Sunday, March 24, 2013

City Council meeting Monday, March 25, 2013


Attend in person, 2212 Beach Boulevard, 2nd floor.  Or, view on local channel 26, also live internet feed, pct26.com.  The meeting begins at 7pm, or shortly there following.  City council updates and archives are available on the City website.

City Council Agenda, 3/25/13.  


Posted by Kathy Meeh

59 comments:

Eddie Nero said...

I think I may go down and see the hippies and noobees cry and piss and moan about highway 1.

Anonymous said...

Ed, whatever floats your boat.

Anonymous said...

Karen,is back stuck on saying

Ummmmmmm

Anonymous said...

could it be that Len and Maryanne are the cats that have her tongue?

Anonymous said...

Has the abandon ship order been given? Nihart looks like she's wearing a life-jacket.

Steve Sinai said...

Boy, you can tell the Nobies were given talking points. They all want the Planning Commission, and not City Council, to conduct a hearing on the Calera Parkway project before the final ERA is published.

Anonymous said...

Duh, that's their planning commission. Council should of canned them already!

Anonymous said...

@727 that's funny. she does seem to be under someone's influence.

Steve Sinai said...

Wow, what a mess. It looked like Sue was going to get her meeting, but she couldn't come up with a motion that anyone else could understand, so nobody seconded it.

Apparently, this will be continued at the next council meeting.

Anonymous said...

It'll all be litigated for years and years and years. CA Coastal Commission vs. Caltrans, Friends of the Frogs, whatev. Pathetica will be the tin cans tied to the bumper on this roadtrip.

Kathy Meeh said...

Item 7, "no action". Looks like we may have the city council we need for this city to move forward. 4 City Council members rock!

Steve Sinai said...

The headline for that council meeting ought to be, "Hippies shoot themselves in the foot."

Sue Digre did mention InSync as a possible alternative to highway widening. (She deserves points for doing some research.)

After a quick glance at the website, it looks interesting, but having worked on high-tech engineering projects for 30 years now, I know these things tend to be over-hyped at first. She's trying to arrange a demo in early April.

Mary Ann said she was talking to some Caltrans engineers about InSync, and they mentioned potential problems with salt corrosion. I believe Pacifica Net had the same problems with their equipment, which caused their service to deteriorate to the point that I and many others ended up dropping it.

Anonymous said...

Oh brother! Big turnout of speakers wanting more input to council on highway widening before the final EIR is issued. Looked like Nihart and O'Neill would have gone along with holding another public meeting but balked at Digre's too wide-open format. O'Neill made a motion, Digre seconded and then withdrew her second because O'Neill included a Caltrans slide show. Then Digre made a couple motions. Nihart seconded the first one and then withdrew her second. Digre's second motion died. Ervin would have followed Nihart's vote so Digre came very close to getting her meeting by 4 to 1. Grisly meeting. Grisly.

Anonymous said...

It almost went the other way. If Sue hadn't withdrawn her second of O'Neill's motion because she didn't like the Caltrans Power Point part of it, she'd have had her public meeting.

She even got a second shot when Maryann seconded the motion Sue made but it looked like then Maryann didn't like the vagueness of the whole thing so she withdrew her second. It should be over but you know it isn't.

Kathy Meeh said...

Item 7, initially Mayor Pro Tem Nihart did "second" the motion.

But in attempts to make the motion, Councilmember Digre stated the meeting would be an open session or forum for the purpose of asking the community how they feel about a highway through Pacifica. She wanted to facilitate the meeting or forum through professional mediation leading to conflict resolution.

FMV, this is the reason Mayor Pro Tem Nihart withdrew her "second", and no other councilmember would "second". The motion failed.

Anonymous said...

Mayor Len proved once again last night the hippies and noobes own him and council.

They were cheering and clapping and no one was asked to leave.

Len, you are a sellout like the rest of them.

Anonymous said...

Pay special attention to what happens in court with Stockton in the next couple days.

Pacifica, will be doing the same thing within 2 years!

Anonymous said...

Mediators aren't free. Could be they're a little touchy about adding to that 3.6 million paid to consultants or Nihart rejects the idea of mediation on this issue. Unbelievable meeting even for Pathetica.
Entertaining, but IMHO the real battle will take place in court among the agencies.

Anonymous said...

Conflict Resolution Consultants?
Are these nut jobs kidding?
This isn't a freakin therapy session it's a vote on the future direction of Pacifica.
We will all need tharapists if we swallow any more baloney served up by the NOBIES. These guys have only one strategy and they are playing it over and over again.
DELAY.....DELAY...... DELAY......
It's worked very well for them for decades. Stop feeding this insanity.

