I attended one of the City Council candidates forums last month.
Sue Digre spent her time giving excuses for why she hasn't gotten anything done during her time on Council, while John Keener was saying Pacificans need to resign themselves to the idea that nothing will be accomplished in the next four years.
What's the point of paying people to serve on City Council when they say outright that they can't or won't get anything done? It's easy for people to say “No” and let the city's problems fester, but we need people on Council who make an effort to solve problems and move the city forward. That's why I'm asking people to vote for Mike O'Neill, Victor Spano, and Eric Ruchames.
Steve Sinai
64 comments:
Gee, wasn't it yesterday that you posted that "Just to be clear, the blog doesn't endorse anybody."
When the entire blog consists of 2 people, and both endorse the same candidates then saying "we don't have an editorial board" makes about as much sense as saying we don't have an office in Rio.
When every other post is in support of your slate of candidates one can assume you've got a certain political slant. Just come out and say it, you might actually get some grudginf respect as opposed to laughter.
Just my personal endorsement. As I said before, there is no editorial board. I believe Kathy is voting for O'Neill, Spano and Dyer, so there's no consensus on who to endorse.
Anyone who wants to let us know who they're voting for is free to send their list to fixpacifica@gmail.com. No anonymous endorsements, though. You have to use your name.
Who you vote for is private. Don't force your opinions on us.
Well, I'm laughing. Put me down for what 212 said. Did Riptide endorse? Or did John also keep it personal?
Riptide is just one person - John. And he said outright that Riptide was endorsing.
Golly. Riptide has the coolest stuff. They have Alfed E. Newman morphing into Dubya over and over. But, then, I noticed a disturbing post by Big Banker claiming that this blog was named Fix Pacifica by Rocky and the Flying Squirrel. Say it isn't so.
Just can't wrap my head around Ruchames.
Eric said at the AAUW candidates forum "he's not sure if Caltrans is the answer."
Also his answer about the tabu of cutting city workers pay makes me believe he will be more on the side of the unions than the taxpayers.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3T0P4zXT3M&index=4&list=PLFUunuheJ0ZUlGLqLE-W-tomaYK-npq6j
An urban myth from a chubby cowboy, 6:42.
659 No one has stood up to the unions in years. As candidates they court union endorsements and with endorsement comes money. Once in office it's time to pay the piper. Ruchames is no different than anyone else on that count. Like Ruchames, Spano was also a career public employee and also collects a lifetime pension. Unions and politicians are joined at the hip.
What a relief, Sinai! The squirrel count is too high as is.
Voting for a mix that is representative of Pacifica - Digre, O'Neill and Ruchames.
Keener, Digre and Spano
The set of signs in front of Ash's Vallemar Station is a head scratcher.
Ruchames, Keener and Spano?
1105 guess it's a no incumbents thing.
Spano, O'neill & Dyer
I really think, knowing how things happen in Pacifica.
Ruchames
O'Neil
Keener
Larry, Moe, and Curly
It'll probably be Digre, O'Neill and Ruchames and anyone who doesn't like it can thank Dyer and Dougherty and Spano's choice of friends--even before the letter.
Why on earth are people voting for Ruchames?! I don't get. He has no stance on a single issue and hasn't read any key city documents. The man is an empty suit.
Here are his answers to one of the forum questionnaires:
Q: Have you read the climatic action plan?
RUCHAMES: No
Q: Have you read the draft general plan update?
RUCHAMES: I am still working on them.
Q: Have you read the FEIR for the project?
RUCHAMES: I am still working on them
Q: Do you think the city should take an active role in the quarry?
RUCHAMES: Not sure what this question is referring to.
Q: Would you vote to support widening Highway 1?
RUCHAMES: This is not a simple yes or no question.
Q: Do you support alternatives to widening?
RUCHAMES: See above.
My god, is this guy for real? And you want to vote for this guy?!
O'Neill, Ruchames, Spano
Dyer cemented her reputation as an octogenarian banshee with last night's performance at City Council. She'll get the mayhem and mischief Halloween vote.
11:37 Noone can crystal ball the masses without any scientific polling, but it's fun to play. Spano has name recognition, on top of the ballots, good sign locations, he's out on your street, was at fogfest, decent website, facebook. I got three different mailings from him....I would not count him out so quickly. If he doesnt make it, he succeeded in getting a lot of attention for this blog. That will be an unintended consequence for better or for worse.
I have a vision, I think it's gonna turn out exactly like this:
1. O'Neill 4900+/- 250
2. Spano 4400 +/- 250
3. Keener. 4000 + / 250
4. Digre / Ruchames (very close--statistical tie) 3500/3500
5. Dougherty <2000
6. Dyer < 1000
We have coming to us exactly who we deserve!
