Tuesday, March 14, 2017
Ruff Thoughts About Last Night's City Council Meeting
What's wrong with directly asking the people what they want? It's hypocritical to pass an ordinance that says a city vote is required for action on highway widening, and then not allow a vote.
A few people got up and tried using the argument that having three council members who oppose widening proves the voters are against it. Sue V. had a good counter-argument about how she got more votes than Keener, so doesn't that show people were OK with widening? I also noticed that none of the people trying to make that argument specifically mentioned Martin, knowing that if she and her supporters hadn't gamed the election rules to force Nihart out of the race, Nihart would be on council rather than Martin.
Sue V. agreed to postpone a discussion of a vote. As of now, it looks like the issue of putting a highway widening vote on the ballot will be formally discussed at a council meeting in late April.
As an aside, I have to give Keener and Digre props for joining Vaterlaus and O'Neill in denying an appeal to the storm overflow system to be built near the community center. Lots of people spoke in an attempt to stop the system from being built there. It would have been very easy for Keener and Digre to do what's too often done by Pacifica council members, and that's to keep kicking the can down the road. Instead, they bit the bullet and made a hard decision.
Linda Mar isn't my neighborhood so I never paid much attention to this particular project, but the city would have taken a huge financial risk by approving the appeal and delaying it. Fines for allowing a large sewage spill that resulted in untreated sewage flowing into the ocean could have been in the $80 million range. For comparison, the city budget for this year is about $30 million.
Posted by Steve Sinai