. Small print, 20 year Waste Water bond pay back. Viewed by you now, or in 20 years. |
Open Session, 7:00 p.m. Consent Calendar
1. Approval of Disbursements, FY 2013/14, 7/31/14 - 8/27/14. FY 2014-15, 7/17/14 - 8/28/14.
2. Approval of City Council Minutes, 8/11/14.
3. Continued 4/12/10 proclamation of the existence of cliff erosion, landslide ground substance and failure of revetment supporting the storm drainage at 380 and 400 Esplanade Avenue, photos.
3. Continued 4/12/10 proclamation of the existence of cliff erosion, landslide ground substance and failure of revetment supporting the storm drainage at 380 and 400 Esplanade Avenue, photos.
4. Proclamation, "Prostate cancer awareness month, September 2014", report.
5. Approval, purchase of 2015 Police Chevrolet Tahoe from Putnam GM, FY 2014-15, $33,676.64, report.
6. Approval, 5 year street light and traffic signal maintenance contract, Aegis ITS, Inc., FY 2014-15, not to exceed $45,060, report.
7. Update city master fee schedule, FY 2014-15, pdf pages 10.
8. Approval, sales agreement to purchase land owned by David Colt, parcel 023-073-080, completing the Pedro Point Headlands Trail, property valued at $583,000, report, 1) Trail Segment illustration, 2) Option and purchase agreement. Fiscal impact, not to exceed $20,000 (see report page 2 for details).
Special presentations - Sanchez Art Center; Pacifica Little League All Stars (proclamation); PG&E (Scott Hart).
Consideration
9. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Reports, 1/2013-8/2014, pdf pages 10, and pdf 5 pages.
Special presentations - Sanchez Art Center; Pacifica Little League All Stars (proclamation); PG&E (Scott Hart).
Consideration
9. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Reports, 1/2013-8/2014, pdf pages 10, and pdf 5 pages.
10. Waste Water 20 year Financial Plan, report, and sewer funds financial plan, pdf pages 5 (if print, shrink to fit, type is very small).
Adjourn.
Note illustration from Ap-toolkit,"The Accessible procurement toolkit."
Posted by Kathy Meeh
Note illustration from Ap-toolkit,"The Accessible procurement toolkit."
Posted by Kathy Meeh
117 comments:
Yowza! You got to watch your consent agendas with this council although I totally understand why they'd want this one under the radar given THEY CAN"T ACCOUNT FOR 4 MILLION BUCKS. Note their item #8 "approval, sales agreement" regarding a little $583,000 bauble the city wants to pick up to complete the Pedro Point Headlands Trail. The staff report is enough to make you believe in Santa Claus. Hey, there you go city council. Write a letter to Santa for this one, or the county who's already in the park business on Devil's Slide or the GGNRA or the PLT. I love trails more than life itself and this one would be great to finish, but get someone else to pay for it! And the improvements and the forever maintenance. And spare me your dog and pony show about the option to buy and how you'll find the money. Better you should find your common sense. Forget your bucket list. We're broke. Have you no shame?
Sports Fans, check out Lionel E and Chris Fogel on Riptide re item # 8 on the consent agenda. Council is at it again.
Update regarding the sale of Dave Colt property to complete the California Trail through Pacifica. Item 8. "Fiscal impact, not to exceed $20,000 (see report page 2 for details)."
Update regarding the sale of Dave Colt property to complete the California Trail through Pacifica. Item 8. "Fiscal impact, not to exceed $20,000 (see report page 2 for details)."
Oh, don't worry because it's just an option? Let the spin begin. Council wants to spend half a million on a trail. Item 8 on the consent agenda is an option to buy the property at the agreed upon price of $583,000. This impoverished city wants to spend $583,000 on land to complete the trail to Devil's Slide. No mention of the cost of improvements and yearly maintenance. And to minimize any uproar they put it on the consent agenda. No discussion, just one vote for items 1-8 and this thing is set in motion. City acknowledges it doesn't have the money and would have to "look for funding", and mentions the county and reimbursements and rainbows. The old Pacifica shell game begins. The county has an obvious interest in finishing the trail system. It should be the county buying it for their park system and coastal trails and the county paying to improve and maintain the property. They can afford it. It's just an option? Who are you kidding? Zero trust that once council puts this in motion as another Pacifica shell game that it won't end up as another half a million dollars they've lost track of and another on-going expense. The Coastal Trail is a great idea. Pacifica paying for any part of it, is not. It's unnecessary.
1222, except what you are saying and implying is confused BS, and isn't true. See City Council Agenda Item 8, report, page 2. There is also a link to the report on the City Council Reminder article, my comment 1129.
Todd Bray, just posted on Riptide the property is worth over $900,000.
Is this the same parcel that Emperior Vreeland and Cowboy Scott Holmes sent city crews over to start builing a trail without permits or permission from the land owners?
That WHOOSH you just heard was our council flushing 20 grand down the toilet. Mark my anonymous words, there's no way they can come up with 580 grand in nine months. No. Way.
