 |
| Spano and O"Neill are both good candidates, but lets try to win the election |
We all want to protect the environment but we must have balanced growth in order to have money for environmental causes.
That is why I am urging Pacificans not to vote for Rich Campbell. Mr Campbell is being backed by all the same groups who have fought and stalled any progress in Pacifica for over 20 years.
The Sierra club wanted to shut down Sharp Park Golf Course, the Quarry project and Highway 1 improvements.
 |
| Campbell v. Pacifica School Board |
If you don't think Rich Campbell will delay our progress like Vreeland, Dejarnett and Digre did then think again.
Victor
Spano and Mike ONeill are both great alternatives to Campbell. But only
one can win and we don't want to split the vote or Campbell will win.
Because I feel he has the best chance of winning I am voting for Mike
O'Neill because he got the Chamber of Commerces recommendation and he is
pro-progress.
We
do not need an EPA environmental lawyer on our city council tying
things up for years. Please don't sentence Pacifica to more stagnation
and insolvency.
Vote for Mike O'Neill."
Submitted by Bob Hutchinson
Posted by Kathy Meeh
but Rich Campbell supports development of the old waste water treatment plant on Palmetto. He said so. Mixed use with a library. And a hotel. He said so.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree.
ReplyDeleteSpano and O'Neill are both good, but O'Neill is better name recognition and a better chance of winning.
I hope whoever loses goes for Digre's seat in two years.
Campbell just posted a personal blog on the Patch about the Beach Blvd project, then he took it down. Probably because he knows it might be illegal for him to comment on something before it has gone before the planning commission.
ReplyDeleteCampbell will say anything to get elected. The fact is he's backed by all the enviro groups who have stopped any progress here for years.
Only Mike O'Neill has a chance to beat Campbell. A vote for Spano is really a vote for Campbell. Don't do it! Spano has time to up his name recognition over the next two years and try again. Campbell will derail us. Keep him off council. Vote for Mike O'Neill.
ReplyDeleteGuess somebody forgot to update the online Tribune "Letters to the Editor" as they all date from October 10.
ReplyDeleteCampbell, is a Vreeland clone.
ReplyDeleteO'neil was on the PTA BFD!
You're right Anon 7:07 PM, the Tribune letters-to-the-editor (LTE) section has not been updated on their website since 10/9/12. Eventually it will be though.
ReplyDeleteBob Hutchinson was kind enough to send the LTE for the article directly.
Elaine is out sick
ReplyDeleteKathy, love the photo. Worth a 1000 words.
ReplyDeleteHutch, IMHO, that's really a fine letter. Packed with the important things, but not overheated. Campbell's election rhetoric may fool some, but his resume, which you provide courtesy of the Sierra Club, should remind us all that if it looks like a duck, etc. And, the phrase "city in peril" describes our situation perfectly. Bravo!
ReplyDeleteCampbell claims to be all things to all people. Remind you of anyone who sat on the council recently?
ReplyDeleteScary.
A vote for Spano gets Campbell that much closer. Spano needs some seasoning.
I can't take credit for the title, that was the Trib.
ReplyDelete@ Anon 531, Yesterday I also saw that Rich Campbell posted an article on Pacifica Patch pretty much trying to take credit for the Beach Blvd project. I called him out on it and next thing you know POOF the whole article was gone.
I asked Crista (Patch Editor) what happened and she said Campbell had contacted her to ask that she remove the article.
Here are Campbells own words:
"This morning I posted a brief blog concerning the City's release of the draft environmental impact report for the Beach Boulevard Project. It's an exiciting event, and so had an opinion on it. Although I was not acting as a city planning commissioner or representing the planning commission, if other planning commissioners responded to the post in Pacifica Patch or any other forum then the risk of running afoul of state open meeting requirements is a possibility if a quorum is reached. Though the risk of this happening is remote, I did not want to create even the appearance of impropriety and so asked the editor to take down my blog post just after it went up after learning of the risk this morning. All this said, I still hope Pacificans take the time to review the Draft EIR for the Beach Boulevard Project, which also discusses the proposed new Library."
Rich Campbell does not opposed development! Rich Campbell will ensure that the scope of development is appropriate for our coastal community. His experience as a lawyer working with both developers and the EPA gives him the edge at negotiating. I want him on our side when it comes to planning our amazing community!
ReplyDeleteDear Bob Hutchinson- It would be great to hear what qualities Mike O'Neil has that makes you so passionate about voting for him.
ReplyDeleteTo clarify Rich Campbell is not against the School Board. On the contrary, Rich very much supports our schools! Rich helped to bring about positive change in the lunch room. He worked with the School Board and the Food Provided to make lunches healthier for our children. Changes like removing sugary flavored milks from the menu, replacing whole grains where possible and requiring children to select fruits and vegetable to balance out their meals have been put into place. Thank you Rich for making my child's lunch healthier!
