Friday, June 19, 2015

City Council meeting, Monday, June 22, 2015

Attend in person, 2212 Beach Boulevard, 2nd floor.  Or, view on local television or live feed Pacificcoast.TV, (formerly  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.

Closed Session, 5:30 p.m.  
1).   Government code 54956.9 : CA Code 54956.9 (d) (1), existing litigation" Pacificans for a Scenic Coast, Pacificans for Highway 1 Alternatives, Center for Biological Diversity v. Federal Highway Administration et. al. (United States District Court Case 3:15-cv 02090.
2).   Government code 54956.9 : CA Code 54956.9 (b), significant exposure to anticipated litigation, potential cases, two.

Open Session, 7:00 p.m., call to order, roll call, salute to the Flag, any Closed Session report. 
Consent Calendar (pass through approval)
1.    Approval of  Minutes, 6/4/15.
2.    Disbursements Fiscal Year 2014/15, 5/7/15 -6/4/15.
3.    Resolution for State of CA to reimburse the Child Care Division program closure due to emergency winter storm closure, 12/11/14. Report/Resolution.
4.    Agreement with Pacifica School District for child care rental space services, 2015-16 school year, $142,272.  Report, Extended Day Care contract.
5.    Resolution establishing FY 2015-16 appropriation limit, State of CA, Article X11B. The Proposition 111 appropriation of revenues formula indicates our city 62%, well below the maximum limit.  a) Report, Resolution,  b) Appropriation limits, 2015-16.
 6.    Resolution of Intention to continue the Business Improvement District (BID) Program, and  levy assessments, FY 2015-16. Report, Resolution,  Hotel/BID Annual Report.
7.    Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, Fiscal Year 2013-14. Final reports, description,  a)  CAFR, b)  Single Audit, c)  Measure A, d)  Management Report.
8.    Agreement amendment with Platinum Consulting and Investigations for Labor negotiation services, 5/1/15 - 12/31/15, $30,000, (agreement terms not to exceed $54,900). 
Special presentations - Proclamation:  Parks, Beaches & Recreation month.

Public hearings
9.   Appeal Planning Commission approval of four (4) detached studio apartments, vacant lot in the 4000 block of Palmetto Avenue (APN: 009-402-270)Report, pdf pages 11. For attachments "a" through "s" see the interactive link to the City Council Agenda, above. 
10.  Resolution adopting the 2015-20 Capital Improvement Program.  Report, Resolution, a) Capital Improvement Program (CIP), 2015-20, pdf pages 196.
11.  Adopt Annual Operating Budget. Report/Resolution.  a)  2015-16 Operating Budget, pdf pages 110.  b) 2015-16 Operating Budget Report, copy of City Council minutes, 6/30/03: City inter-fund loans, $3,253,700, pdf pages 3.  

City Council Communications, Oral Communications from the public 
12.  Discuss, provide direction regarding the North County, San Mateo Local Area Formation Commission's (LAFCo) draft analysis to 1) merge merging City water services with North Coast County Water District (NCCWD) and 2) reduce the City's permanent open space sphere of influence in boundary areas south and south east of the City, (provide comments by 6/29/15, meeting 7/15/15).  Report,  a) San Mateo LAFCo Memo; Draft Municipal Service Review and Sphere Update for the North County Cities and Special Districts, pdf pages 241.  Pacifica from page 183. Recommended Municipal Service Review (MRS), BCCWD determinations from page 210.  
Adjourn.       Note photograph from National Real Estate Post. 

Posted by Kathy Meeh


How to balance a checkbook with no money said...

The new way the city does this check ledger is 100% bullshit. We see the check amount and to who it is paid, but the why is missing?

Another way to hide stuff from the taxpayers!

Anonymous said...

758 Odd change in light of the audit results? Quick scan of Item 7 Single Audit says the auditors found significant deficiencies in the city's financial reporting and controls. The Audit refers repeatedly to the potential for misappropriation of funds due to sloppy methods. The city accepts each finding and cites short staffing as the excuse and states they are now fully staffed. Yeah, folks, nothing to see here, let's just move along, this is Pacifica!

Anonymous said...

if "discrepancies", "deficiencies" or "Easter bunny got it" run back to 2003..will prior auditors re-state audits??

Anonymous said...

1237 Of course not. And it would be foolish to limit our concern to an improperly documented inter-fund loan in 2003 for some 2 million when this audit describes very recent and very significant deficiencies in this city's financial controls. It would be foolish, but fools have fans. Nothing will come of any of this because the city wants nothing to come of it, inter-fund loans keep this city going, the sloppy bookkeeping was due to a shortage of sloppy bookkeepers, and hey kids, let's move forward! Now, who gets the next award?

The Rents Too Damned High said...

Why are the Pacifica taxpayers paying for Tinfow's Ocean View Apartment above Eureka Square?? She has zero intention of moving here and she can't come in early leave late to miss the traffic. She can't even take Bart in and work on the Bart Train. Little Ms Princess, has to spend more taxpayer money!! You have an assistant city manager who probably does 80% of your work. Your making $200,000 pay your own damned rent!!

Kathy Meeh said...

940, General Manager Lorie Tinfow has put together the team that may help save this City. The contract is here, click the printout and view. Annual salary $190,000, monthly relocation allowance $2,000.
And as expected, according to you, she has chosen to live with a view and the sound of the ocean. Great location!

Kathy Meeh said...

940 approximately, regarding City Agenda Item 2, City disbursements: Allowed employee expenses incurred in the course of doing one's job are not the same as employee bonuses. And these expense ledger payments are not identified as "bonuses", rather they are identified as "expenses".
You may have a point however, that it might be better for the City to provide better disbursement detail on their ledger.

Sorry I inadvertently deleted your second comment referred to above, (hit delete in error).