Unless they borrow from the sewer fund again, but let's not give them any ideas.
Over/Under on the public showing up tonight at city council is 8.
Kathy, with all due respect, we disagree on the city's option to buy and the door it swings wide open for another city council shell game. There is no argument that the immediate fiscal impact is $20,000. However, there are no restrictions on where the $583,000 can come from despite the city's stated intent to explore possible funding from other public and non-profit sources. Even iffy ERAF is mentioned--shall we place this project ahead of the PRC which was barely funded by ERAF for this year? Earliest negotiations began back in the somewhat tarnished golden era of interfund-lending? Will that be the answer? Why open the door and start the scrambling? Particularly when SMC has a known and obvious interest in completing the trail and the money to do so. What of the cost of on-going improvements and maintenance? These must be considered when a city is as broke as Pacifica. It's truly unfortunate that these negotiations were allowed to reach this point. Using the consent agenda to put this plan in motion also speaks poorly of council's judgement.
Eh, we're just going to disagree.
112 Yee haw!
They get this option going and it'll be like a bunch of surfers looking for money for a tank of gas. I got 5, she's got 10, let me look in mom's purse, check the sofa cushions. Whoohoo, an envelope marked sewer fund. Baja here we come!
Bray says 900 and Colt takes 583. It is a property destined to be a public trail one way or another. I dunno.
143, I'll take the over for $100. I think 12 people will show up. I don't have the money right now, but if I lose I can apply for a grant or borrow from my home equity loan
115 Let's think like council. Arrghh bang clunk sizzle. Got it! Remember the $308,000 Ritzma accidentally sent to the state when the RDA monies were called in? You know, along with her promotion. Refund check's in the mail. You bet. $275K to go, but who's counting?
213, what a disgusting comment! Even the highest, most zonked out surfer wouldn't raid the sewer fund, no matter how bad they had the munchies. Council though...
I expect an apology to all the stoned surfers out there. You're better than this, 213, I just know you are.
206, the city's contractual investment in this land transfer up to 15 months is $20,000 (according to the Staff Report). Nightmare scenario: the deal defaults; Dave Colt keeps his property; potentially the California Coastal trail dead-ends or bends in Pacifica. There is nothing else.
And this item may also be moved to Consideration (discussion, and public input) at the City Council meeting. That frequently happens when there is a public request.
Ah, right you are, 237. Forgot about the accidental $308,000 donation to the state. When that's given back, I'm sure the state will send a little extra back with it, just for our trouble. So... lessee... that and raise some fees here... jack up parking by a dollar over there... let's assume that Fog Fest will bring in an extra $500,000 that it never has before...
Why we're positively drowning in money!
aaaaaaand the motion passes,
MEETING ADJOURNED!!!
Where's Horsely? Once the latest laugh at Pacifica's expense dies down in RWC, maybe he could get the county moving on buying this property asap. Obvious interest to finish their trail system to Devil's Slide. Maybe a chair at the table for Pacifica, well a tiny chair in the hallway, where we can't screw up anything, but a chair nonetheless.
242 You're right. Turning over my new leaf now. Which is why I'm not going there> zonked out surfers >sewer funds.
The County will pay for this parcel of land. Not our City. For Christ sake, we have no money.
Where do you think this is coming from.
San Mateo County, Duh!
227 Silly! Never use your own money. How far would that go? If you need cash, get a loan on your neighbor's house. Then you can shop all you want. Because you deserve it. Ah, don't thank me. I'm just happy to help.
Shout out to Kathy. Each time I visit this blog I am tickled by the photo of the flat cat with beggars. Never fails to make me smile. Probably a lot of other folks too. Incredible public service you provide to this town.
No need for a middleman.
Sure, sure, the county is paying for it all. Despite the city being the named purchaser on the doc, the county is actually the buyer. Uh huh, uh huh.
Pacifica's gunna buy it, swap some funds around, city council will wave their hands and flap their gums and then the debt on the property will be refinanced a half dozen times.
In the end we'll have paid $5.5 mil on something we had no business taking ownership of.
357 You got it! Open that door with council's seemingly innocuous little option to buy and prepare to be screwed again. Incredibly, this Council expects the public to forget what we know about how they operate and their string of disastrous financial decisions and mistakes. The biggest clue to what's really going on here? It's on the consent calendar--from whence so many Trojan Horses have come. Pull it from the consent agenda. Bring it before the public, or, better, yet, forget it because SMC has an obvious reason to get it bought, improved and maintain it. Without Pacifica.
You know what's coming if Pacifica robs Peter to pay Dave and buys this property? Sun hats and gloves everyone! Pacifica needs us to clear a trail on Pedro Point. Clear, improve and maintain. Shovels and picks, no power tools please. Exhausted volunteers, little white crosses along the trail to glory, uh, make that Devil's Slide.