ReplyDeleteIt's not about lunch.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteDear Bob Hutchinson- It would be great to hear what qualities Mike O'Neil has that makes you so passionate about voting for him.
------------------
He's not Rich Campbell
No seriously, Mike O'Neill is a pro progress, pro business candidate that gets the fact that environmental radicals who put frogs above people have held this city back for decades.
Plus the Sierra Club has not endorsed O'Neill :)
"Rich Campbell does not opposed development!"
ReplyDeleteDigre, Lancelle, DeJarnatt and Vreeland didn't oppose development during their campaigns, either. Look where that got us.
Rich Campbell is also endorsed by The San Mateo Central Labor Council, and the Teamsters. I'm having trouble finding information on Mike O'Neil. What professional organizations are endorsing him?
ReplyDeleteI think you're misinformed. I've know Rich for years, and he's not an environmental radical who puts frogs above people. You're actually quite funny. You've got me laughing right now!
ReplyDeleteRich, you are an attorney first of all. You hold a license from the state of California. The state views you as a professional in the subject of law.
ReplyDeleteYou can not wear one cap that says Planning commissioner and another cap that says private citizen. I think as a member of the planning commission you should have reclused your self from answering any questions about a project that you sit on and can possibly vote on.
One previous planning commissioner got his self in trouble by making comments about the quarry and was asked to resign cause of another related incident regarding the quarry.
I know attorney's have a way of justifying all acts and trying to twist and turn out of sticky situations.
Being you are an EPA employee and a hand picked by our last EPA employed council memeber, You should maybe try to distance your self totally from this fast and loose style of city government.
A vote for Spano gets Campbell that much closer. Spano needs some seasoning.
ReplyDeleteWhy is it all the local windbags never run. I never see Ian throw his name in the hat? What about the two from Patch. Sinai and Meeh, obviously have lots of free time.
Everyone wants to whisper in everyone's ear but no one has the stones to run.
At least the people who run put in the effort to try to fix pacifica.
Up until the 2010 Pacifica City Council election, the pro-development candidates for council tended to shoot themselves in the feet and split the vote. That's one of the reasons the hippies were able to control council for 10 years.
ReplyDeleteFixing Pacifica is looking iffier all the time, but it has absolutely no chance if Campbell wins. Vote for Mike O'Neill and let's start moving forward.
ReplyDeleteHey Anonymous@2:47, why don't you get off your a** and run, instead of complaining that others don't run?
ReplyDelete@247 You want more people to run? Really? That explains why you don't understand that a vote for Spano is really a vote for Campbell. For years we've seen how your strategy works. No thanks. Vote for Pacifica. Vote for Mike O'Neill.
ReplyDeleteO'Neil is endorsed by the chamber of realtors, since he is one himself!
ReplyDeleteO'Neill has offered nothing to fix Pacifica. Spano has. O'Neill will be more of the same. Spano will be something new. Vote Spano.
ReplyDelete"Fixing Pacifica is looking iffier all the time, but it has absolutely no chance if Campbell wins." Campbell has that power? Vote for Campbell!
ReplyDeletewho ran for the planning commission when Campbell got elected? what did he say to get on the planning commission?
ReplyDeleteanon240, make no mistake Campbell knows what he is doing and just does not care. Brown Act is a joke to guys like him.
ReplyDelete@324 So O'Neill has the confidence and support of his peers? This is a problem for you? Get over it because Mike O'Neill has earned the confidence and support of many Pacificans for his longtime public service. His contributions to Pacifica really raise the bar in this election.
ReplyDeleteanon 3:50 you don't run for election to the planning commission, you're appointed by the council. The fact that I even have to say this shows the level of informed discussion we're having here. if you didn't know that you're not elected to the planning commission, then please vote for nobody.
ReplyDeleteRich Campbell might of removed his old sewer plant/libray article for another purely politial reason. He was gushing about a project he did nothing to advance. He did not advocate any part of it other than reading staff reports at planning commission. He never attended a library foundation meeting for example, and the libray was the real energizer for this site.
ReplyDeleteFinally, if the planning commissioners respond to a planning matter in public and Campbell is worried about, that proves none of them understand open government law and the District Atty citing them for the prior violation has had no teachable effect.
@334 Knowledge is power and Campbell got his as an EPA insider, a lawyer and a Pacifica Planning Commissioner. There's no match for that kind of a Professional Enviro on this or the soon-to-be council even if he's in the minority. He'll find a way to delay and obstruct any project that doesn't meet his criteria for being appropriate. And, he'll be a rallying point for every enviro and anti-growther in town. We don't need to give that bunch anything to work with.
ReplyDeleteDon't be fooled, don't split the vote. O'Neill on November 6th!
The scary thing with Campbell is that others on council may be swayed by him. Probably not Stone or Vellone, if she makes it. Digre will be with him. Nihart has always had a lot of backing from no-growthers and so does Ervin. Politicians that want to stay in office have to take care of their backers now and then. Just saying...We cannot afford to let Cambell win.