Anonymous said...

Delay? Thirty years for Devil's Slide. Start counting from the final EIR. Oh well, now we know what the next election campaigns will be all about. Aren't we all so over being insolvent?

todd bray said...

The sad thing is the council is acting more like school children wanting to earn a A from their teacher, (in this case senior staff).

I can't fathom what sort of answers council expect in the FEIR if after that, and only after that the project will go into a 2 year design phase.

Sorry, but our council just want to make happy with staff. The only passion I've seen in the last few years is a passion to tax our property and purchases to feed senior staff.

Kudo's to Mike O'Niell though. His original motion was just fine. Unfortunately Rhodes has to torpedo it. All you Yessie posters are right to be upset with our grade school council.

Anonymous said...

People from the Chamber of Commerce were the only ones that made sense last night.

Anonymous said...

Todd you haven't been paying attention. Council is doing exactly what we elected them to do, Carry out the will of the majority of the people. They saw the tromping Campbell (your enviro candidate) got in the last election. The people have spoken. They have had enough of the gang of no. O'Neill got a clear mandate. The hippies don't control council anymore.

Anonymous said...

Right you are 1048! Senior staff controls council. Have you been paying attention? You saw it last night with the way the various motions went. Did you also see that Digre very nearly got her public meeting? She fumbled the crafting of her motion and got none of the usual help from staff in sorting it out, but it sure sounded like she had enough votes. O'Neill and Nihart both said they had no problem with another public meeting. Ervin ummed a lot but she will follow Nihart.
Your eagerness to declare this council as somehow anti-enviro is pure denial. Scratch the surface and you got 3.5 to 4 hippies who got elected with enviro votes and endorsements. They're not so eager to choose sides.

Chris Porter said...

Todd, you have such a ax to grind with Steve Rhodes. Council had the right to do whatever they wanted to do last night. I heard comments last night that all questions sent regarding the DEIR would be answered in the FEIR. I know John Curtiss sent in pages of handwritten comments on legal size yellow pads because he showed them to me so you think you would have better questions than John Curtiss? Let's keep the process moving so the people of Pacifica, like me, who travel this roadway on a daily basis have some relief from the commute traffic. Wait until the Easter vacation is over and we start to get the true impact of the additional tunnel commute traffic.

Steve Sinai said...

It was my sense that only Digre wanted the meeting, while the attitude of Ervin, Nihart and O'Neill was "whatever, but it won't change anything." Len didn't want to hold the meeting.

It was Digre's responsibility to think about what she was proposing, and then make a motion that others could understand. She also hadn't thought about the costs involved. Staff and the other councilmembers tried to figure out what she wanted, but they couldn't.

Anonymous said...

Last night's meeting was hardly a resounding endorsement or rejection of anything. Council and their oh whatever attitude almost fell in front of the bus. Luck, pure dumb luck, is all that stopped us from going through more meetings. Hard to predict where this brilliant strategy will take us next. Probably doesn't matter what council does because Pacifica doesn't even control the entire project area. The real battle will be waged between CA Coastal Commission and Caltrans for many years with all of us still stuck in traffic and getting older. Ah, living on the coast, you gotta love it.

todd bray said...

Chris, Steve... just what answers are expected in the FEIR. Since council nor staff submitted and questions or comments on the DEIR, what sort of things do they need answered? As far as I can tell council has no questions of the DEIR requiring an answer or response in a FEIR.

Steve Sinai said...

I have no idea what you just tried to say, Todd.

Anonymous said...

Todd's point is clear to me. The City Council submitted no comments on the DEIR. They have no questions. Since they have no comments or questions, the FEIR will not respond to their comments or answer any questions they have. The Pacifica City Council will play no role in the FEIR or in deciding what the project will be, whether it will be changed in any way, or whether any alternatives will be considered in more depth. They have taken themselves out of the process. They have failed to lead and have failed the citizens who elected them.

Steve Sinai said...

So what? The city was involved in meetings with Caltrans and the San Mateo County Transportation Authority. These are the same meetings where Todd said there was proof of some kind of conspiracy going on.

If the city could ask questions directly to the people who were responsible for the EIRs, why waste time writing up comments and questions in response to a DEIR?

Anyway, the city has ultimate veto authority over the project. If it doesn't like it, it can refuse to ask for funding.

Anonymous said...