346, its complicated. Steve Sinai put up the begging picture, replacing a skinny pig that was there prior. I received that photograph in an email from my brother, and spread it round. Don't know if Steve got the photograph from that effort, or found it elsewhere. Either way, Steve put up the photograph, his decision, his choice to replace the skinny pig that was there prior.
I agree the choice Steve made in posting the photograph was a good one, as was his choice of blog name, "Fix Pacifica". What an appropriate, astute, and eye-catching name that is!
Thank you for your positive comments (all of them), and glad you are amused by the flat cat.
Ask Horsely how much the county is paying Colt for the property! Get your facts straight.
For a better idea of the true magnitude and sheer folly this council wants to take on with the Colt property, go over to Riptide and read the comments on this topic from Ron Maykel. His resume might be too green for some, but Maykel don't lie. Pacifica has no business there, not as the lead and not even as a middleman. More mundane tasks require council's immediate attention.
510 Please enlighten us. You seem to have some info Council chose not to share with the public for some also unknown reason.
I agree with the Anonymous who said, if the NIMBIES are against it, it must be good. This is continuation of the California Trail, you'd think NIMBIES would be jumping for joy (like happy red legged frogs). Personally I'd rather Dave Colt built a condo complex there.
In any event, 512 and other Riptide NIMBIES, now you're claiming the legally binding contract between Dave Colt and this City lies. So, here we are at another new low.
And 510, when you ask Don Horsley what the county will pay, let us know. The city report (Agenda Item 8, page 2 above) states "under a previous agreement with the San Mateo County Transportation Authority, the City will receive $360,000 in reimbursement funds.." In other words, the city likely has assurance outside funding is available and will happen, otherwise its doubtful this item would appear on the city council agenda to move forward at this time.
Again, the city staff report states over 15 months, the city is obligated to pay up to $20,000 to hold "the exclusive option to purchase the property". (Agenda Item 8, page 2 above).
yeah, we know what the report says, we all read it, but i guess you didn't. i suggest you do your homeowrk and read what that 360,000 is going towards
here's a hint, not just the colt property
Playing the nimby card. When you got nothin', you got nothin' to lose.
6:00 hint, how about enlightening us with accurate information, rather than biased anti-city council political opinion? But, want to dead-end the California Coastal Trail in Pacifica. Well, who cares.
The structural economic imbalance in this city is the result of activity from NIMBIES, and their control on City Council. Fix it, the problem sticks to you folks, no one else.
People hear what they want to hear. They also often see what they want to see. That $360,000 now being given as a reason the city should go forward with this lark is not all going towards the Colt purchase. It's actually a SMTA re-imbursement for another purchase which appears to have already taken place (Tronoff). We don't know how much the Tronoff purchase was or where those funds came from. Who knows how much could be used towards Colt? Furthermore, and more important, what city service, program, or ledger fund took the hit for at least $360,000 when Council purchased Tronoff. I don't think we've ever had an excess of cash. Seems like this payment should rightfully go back to that fund or funds and stay there. Is this one of the pitfalls of inter-fund lending. Possibly the same vacuum that sucked up the 4 million? Yikes! Is the $360,000 part of the 4 million? Is this how those various city fund accts were never made whole over a decade? Money goes out, but when the re-imb comes in, it isn't used to offset, instead, it's spent on new stuff. It's so seductive, isn't it? Easy to see how one could fall in, again and again. Nimbies, yessies, whatevs, all tumbling in. Humbling.
Kathy, enlightenment comes from within. I do agree 100% with your earlier comment about condos up there. Looking at that map for item #8 there's a lot of city owned land producing zero tax revenue. Get it sold and let the CCC and the new owner duke it out. Plenty of these new moguls crave the coast.
Kathy, I judge council by what they do. Period. Just because I vote for a person does not mean I follow the 'love me, love my dog' formula when they propose a dog of an idea.
$360,000. Reimbursement fund related to the purchase of lands from the Tronoff family (also for the trail) and this purchase. So the question becomes What is the total amount the City of Pacifica is committing to,how much has already been spent and how much can we reasonably expect to be reimbursted for.
Let's rob the Measure A money for the trails. We did it before and no one noticed. Smooth streets are over rated anyway.
Kathy
Are you trying to make the "gang of no" heads explode with your comment.
I wish they would build condos on the parcel?
Yep, the nimby's are frothing at the mouth over this one. So yes it must be a good thing.
There is supposedly no City money being used for this purchase. So what's the big deal?
Is this a plan to try and discredit current council to help their fellow nimby get elected?
And what with all the lame attempts to get people to go over on riptide?
Council meeting. Ducks are in line. Did I hear estimated total cost 5.5 million and we have 180K and promises galore? And a completion deadline of 2021. I think I did.
Stone gave a shout out to Vreeland on this project which had been
so close to Jim's heart. Sounds like this is the one that's the trail to prosperity for Pacifica. Sure sounds good.
If Todd, Chris Fogel, Jay Bird are pissed about this deal I love it.
$5 million in project cost for the trail (when were those projection made, this has been in the work for more then a decade) $300,000+ spent on the Tronoff property, $560,000+ for the Colt Property.