ReplyDelete@350 he said Jimmie you the man.
ReplyDeleteI really really like Victor Spano. But we have to go with the one that can beat Campbell.
ReplyDeleteRich Campbell is a good guy, he really cares. The problem is that he cares about the environment a little too much. And even if he is for some development, all his backers will expect him to allow every delay on every project.
It is not a coincidence that Rich Campbell is being backed by every environmental group that has protested every project in Pacifica for 20 years. They know he is their man.
Just so you know it too.
anon359 that's all we need. an EPA lawyer with a spotty relationship with the Brown Act on a council that finds transparency and communication so challenging they need gadgets and consultants to explain it all to them. i'm sure campbell will fit right in.
ReplyDeleteHere is a list of endorsements for Mike O'Neill.
ReplyDeletewww.mikeforpacifica.com/list-of-endorsers.html
I also plan to vote for Mike, along with Susan Vellone and Mary Ann Nihart.
If you liked Vreeland you'll love Campbell.
ReplyDeleteDon't be fooled and don't let the phony enviros make fools out of you. A split vote is a win for Vreeland's mini-me.
Vote O'Neil only for the 2 year term.
"Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteanon 3:50 you don't run for election to the planning commission, you're appointed by the council. The fact that I even have to say this shows the level of informed discussion we're having here. if you didn't know that you're not elected to the planning commission, then please vote for nobody."
city council appoints planning commissioners by a vote. one could consider voting a form of election. i know who also applied for the planning commission at th same time as campbell.
sure 649 You're right, it is like a mini-election with just 5 people voting.
ReplyDeleteThe Sierra Club supports Rich Campbell even though he is for keeping the Sharp Park Golf Course. He is also supported by the labor unions. They do not throw their weight behind people that are anti development. He can unify the environmentalists and the pro development sector of this town and get something done, something worthwhile. Let's build the character of the town along with the tax base.
ReplyDeleteNow, who would that be?
ReplyDeleteI can't believe that the Labor Council endorsed Campbell.
ReplyDeleteIt's obvious that they are not doing their homework before endorsements.Labor should have checked Campbell's voting record before they gave him cash.
No wonder why we have problems in our community.
Vreeland got endorsed by the Labor Council, SAMCAR, Sierra Club . . . even as they took opposing positions on Measure L. What does that tell you about mini-vree? he will say what he thinks you want to hear to get support. that is not progress.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if, in his unbridled enthusiasm for the Beach Boulevard project, Rich Campbell will take a moment to acknowledge the group of people who put a halt to the Jim Vreeland Honorary City Hall by the Seas . . .
ReplyDeleteAnon744. Enlighten us on his voting record.
ReplyDeleteO'Neil's voting record: he approved the storage units on Palmetto and said they were "beautiful." O'Neil's vision for Pacifica's future: storage units.
ReplyDeleteIt's easy to make false accusations when you post anonymously.
ReplyDelete@ Anon 900, I'd love to see storage units in the quarry just to piss off Loeb, Bray, Boenher and the rest of the twirling stoned organic twig eating gray haired jobless hippies.
ReplyDeleteStorage units in the quarry would piss-off everybody. Storage units and fireworks stands are about the only things that get approved around here.
ReplyDeleteHey, those storage units on Palmetto are about the best looking thing on Palmetto. What a dump!
ReplyDeleteObviously you people do not understand zoning. Neither does city hall. Wrecking yards, trailer court, RV park which is the only money maker on the street, self storage.
ReplyDeleteI see we have a Keri, post!
At one time it was studied if Pacifica, should take out the whole area from Beach blvd to Palmetto and redevelop it.Right around the right time that BART was buying up the area in Daly City for the station. At one time Daly City studied buying up everything to Mission.
ReplyDeleteThose ideas quickly fell apart.
Campbell, is an attorney. Posting it and taking it down was a massive brain fart.
ReplyDeleteI expect this buffoonery from Sue and Pete but not an attorney.
Oh wait lots of attorney's around Pacifica, trying to make policy!
Nope that wasn't me! I would never call Pacifica a dump! I love Pacifica! Although whoever wrote that was correct. Storage units are not a good use of coastal lands. Rich Campbell will work to expedite updating our general plan to entice the businesses of character to move in. (I thought there were rules on this blog for others not to attack each other. Moderator, are you doing your job???)
ReplyDeleteWhat is it you consider to be a personal attack, Keri?
ReplyDeleteSteve Sinai said...
ReplyDelete"What is it you consider to be a personal attack, Keri?"
How about this?
"I'd love to see storage units in the quarry just to piss off Loeb, Bray, Boenher and the rest of the twirling stoned organic twig eating gray haired jobless hippies."
That was a pretty diffuse attack, and so over-the-top that I figure people won't take it seriously.
ReplyDeleteI'm mostly concerned about personal attacks intended to drive away blog participants.
You ought to see the comments that end up in the spam folder.