1137, well, Therese actually stands for economic development, and has been very clear about that. Kudos to her!
Mayor Nihart at city council last night stated that this city needs 8-10 projects similar to the one the city planned for Beach Boulevard, which is estimated to net $500,000 annual city revenue. (She especially mentioned redevelopment of "infill" sites). Hence, the city needs $4-5 million annual revenue to run an efficient city.
Does Dyer favor a library at Beach Blvd? That $500K revenue from the city's plan for Beach Blvd is based on full tenancy. How much more could be realized without a public bldg parked on the site? A decent 150-200 room hotel would easily surpass that with TOT. The CCC might go for it if the rest of the parcel was public plaza. Hard to get excited about the city plan when it's so clearly not about producing revenue for Pacifica. And the 8-10 additional projects? They, too, are years away, if ever. What's the plan to survive for the next 5 years? They're still not serious.
1158 LMAO. Isn't that the Pacifica Environmental Family Questionnaire you're flogging? I think your boy Spano and Ruchames both skipped that forum. Fine by me.
131, here's the suggested City concept for 2212 Beach Blvd Property Revitalization and Redevelopment: Hotel/restaurant; future development (civic with retail); multi-unit housing (townhouses or apartments). Scroll down the page for graphic overview, and for links to more detailed information.
Spano's overdone the signs, stepped in a pile of it with the letter, stumbled early over a coveted sign location, claimed and then had to recant key endorsements he never had, regrouped and landed on here, he's known for changing his positions with his audience, peaked a while ago. I've found the most common response people give when asked what they think about Spano is "hmm, I dunno" sometimes accompanied by a waggle of the hand to mean kinda iffy. Granted, not a Fixie among them. But, half the votes were in before his latest faux pas and he's probably the sentimental fav in the north end of town. Sure, he could win. Of course.
My prediction
1. O'Neill 4900+/- 250
2. Spano 4400 +/- 250
3. Digre / Dyer (very close--statistical tie) 3500/3500
4. Ruchames 2800
5. Keener 2200
6. Dougherty < 1000
1242 Thanks. Looked at the Spano's website and it has something you don't often see on those things. As is custonmary, he lists endorsements and then just to the right of that list is another list of well-known names with which he has some connection but who have not endorsed him, nor has he asked them to. You have to read the fine print above the second list to learn that. Sorry, that's a little fishy. Is it an attempt to mislead? Guess it would be "Oh, no, I didn't mean they endorsed me, don't you see the disclaimer"? It's often the little things that say the most about someone.
Thanks, Kathy. I know what the city plans. The library is the problem. Waste of prime real estate. The rest of the plan with a larger hotel, and whatever public space the CCC demands as a price for that, will bring in double the city revenue and anchor a revival of that area.
I liked Spano's pursuit of a buyer for Beach Blvd. The city wasn't ready to even consider it because they were committed to putting their planned project out to bid. Nonetheless, I liked the initiative Spano showed. As a councilmember that individual initiative is not encouraged. Their is a heirarchy in place. Making the transition from individual contributor to a place way down the totem pole should keep things interesting if he wins.
Nostradamus, that's veddy interesting. Here are some actual results from the previous 3 off-year, low turnout elections. For each race I list the top 4 finishers, but only the top 3 won a prize.
2010 66.7% turnout, 9 candidates
Stone 5618
Digre 5135
Vree 5078
Leon 4450
2006 68.2% turnout, 7 candidates, and
Measure L
Vree 7890
Digre 7213
Lancelle 6741
Moore 5436
2002 6 candidates and Measure E
Vree 7510
Lancelle 6712
Digre 4913
Carr 4148
I don't see any reason why the numbers next week won't resemble 2006. I don't believe any profound changes have occurred in the electorate in Pacifica. Voters continue to favor moderate candidates who have held prior elected office and whom they trust. Same number of candidates this year as in 2006 and none seem to be superstars. Maybe even lower turnout than 2006 because there is no controversial measure on this ballot. IMHO and in no particular order, I think it's O'Neill, Digre and either Ruchames or Keener.
As much as I'd like to believe people study and vote on the issues, I think it's mostly about name recognition.
Seems like biggest asset is incumbency or a prior high-profile elected office like school board. Works just about every time. When it doesn't, as with Cal Hinton's last run in 2006-when Nihart was the top vote-getter, it's often due to vote-splitting. That race had 5 candidates for 2 seats and Hinton came in 3rd following Pete by 450 votes. Fourth and fifth? Simons and Schlesinger.