That is a lot of VISION for a city that cut library Hours, and could not find $3,000 for the Beach Coalition.
Sure they all wanted it pulled from the consent calender so how come it was on there in the first place???
The hippies are probably unhappy that anyone's being paid for their land. They expect Colt to donate the land for the trail, just like they wanted Peebles to donate the Quarry to the GGNRA.
Donate, don't donate. The cost of the land is a drop in the pan to the whole project. Pacifica is taking on a huge load in time, administration, labor, grant writing. I get the vision, but lordy!
I'm not against the trail, I would just like some clarity about how it will be paid for. Council seemed a bit peeved that members of the community would question where the funding was coming from, stating that by designating the area a conservation zone, we could be eligible for additional grant funding.That's a new fact not mentioned anywhere previously. O'Neill stated that we have to go ahead with initiating the purchase in order to qualify for grants.
Okay. Great. No problem. WHAT are those grants and funding sources? Nothing was stated in the staff report about them or the conservation zone designation, so how is the public supposed to know this?
O'Campo dropped the bomb that the trail itself will cost $5 million to construct and that the city would have to construct it by 2021. Where was this in the staff report? Where did this figure come from. So now we've put $15-20,000 on the promise that we can come up with $5,580,000 in seven years.
But no evidence provided anywhere of any firm funding sources other than a commitment from the TA for $180,000.
And no info on how the trail will be constructed, what the EIR will look like, or exactly how much it's going to cost, but we've just committed $15K towards a $5 million project, whatever it turns out to be.
Measure V was an utter failure. Had it succeeded we'd be in much less deeper doo-doo than we are in now. It failed as a result of a lack of leadership by this council.
A big shout out to those on the financing city services task force, not just for wasting their time and the taxpayers time, but for dreaming up brainstorms like Measure V!
City council voted 4-1 to move forward with Item 8, the land purchase option to buy David Colt's property. The usual dissenting vote, Sue Digre. Among citizens speaking for the project: Lynn Adams "Let's do this!", and Julie Lancelle "This was envisioned 10 years ago". Lancelle also expressed concern about the bicyclists who travel that stretch of Highway 1 (glad she included that).
City council brought-up the need for site ownership in order to qualify for grant funding, their current advantaged positions on county committees, project retaining walls which will stabilize the hill, taking pressure off of existing limited parking, and safety for bikes which will travel trails, not Highway 1.
Other notes from individual council members: Conservation grants (Nihart); vision to move forward (O'Neill); work that has already been completed, we can't afford not to move forward (Ervin); Devil's Slide Park is a County effort with County support (Stone). Later, not now (Digre).
Representing Supervisor Don Horsley, Chris Hunter spoke during citizen communications. The Trail will allow people to hike through between Montara and Pacifica.
1042 Had council put on the full court press for Measure V that they put on tonight for this trail, V could have passed. This was well coordinated and united old-school hippies like Lancelle with ideological opposite Stone. Apparently nimbies can be useful. Stone was very statesman-like in his homage to Vreeland. Of course, Chris Hunter was the star--delivering buckets of good news right on cue. Apparently money does grow on trees if you need a trail built. Thoughtful of council to get those invites out. Fogel's right. A definite chill in the air for anyone who dared to question the sketchy details of the mission. And what umbrage was taken at any suggestion that using the consent agenda to slide this through left the public out.
Far safer for a politician to embrace a trail than a tax measure. Who doesn't love a trail in such a beautiful place? Wonder what they'll embrace next.
829, yes. NIMBIES are a total drag on moving forward. They've ruined the structural economy of this city, and when there's an earth project they seemingly should support (California Coastal Trail), they have no vision, they cry, they come-up with inventive ways to justify "NO!!!"
ePacifica needs Headlands Trail to attract spending visitors.The project is too expensive for bankrupt pacifica.Mary Ann stated all funding sources must be aggressively pursued. Mlke O'Neal suggested bond financing.Bond financing is in Pacifica's future:The sewer fund needs are going to be smoothed by bonds to keep from shocking homeowners.Library bond financing. Downtown project.Bonds guaranteed by homeowner is the big sell.
Vision's one thing. And getting it done is quite another. Project belongs with the county. I'm sure at some point after we're too far in, we'll find out just how and who kept it in Pacifica.
1232, hum, you must have viewed a different meeting than I did. City council, minus one, understood the issue. The city council conversation was positive. There was no wringing of hands, tearing-out of hair, or hesitation to move forward. They got it. Some people never will.
Sure looks like Council follows the blogs closely. Posts about the trail started appearing late Sunday when it was still just an item on the consent agenda with no discussion planned, no speakers. Council must have had a very busy Monday getting ready for the Monday night performance. Lines, parts, cameos, guest stars, roll it! Bravo! Bravo!
How much money have the "gang of no" kicked in for the trail?
Bake sales, Nancy Hall can play a few gigs around town, dunk the nobee booth?
Colt, should now hold out for $900,000. If Bray, says the property is worth $900,000, his word is gold!