There's only a small group of people opposing the widening. The same group that's against everything. Thank God council didn't let them succeed in stalling yet another project. Let them try and get this on the ballot. I doubt they can get 4000 signatures especially when pro highway widening will be right along side of them.

Anonymous said...

Focus on the big picture…
The radical NIMBYs request was rejected! O’Neill and Nihart almost got sucked in- but they didn’t.

The council of the past (Vreland, DeJarnett, Digre, Lancel) would have taken 5 minutes to approve Digre’s “Delay Tactic”.

Show your support for the new council- we need them to keep voting against the NIMBYs

Steve Sinai said...

They didn't outright reject it. Nobody could figure out what Sue wanted, and they gave up in trying to accommodate her.

Maybe with a few weeks to think about it, the four sane council members will realize what a waste of time and money it is simply to hold a bitch session that ultimately means nothing.

Anonymous said...

The problem is the city can now only make an up or down vote on the Caltrans widening project or nothing. The Council has given up any possibility to influence the specific project plan or further consideration of alternatives that could be implemented sooner. Instead we will have to wait years for the design to get through the approval process, then more years of construction. Meanwhile, we could have safety improvements and congestion reduction right away if the Council insisted that alternatives be considered. They have blown that opportunity.

Chris Fogel said...

Anyway, the city has ultimate veto authority over the project. If it doesn't like it, it can refuse to ask for funding.

Right. And since the city can kill the project with a simple up-or-down vote by council, I'm pretty sure Caltrans would take the City's call and put some effort into tweaking the DEIR in order to get put a FEIR on the table that we would agree to push forward for funding.

I hope we can put personal preferences about the project aside for a moment and talk purely about the process:

It has always struck me as very strange that the City been so passive about their role in all this. You would think that city leaders would be a tad more... involved... with a $50 million project that has significant impacts and will run straight through the heart of the city. Doesn't that silence strike you as odd, no matter what your thoughts are on congestion?

Instead, it appears the City is quite content to let outside agencies run the entire show and make all the decisions.

Don't our representatives have a duty to the City's citizens to represent them in some fashion during all this? We currently have no representation from the City on behalf of the public -- for the current widening plan, alternatives, synchronization... whatever your preference is for this project -- the City has not been representing anyone in this process.. because it has never bothered to ask!

The paralysis exhibited on Monday night came about as it slowly dawned upon Council that -- oh crap! -- it's too late for us to act as the public's representatives and provide any meaningful input into the direction of the Caltrans project.

If the City wants to sit on its hands and do nothing because it supports Caltrans' vision it should say so!

Anonymous said...

Now, that's a strategy! Council stands on the sidelines so it all comes down to that one moment and that one decision. Brilliant! Council's one moment in the glare of the spotlight will be "Do we or don't we ask for funding"?

This council will probably ask for funding, but what are the odds everyone else with an objection, San Mateo coast residents and concerned environmental organizations, will stand on the sidelines and allow themselves to be muzzled and shut out of the decision making and planning? We need only look at the decades-long, litigious saga of the new tunnels, to see the future of highway widening in Pacifica.

But kudos, really, to council and particularly staff for so deftly managing to manipulate this project along for mighty Caltrans. As pawns, you have found your evolutionary niche.

Anonymous said...

We have no representation on highway widening and haven't had all along. Council's passivity is a strategy. Self-preservation, pure and simple. They'd love it if everyone thought they/we are powerless before the Mighty Caltrans. And so far the ruse has worked. Fortunately, there are people who will stand up to Caltrans--they've done it before. As usual, none with that kind of backbone on this council or staff. That's ok. This will be a hell of an election issue in 2014 and 2016.

Anonymous said...


It has always struck me as very strange that the City been so passive about their role in all this

Council doesn't want to piss off the hippies and nobbe base.

Steve Sinai said...

It was always my impression that City Hall was in favor of the widening, so I don't know why people are thinking council and staff should have been challenging Caltrans on everything along the way.

Caltrans and SMCTA held public hearings where people were asked for their input. What kind of additional input could City Hall have provided beyond that?

Caltrans did look at the alternatives suggested by those opposed to the widening, and found them to be unworkable or too expensive.

There has to be a drop-dead date on input for these kinds of engineering projects. Otherwise, nothing would ever get done.

Anonymous said...

We'll all be dead before that road is widened. It'll become the battleground for everyone opposed to growth on the SMC coast because they see it, and so does Caltrans, as an essential link to growth on the coast. It isn't about Pacifica and it isn't to benefit Pacifica.

Anonymous said...