Ruchames has not only current school board recognition and library cred, but he was also in this community as a peace officer for 30 years. His campaign is barely noticeable (so were his school board campaigns) but it's his name on the ballot, nonetheless. IMHO, it's incumbents O'Neill and Digre and Eric Ruchames.
I looked at Spano's web site to see what 2:41 was talking about. Sure enough, on his endorsements page he lists a whole bunch of people, most of whom are from other cities. He says they are "Professional Endorsements for Economic Development and other profesional skills recieved on Victor Spano's Linkedin.com profile" (misspellings included). I have no idea what this means. But it's really stretching the meaning of an endorsements page in a political campaign. Can we say ethically challenged?
Name recognition plus a small influence for primacy and latency on the ballot. The first couple of names in a list and the last couple will get a few more votes for list position. The middle-class always gets screwed!
OOPs, at 757 I was referring to Cal's last run in 2008 not 2006.
Good point about the vote splitting. If not for Tod Schlesinger, who put his name on the ballot and then didn't campaign, Cal would have been re-elected rather than Pete. That would have changed the whole direction of the council.
Well, if Cal had won, it would have then been Nihart, Hinton, Vreeland, Digre and Lancelle in 2008. But, Pete was a key member and as influential behind the scenes as Vreeland. Particularly about the role of the city attorney. Without him, I think council would not have had the momentum it had between 2008 and 2010. Maybe the inter-fund lending would have been done with less abandon although I think it continued til last year. Actually all that's changed with that is now they keep records. Stone came aboard in 2010, Vreeland started to decline, etc. It would have been different with Cal but in subtle rather than obvious ways.
1200, at city council last night, Therese Dyer recalled that St. Vreeland was not such a saint after all.
She only mentioned four (4) past issues:
1) Vreeland improved his home without required city permits.
2) Vreeland's involvement and instigation in the firing of the long time respected building inspector, Mike Angel.
3) The resulting Mike Angel lawsuit which lead to a legal settlement, (costing a man to lose his job, and the city to lose a lot of money).
4) Vreeland drawing benefits and pay for one (1) year while he was absent from city council meetings, which caused city business delays (including no quorum). Whereas, he should have resigned.
That was part of HIS reputation. There is so much more Therese did not mention, but possibly she will in the future. Her comments were prompted by BJ's "Don't Fix Pacifica" LTE last week (Tribune 10/22/14), which trashed Victor Spano, this blog, and me (she mentioned my name).
You say she "cemented her reputation", and you? Her memory is good; your memory seems to be nonexistent. Her reputation includes courage, integrity and ethics. Your reputation? Halloween may also be easy for you this year: no costume, "L" to the forehead. Perfect!
Please this the time we need to think who would do the job.
Digree needs to retire
Spano got more brains than Ruchames.
Dyer is more intelligent than Dougharty.
If we want to progress and be more productive city, let's be smart on Nov 4,2014. Enough is enough.
6:34-- I know you consider yourself Pacifica's Carl Rove, but given that you don't even know what an "off-year election" is, I don't think you're as smart as you think you are.
Hint: none of those elections were off-year elections. This one isn't either.
853 You are correct. What was I thinking? I meant gubernatorial not off-year. The message is low voter turnout compared to Presidential election years. I think most readers got that and if they didn't, well, there's wiki. As far as Karl Rove, uh, no. I'm in the Molly Ivins camp on all things Bush. Rove was Dr. Frankenstein and Dubya The Creature. As far as political strategists, I'm a fan of David Gerger, Paul Begala, Alex Castellanos and Bill Clinton. And I live for the day when I can vote for Rahm Emanuel for national office or at least for another candidate he advises. Nothing Rovian, here. Gubernatorial.
Kathy, every council member does things worthy of criticism, and Vreeland was no different in that respect. But I always viewed him as the least worst member of the "Gang of No" council.
At a city finance hearing, after I gave reasons for why I thought the City Attorney's Department under Cecilia Quick was costing the city way too much, Digre and DeJarnatt defended her while it was Vreeland who actually agreed with me and asked the city manager to start looking into contracting a part-time City Attorney.
What people found repugnant regarding Vreeland and the blog, including me, was the way he was bad-mouthed and called a "rat" right after he died.
Finally, I despise the way Tod S. and Therese stand up in front of city council every two weeks and publicly rip people. They never say anything positive or offer solutions. They just bitch. I realize some people get off on that, but I don't.
9:37-- oh for crying out loud, called a "midterm election," not a gubernatorial election.
BTW, I'm an Ed Rollins fan.
Yo, Steve, guess who else got up in front of council every two weeks to piss and moan about everything under the sun back in 2006-2010. Like clockwork -- never missed a chance to waste everyone's time at a council meeting. Yep, your co-blogger.