One night at Council Mary Ann, almost had one of her "episodes" whining about all the criticism on the local blogs.
City employees read the blogs also.
So, our environment is our economy was true. Be of good cheer, Sue.
743 A designated blog monitor? Sure. The blogs are probably council's guilty pleasure and pain.
Crowd sourcing, HEHEHEHE, crowd sourcing? I couldn't believe my ears. But kudo's to Van Ocampo for fessing up the trails construction costs have been estimated at an additional 5 million dollars. Knowing Colts exceptional knowledge of the hill, his talent as a concrete business owner and the fact he lives right there I'm sure he could save Van a million or two.
As an incumbent I want to thank Mike O'Niell for blundering through this and voting in favor of it without a public hearing. That was dumb, thank ya Mike. Sue Digre on the other hand wanted to look into the whole deal a lot more thoroughly and involve the public this time by having at least one public hearing. Thank you for looking out for public involvement in government.
And to answer Mary Ann's quip directed at candidate Keener when she blurted out a snide remake defending her idea of public input, which was to bury this item in the Consent Calendar: It's you Mary Ann, you have no idea of what public input or your responsibility to it is anymore. You should never have approved an agenda where item 8 was on the consent calendar.
But in the end we all want the trail for a rainbow of reasons. The county, Caltrans, City and Coastal Conservancy should all just step up and finish this pig, and with Colt's expertise as the contractor. Him or Blackman. My wife loves Dave and Daver.
Council got all pissy last night because they bungled the rollout of the Trail That Will Save Pacifica while Horsley's flack was there to witness it. Quite embarrassing to all involved to have the state of our finances made public like that. Tsk, tsk... gotta manage your plebes better, Pacifica.
Yes, yes, we've got tons of money for this (just none for the library or the visitors center, sorry!) so full speed ahead.
The county is gung ho about the trail and is twisting arms, so why not drop the whole thing in their lap and let them handle it all.
Nope, p-town will get behind the wheel and will be left with the bills just like Linda Mar Beach.
Chris, you lost credibility and objectivity when you started actively campaigning for John Keener. This is a ploy to make your candidate look good. In fact, the usually quiet Keener is already on that other blog railing on council (except Sue) for imagined slights against Pacificans.
I see Todd is following suit. What's that about politics making strange bedfellows?
You guys are so transparent it's amusing. I'm actually embarrassed for you.
Tronoff is part of a civil engineering and surveying company. Do you think the city will listen to him and Colt?
No they will hire more consultants and stash the reports away in a dusty box.
Bob,
I went to council in person last night to ask what I feel was a perfectly legitimate question: Given that the city currently has a several million dollar deficit, how are we going to come up with the $5,800,000 that is required for the trail by the seven year deadline?
I think that's a very reasonable question to ask. I'm sorry that asking it has upset you so much.
I am disappointed in both Mary Ann and Mike for implying that pulling an item from the consent calender provides the same level of public information and Public over-site as a properly noticed public hearing.
Todd 931, never did Van Ocampo say that THIS CITY would pay 5 million dollars for the California Coastal Trail running through this city? Answer: FALSE.
Hey, it's a trail. Another city benefit that Councilmember Sue Digre ordinarily would consider "economic development". But this time, she stated the trail is not "economic development", and gave it her usual vote: "no". But, this is the legendary California Coastal Trail connection, located in the general area of the Devil's Slide Park. Be happy! Personally, I would prefer a resort development there, or possibly a Walmart.
All five (5) city councilmembers requested Item 8 be put on Consideration, and it was. Consideration (a public forum) is not good enough for you?
After the fact, now your band of NIMBIES are campaigning for the County to buy Dave Colt's land for the trail? Some of you have given-up on the idea the entire city should defaulting to the county, no purchase necessary?
But why are you complaining about the sub-standard city economy you folks have created over the past 30 years? Its a paradise here! And all we need to "fix pacifica" is another trail, or is this the last one? City economy complete.
Oh jeez we're back where we started. Our economy is our envirironment. This council will wish the county was the lead on this project. We all will. They'd have just rolled in and done eminent domain. Was that the problem?Too rough for warm and fuzzy Pacifica? And what a farce of a meeting. Van O is on a barge to the Farallones.
Chris 1101, your assertion that the city as an entity is required to come up with $5,800,000 is crackers. The California Coastal Trail will be put together primarily through grants as discussed at city council, and as stated in the Agenda Item 8 report. At city council, Mayor MaryAnn Nihart also stated the city must own claim to the land to receive conservation grants.
The question from you personally was not reasonable. You are too smart to be on the dummy side of this discourse. I agree with Hutch 1013 completely, including the part that all of you should be embarrassed about taking such questionable political strategies.