Of course city hall is in favor. That's perfectly clear in their performance. Perfectly clear also to all the hippies and enviros who endorsed and voted for Nihart, O'Neill and Ervin in that kumbaya spirit. This single issue will recharge the enviro batteries real good.

Anonymous said...

The Highway 1 bridge over Pedro Creek and the highway widening going thru Pacifica should have been done the day before the tunnel opened.

This shows everyone how incompetant our city hall is.

Chris Fogel said...

We'll all be dead before that road is widened. It'll become the battleground for everyone opposed to growth on the SMC coast because they see it, and so does Caltrans, as an essential link to growth on the coast.

I expect that the meetings the City of Pacifica will hold after the FEIR and prior to applying (or not) for the funding will be extremely ugly.

But they'll be ugly in large part because Council has failed to hold such meetings when it was less than an "all or nothing" affair.

Through inaction, Council has restricted its input to a YES/NO vote on Caltrans' vision and the groups who find themselves on the short end of that vote -- whoever they are -- will be angry, again in large part because Council never bothered to take the community's pulse earlier in the process (or in the case of Monday night, were incapable of doing it).

Chris Fogel said...

The Highway 1 bridge over Pedro Creek and the highway widening going thru Pacifica should have been done the day before the tunnel opened.

I agree with you about the San Pedro Creek Bridge project. That is going to be a traffic nightmare when that project gets underway -- while the bridge is being replaced, Highway 1 traffic is going to be re-routed along the frontage road that runs in front of Fresh & Easy.

Kathy Meeh said...

Well, I don't agree with you on this one Chris, 2:02 PM.

With regard to Highway 1 widening, there were plenty of SMCTA/Cal Trans meetings, including initial planning 5+ years ago, the alternative plan design considerations, the DEIR meeting. These were all public forums, plus oral and written citizen input.

It appears the "process" is working. And it seems everything else is a dodge, obstruction, and a delay.

The need to fix the highway 1 traffic bottleneck in Pacifica is an old, outstanding regional issue. The benefit is to Pacificans, and to our coastal neighbors to the south. We all share the road.

Anonymous said...

This will be settled in the courts just like the tunnel was. 30 years?
Dirt naps for most of us by then or the only thing we'll be driving is one of those Lark Scooters.

Anonymous said...

Council needs to learn a new trick. Playing dead has its limits.

Little Rascal said...

I'm a little rascal on my Little Rascal.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, and you probably look like Alfalfa.

todd bray said...

Chris Fogel, you need to come by and copy the CD with the PDT minutes. You will have a much better understanding of the way the process has been affected, on purpose, to facilitate the project being built.

The biggest thing is the way our staff and council have let the CEQA process just walk on by. I agree that if I were Caltrans I would insist on comments from the city just as a basic CYA move. However the Caltrans staffers are largely ESL and have no affinity for the public or other governmental agency's like our city council.

Way back when the determination was made at the district 4 office to widen the highway to increase capacity. It's all in the PDT minutes.

Anonymous said...

Caltrans and friends know that this widening just moves the bottle-neck to Linda Mar so guess where the next widening will be?

This is not really about alleviating traffic congestion in Pacifica. It's about opening up the coast to growth. Lots of opposition and big money against that.

These leap-frog projects keep Caltrans and their subs and vendors in business. And of course our realtor friends just love them. Big money on the line.

Dopey little Pacifica and its irresponsible, heinously negligent council is just the background drivers will zip through on the way to someplace else. Caltrans is a town-killer and we are squarely in their sights.

Anonymous said...

Another Pacifica Business closed in the last month

JAC Restaurant in Fairmont. Gone!

Anonymous said...

another will open in the never ending cycle of small business

if you enjoy one then go often and tell all your friends

Anonymous said...

These crazy NIMBYs with their Caltrans conspiracy theories are even kookier than the tea part nutjobs.

Anonymous said...

NIMBY'S or NOBIES, same difference. They had their chance at bat. They hit into a triple play and blew our city right into bankruptcy. They are a smug, relatively well organized and loud minority. Unfortunately they will never go away but they will die off.

Anonymous said...

Looking at the ages of most of the speakers Monday night, Nimby or Yessie, and likely most of the posters on here, they'll all be dead before that road is widened.

Anonymous said...

558 Your kind of naivete is so rare. See it here now and then and it never fails to make me smile.

Anonymous said...

Enlighten us, 10:48. Other than outlandish (and frankly nonsensical) accusations, do you have even a shred of proof about this massive Caltrans conspiracy?