I don't remember Kathy blatantly attacking people.
I do think if you speak more than once a month at a council meeting, people stop listening to you.
6:34, I'm Nostradamuses kid brother Scrappy Doo...We've been in touch with the county elections board, who you too can call for info. Pacifica absentees are WAY down from all those years you list. I'm guessing this will be an all time low turnout election of more right wing voters (Republicans always vote) than left wingers and nimbies. O'neill and Spano and Ruchames are most republican of the bunch, so they'll do good. Dyer is too far out. I have not got anything on Dougherty, his record is too clean........Digre's brand equity is at an all time low. But Keener has really been working harder than anyone, so we are giving him third place just because he's a scholar and a gentleman.
Sinai, I'm glad you said that. Fix needed it. I knew Vreeland from before his first campaign. He was not the evil person some have made him out to be. He made mistakes, we all do. He hurt people, we all do. He also did some good for Pacifica, publicly and behind the scenes, and very few of us have done or will do anything to compare. His collapse was drawn out too long, but no one suffered more during it than he and his family. And none of us are privy to what influenced their decisions. The man's dead, too soon, leaving a widow and children who were a part of this community for many years. To publicly savage his memory and reputation is small and vicious. Not because he's a saint, but because he's another human being. The same people who indulge in that seem to also applaud and egg on Dyer and Schlesinger. We're not so far removed from ancient Rome and the Coliseum.
Life is a struggle; I only respect warriors.
Keener will take it all. All others can gtfo.
It's a Gubernatorial election because we're electing a governor/gubernator. Waaawaaawaaaa.
Oh, Scrappy Doo, you're so full of it. Doo, I mean. You and Nasty need to get another book out.
1011 Ed's sorry to hear that.
The demographic that's near religious about voting are seniors. Digre has always had tremendous support there. Keener? We could use a brain on council. Maybe he and Ervin can do lab experiments. Time will tell.
County elections website. This is a Gubernatorial General Election. The one in 2012 was a Presidential election. 2010 Gubernatorial, 2008 Presidential, etc Depends what you're electing.
Might as well post my predictions, too: (All +/- 250, and assuming a 30% turnout)
1. O'Neill 5000
2. Digre 4000
3. Ruchames 3700
4. Spano 2700
5. Keener 2500
6. Dyer 600
7. Dougherty 500
Spano/Keener places depend on what's in this week's Trib about Spano's ill-advised phone call.
1035 Keener's a warrior? Hmm. There was a preacher's fire in the eyes when he said he wasn't a Dem or a Republican, he was a Green Party Member. Take us up to Keenerdom!
1119 Oh no! Turn-out's got to be higher than that, but I like your rankings. Letters to the Trib about the phone call? Was there time for that before deadline? Spano mentioned a rebuttal to the letter in the call. Bet there were some requests to extend that LTE deadline. Guess this is why Editor Hinshaw gets the big bucks.
Yo 10/28, 1018 PM, big improvement. Rather than "pissing and moaning about everything" broken and not fixed in Pacifica every two weeks, now you've got me stating the obvious every day, 24-7.
Steve 10/28, 1008 PM, I think Vreeland had more influence in not fixing this city than you give him credit for, and I stand by my abbreviated comments. Alive or dead same manipulative guy, same civic reputation.
People who have the courage to stand up to injustice, dysfunction, 30 years of brainwashing and the lack of progress in this city-- I applaud and support, all of them. We all have different ways of thinking and expressing ourselves.
Bless you Steve Sinai for what you said at 10:08 pm. You are the voice of civil discourse on this blog.
Hahahaha Kathy. If you think being mean-spirited jerks is the way to win friends and influence people, then by all means keep doing it.
955, and you're Todd Bray saying this? Hahahahahahahahahaha, etc. Have you been reading your own text and that of your friends lately?
My view point is fix Pacifica, your view point is don't fix Pacifica (we've been living with that for 30 years). Time to say "enough", and move forward.
Kathy Meeh at 8:42 said... in reference to Dyer (..."You say she "cemented her reputation", and you? Her memory is good; your memory seems to be nonexistent. Her reputation includes courage, integrity and ethics. "
A bitter tongue, regularly threatening to sue the city (while also speaking out against others that actually put their money where their cause is). Do share where the courage and integrity is.
251 I think speaking before council is an outlet for anger and bitterness for some folks who desperately need one. People used to be more civil and have respect for the office and the system, but that's gone. You can see local versions of the Dyers, Schlesingers and Medlers, and the other more benign regulars, all over the country. In municipal meetings from coast to coast. I think small to medium-size towns allow and encourage more of it, but even the President of the United States gets heckled.
Post a Comment