Kathy, you sure Digre stated the trail wasn't economic development? Didn't hear that. Did hear her say we just went through a tough budget, we can't afford it, and need to learn more about the financing before we jump in. Think she asked for 4 weeks which would have meant bringing it back before council as an item for consideration before the public and with ample notice to the public. Ample meaning more than the few minutes in which it was withdrawn from consent and placed for consideration in the same meeting. Of course some speakers in support must have been idling in the parking lot because they got there real quick. Complete sham of a meeting. Doesn't the mayor approve the agenda? Shit hit the fan and they regrouped. A mockery of the public meeting process.
Sue's battle cry was:
Our ecology is our economy!
Toddster, it's a case of love me, love my dog. This is the council of their dreams and by golly what ever this council does, it's gotta be ok because the alternative is the nimbys who think our environment is our economy. Trails, you know, ahem. I think there's a lot of teeth grinding and jaw clenching going on. And it's just started.
1201, yes, that's what she said as she slumped in her chair, defending her "no" vote, during city council discussion prior to voting. Your comment about what she said is also correct.
Mayor Nihart pointed-out that paperwork for a grant was due, October 1st. So, what would be the point of delaying the city council vote 4 weeks, past that deadline? Plus, this delay tactic of not knowing all the resolved details (guaranteed financing) in advance of the question (the 15 month grant search, approval and completion) is typical NIMBY complaint to delay and kill projects. Been there.
1210 close enough for gov't work.
Kathy, you heard a little more than I did. Stalling tactic? I don't think so. I think Digre is passionate about public involvement. Using some vague urgency to meet a grant deadline to trump a more open and deliberate process--particularly after the mayor enthuses over the ready availibilty of grant money for this project--is another example of very poor judgement in this. The similarities to the Vreeland modus operandi are striking. But life goes on and we always have term limits-- just another deadline?
Crowdfunding? Pacifica is kind of like a developing country/3rd world. Might raise a few bucks.
Just watched the latest episode of The Hunger Games on PCTVs Youtube channel. Love the snide wisecracks from O'Neill and Nihart about public participation when either of those two doof-jobs could have amended the agenda before Kathy sent it out late Fri.
But nope, wait until the meeting is underway, THEN amend the agenda and voila! The public is like totally involved now, man.
god damn, grow up and admit you may have screwed the notice on this one or else just stay the hell home.
Hey 219 They don't need to admit anything. They just need to stay the hell home. Typical Nihart. But, Mike O'Neill, how could you join in that farce after all the honest effort you put into getting info out to the public and answering questions?
Van Ocampo sends his regards from exile in the Farallones. So peaceful, just him, the gulls, the garbage, sharks in the water where they belong.
mike, mike, mike... i know you're reading this... not your finest hour last night
"is this a public hearing right now?" was laaaaaaaaame. come on ya got to pull it together dude or you'll be nothing but a short lived council memory come january.
What farse 238? Mike ONeill, Mary Ann, Karen and Len did just what they should have. Move along an item so we don't lose money. The nimbys are just trying to make something out of nothing.
A swing and a miss Keener campaign.
There once one was a director named Ocampo
Who couldn't keep his mouth shut, so
He's adrift on a barge
And still at large
And nobody knows but Tinfow.
Great stuff, Pacifica Poet. Moving, very moving. Shouldn't Tinfow be Tincoco or Tinfowfow? Or would that be doggeral? I lack your artistry. Any memorable inscriptions come to mind for the dedication plaques that will surely litter The World Class Trail?
I don't usually take requests, 421, but for you, sure...
THE TRAIL THAT SAVED PACIFICA
You're using our trail, we're really glad!
We spent five mil on it we never had.
We're still paying it off to this day
(The refinanced bonds will never go away).
"Our environment is our economy"
Never made much sense to me.
When will Pacifica face the facts
That birds and squirrels pay zero tax.
Thank you, thank you for coming on down,
Mind the potholes on your way out of town.
Dedicated to V. Ocampo (1965-2014)
Pacifica Poet--LMAO, knocked over my coffee cup, choked on my newton, scared the dog. Awesome work, awesome. You wove in all the elements. And that dedication! Dear, sweet Van. That it's shared with such a small audience is pure heartbreak, an injustice I dedicate my life to correct. Well, you know, hyperbole, but believe me I'm on it. Your poem will make the rounds. Oh yes. It's an honor, Pacifica Poet. An honor.
The vast majority on blog like the Headlands Trail idea,but believe Council thinks they still have $4,000,000 to play with.Mary Ann believes if you act like you got money the grants will come in.Josh Cosgrove reminded Council sewer fund repayments start in few years;bet they want to forget about $2,000,000 plus repayments.Now Pacifica thinks they can play options without risk!
Liking the Headlands Trail idea is not the same as liking the way council has gone about this. I think everyone understands how council intends to pay for this 5.5 million dollar project. I just have zero confidence in the ability of this city and this council to run an efficient project and not use a dime of city funds. This whole consent agenda thing and the charade that followed was shameful. This council is tone-deaf on the issue of open government. Not how you inspire public confidence. Council is in way over its head with this. Let's hope the county realizes that and takes over in all but name. Those council egos are sensitive.
"I think everyone understands how council intends to pay for this 5.5 million dollar project."
We do?
City Council thinks they are sitting at a no limit blackjack table.
Only when the dealer and pit boss remind them, the .25 cent slots are over there.
When they demanad a marker and say we are from the city of Pacifica, security escorts them all out the door!
Everyone who lives beyond their means knows, you have to fake it before you make it.
Why not city council?
So I must ask the $64,000 dollar question.
How is this city council any different than past city councils?
The problem is not this city council, but those of you who have worked so hard to keep this city poor. The chaos caused by years of planned economic inadequacy and infrastructure neglect is all attributed to you.
And now, when grant monies will pay for the most important trail through this city, you are bitching??? And not only are you bitching, but you are also complaining about the city financial imbalance you have caused. Be happy!
I think they took a few too many hits of acid in the 60's & 70's Kathy to understand how ironic there behaviour is. But true to their name, the "gang of no" is baulking at another project.
Also let's not forget that the 4 million was misplaced during Sue Digre's rein 8-10 years ago. It's time for her to go. She is the icom of nimbyism on council.
Kathy
But who whispers in city councils ears?
City Council can just look back at past city councils and see the results.
Look at who endorsed Mary Ann, and Karen, the same people who kept Pacifica dirty, dusty and broke.
Kathy
When a pitcher pitches a no hitter everyone says great game.
When the same pitcher gives up 10 runs everyone says, run the bum out of town.
The captains of the sinking Pacifica ship is the city council. Blame goes to them for listening to the wrong people.
The city council keeps doing the same things, thinking they will get a different result. Insanity!
I agree, this city council lags in getting at the core issue of this city: structural economic development. But current city council votes frequently run 4-1, proof this city council is better than prior city councils who, through their actions, have ruined this city economy.
Remember the 1 vote, Councilmember Sue Digre, represents the regressive positions against city progress. One important example was Sue's recent attempt to kill highway widening through a legally binding city arbitration forum. There was no second to that attempted motion. And we know who is whispering in her ear, don't we 802?
Another thing, this city council was the first to set-up a goal list. Len Stone was the Mayor that established that list. #1 on the list is economic development. City council needs to move forward with the #1 priority they set.
Kathy Meeh and Bob Hutchinson have gone rogue and are now arguing that we build more trails and that our environment is our economy. WTF?!
Who knew that they were closet hippies.
It's the age of Aquarius!
836, this is the California Coastal Trail that connects California to Oregon and Mexico.
Want to build housing, office parks, and commerce centers over the others, okay?
Sue Digre and Van Ocampo are the only two people who acted in anyway responsibly to the public good. Sue was absolutely right in voting no, not against the trail purchase but no against the heavy handed forces on council who have sponsored and increased the number of consent items that should have been agendized from the start.
This item has not had a public hearing. Getting pulled from the consent calendar made it a consideration item. Contrary to anything candidate O'Niell says, he showed his unwavering willingness to cut the public out of the process. He has lost my vote because of this. Public first, self second Mr. O'Niell.
Van Ocampo seeing the naive self congratulatory smarminess of Mary Ann et al thankfully extended the public knowledge of this proposal by informing us there was a hidden construction estimate to finish the trail so it would be ADA compliant of $5 million bucks.
I spoke with Colt yesterday at great length. He too was thankful Sue voted no to allow more time for the public to understand the heavy handed tactics of our council and staff through this lengthy process.
At this time the only vote that could be cast in the publics favor was a no vote, and only one council member stood up for us all. Sue Digre.
I have to agree it's long past time for Sue Digre to go. We can all see what puppet masters are pulling her strings. If anyone is responsible for the loss of 4 million dollars it's Sue because it happened on her watch. And she's liable for years of no economic development. She's a drag on any progress here. Now she even voted against a trail that we will be reimbursed for. Please don't vote for her again.
Todd 919, you are living in your own scripted drama as usual. The city documents (Item 8) include stated cost of the Trail, which is NOT the cost to the city. 10 years is long enough for Councilmember Digre and some of you to figure it out.
You never, ever intended to vote for Mike O'Neill, whereas those of us who understand the need for fairness and progress in this city will.
Agenda Consent items sometimes change to Consideration. Nothing new for this city council, or past city councils.
David Colt signed the sales option to the City. That was his intent, that's what he did. Fact.
Clarification of city issues explained by Mayor MaryAnn Nihart are appreciated. That's an education contribution she does very well. Whereas your comments are generally questionable and smarmy, that's what you insist on doing.
Meeh supporting trails? Our environment really is our economy? WTF?? The earth has tilted on its axis. And hang on, because, Todd is right. And Chris Fogel and Lionel Emde and so many others. Council tried to sneak this one past the public. Start with that. It didn't have to be that way, but we have a council whose dominant members have no respect for the public process because it's messy and hard to control and people find out what you're doing. They cut the public out of the process and then, when caught, scrambled to put a clean face on it. Moved it from consent agenda to consideration. That'll fix it right? No. Continuing it to the next meeting and giving proper notice to the public would have fixed it. "This is a public hearing, right?" Not your best moment as an elected public official Mr. O'Neill. What was the rush? Speakers double-parked? Cutting the public out of the process is wrong no matter who does it or what their reason. Sue Digre knows it's wrong. She voted her conscience on the issue of open and honest government. You can't ask for more than that from an elected official. And she voted against something she believes in, that trail, because there was a much bigger issue at risk, open and honest government. The other 4 were asked loud and clear that night. They failed. Full marks also to Van Ocampo for providing information our council clearly felt no obligation to share with us. What an inauspicious start to this project. The county has long known this city couldn't run a bake sale. Let's hope they take the lead. Better yet, they acquire the property so we have no responsibility, financial or otherwise, now and in the future.
Okay, so let's recap how things stand here at Fix Pacifica:
Fix Pacifica thinks more business in Pacifica is good, but when Fresh & Easy moves in, that's bad.
Fix Pacifica thinks traffic in Vallemar is bad, but traffic at Pedro Point is good ("just deal with it.")
If you comment on traffic but aren't a traffic engineer, yep, that's bad, but if you're a retired fire captain, then it's good.
Fix Pacifica says making up facts is bad, but saying that 99% support the widening is good.
Fix Pacifica says John Maybury's censoring posts is bad, but Kathy Meeh's censoring posts is good.
Fix Pacifica says a man bear hugging a woman and upsetting her as a prank is ha-ha! good, but for her to complain about this is bad.
Fix Pacifica says more trails are bad, unless it's Vreeland's trail and then it's good
Fix Pacifica says OMG WE'VE GOT TOO MUCH OPEN SPACE!!!, but now thinks having more is good
Fix Pacifica says wasteful spending is bad, but thinks that 5.5 million spent on Vreeland's trail is good.
Who the hell knows how much is unaccounted for? Is it really unaccounted for or is that just a cover for we all spent money we knew we didn't have and now we need a cover story? Hmmm, who would make a good villain in our story? You can't trust the stuff that comes out of city hall. And as far as it just being discovered. Bullshit. Deficit spending may have started under Vreeland and Tanner but it continued right up and into this regime. Has it stopped? This council shared the bad habit, they just didn't share the news.
Hutch, Sue was the only one without any strings Monday night. As for the masters pulling the strings, well, you know who the trail builders are. You and Kathy have raged against them for years. And now, you've joined them! Let's see, it'll be Loeb, Lancelle, Verby, Meeh and Hutch. You can probably move up in the order. Need a bumper sticker "Our environment is our economy"?
1051, no the campaign against the California Trail you are running here is purely political.
Van Ocampo is part of the city process. He gave his city planning report at City Council, 9/8/14.
Sue Digre represents "honest government"? Remember the Planning Commission violation, she advised the commissioner and others who attempted that end-run. Remember her attempted action to block highway widening, that was a sneaky effort advanced from nimbies who advised her. Remember her active participation in blocking Measure L quarry development, she actively endorsed "No on L", (against the best economic interest of this city). She claims to be supportive of "economic development", but her actions indicate that's an inside joke. That's City council candidate incumbent Sue Digre. A vote for her and John Keener are votes for continued city failure.
Still want to play Anonymous "WTF"?
omigod
hutch and kathy supporting another trail project and beating up digre for being against it
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
I'm dying over here
It's tough to make an argument on an issue of ethics when all you've got is politics. Only one person stood up for the public Monday night. And she's done it before. That's not political, it's just right.
Wow. How close are we on here to critical mass?
Everyone know how much the trails bring into the city bank account. A Safeway sandwich here, some Taco Bell here.
Hey what about measure A money? Is that account drained also?
1142, the bonus is 1) retaining walls to shore up the hillside, and 2) bicycle safety, since the bicyclists will travel the trail rather than Highway 1 in that area. (This is an extremely dangerous patch of Highway 1 for bicycles, as Julie Lancelle pointed-out at city council 9/8/14).
Again, this isn't any trail, its the California Coastal Trail, which connects with the new Devil's Slide regional park. In partnership, this is San Mateo County and city regional planning. Over 15 months, the city will search to complete outside funding. Win, win!
When it comes to bicycle safety alone, your comment is worthy of less LOL, and improved critical thinking. But if you're actually "dying over here" it won't matter.
Wow the nimby spin patrol is out in full force. I don't think this issue has legs so good luck trying to use it for your candidate Keener. You better concentrate on getting him prepared for the debates.
Free retaining walls as a bonus? Wow! Why didn't you say so? Here's my $5 million.*
* actually, it's an IOU**
** more like a note scribbled on a taco bell wrapper***
*** um, a pinky-swear?****
**** listen, I'm TOTALLY gonna get the money for you, okay?
It's pretty simple. A couple of the gang of no nimbys realize they can't get their golden boy Keener elected unless they can take votes from ONeill or so they are trying to discredit him among his supporters here. It's not a well thought out strategy, but that's how they roll.
Post a Comment