Thursday, July 30, 2015

Proposed Civic Center requires a city tax, South San Francisco

The Daily Journal/Austin Walsh, 7/24/15.  "South City tax heads to ballot: Officials approve putting half-cent sales tax to voters in fall election."

Image result for South San Francisco
South San Francisco improving livability of their city.
"South San Francisco residents will be asked to approve a half-cent sales tax increase to drum up funds to pay for the construction of a new civic center, after the City Council voted unanimously Wednesday to place it on the November ballot.

The revenue, which is estimated to generate roughly $210 million over a 30-year life span of the tax, is proposed to pay toward building new police and fire stations, as well as a library and recreation center, plus maintenance of existing infrastructure.  ....  “The people of South San Francisco have historically recognized the needs in the community,” said City Manager Mark Futrell. “I believe they will understand the needs and take care of these community priorities.”   Read article.

Related -  San Diego Free Press, 4/27/15. "How communities can benefit from private development in California".  The poster-child for the interaction between people and projects is South San Francisco...  The city underwent a 2-year long planning process to develop the downtown area over 20 years within half-mile of the CalTrain station. They proposed several public plazas, 1,400 residential units and 800,000 square feet of commercial space with retail and services within walking distance. .... The downtown South Francisco plan is just the foundational statement of principles, and implementation of community benefits is key to its success. One example of implementation is the adoption of an incentive zoning program with a menu of public benefits."   

Note graphic from the City of City of South San Francisco Downtown Station Area Specific Plan, also linked in the related article above. 

Posted by Kathy Meeh


Tom Clifford said...

Until the City of Pacifica can tell it's residents were the $4.75 million went and how Staff & Council are going to keep it from happening again, no tax has a snow balls change in hell of passing.

Anonymous said...

How ugly is the truth if this council is willing to look like idiots, or much worse, rather than tell the truth? Nearly two years after that dramatic "reveal" we still have no satisfactory explanation. Council hired a City Manager known for her ability to translate complex financial info into easy-to-understand terms. She reports to council. Why haven't they allowed her to explain the 4.75 million? Again, how ugly is the truth?

The passage of time has always been the politicians' best friend. Key dates pass unnoticed, records disappear, interest fades. Still, it's 4.75 million dollars of taxpayers' money. How ugly is the truth?

mike bell said...

I am 100% in agreement on this missing $4.75 million.
No accounting = a firm NO vote on any new tax for any reason.

Anonymous said...

No accounting this late in the game should mean an investigation by the State Controller's Office. It's 4.75 million dollars, maybe more, who knows? City Council Members, if any of you don't agree with this cover-up, you can ask for a real investigation. Got backbone?

Ask City Hall said...

Hi everyone. Pacifica wouldn't be such a wonderful town without its many wonderful citizens. And we value your wonderful input.

This month we ask you:

Where do you think happened to the missing $4.75 million?

We ask because we don't know!

We can't wait to hear your wonderful suggestions.

Wonderfully yours,

Yet Another New Administrative Hire

Anonymous said...

Laurie Tinfow already addressed the issue, nothing to see here, all of you move along.

Me thinks, they found something really bad and tried to cover it up.

She came to Pacifica with scandal and she is going to stir up another one.

Kathy Meeh said...

416, to be clear again, Lorie Tinfow was not complicit in a Walnut Creek scandal, which involved firing a seasonal employee. She followed city protocol.
Such employee hiring and firing decisions were made by the General Manager of that city. In Walnut Creek, Lorie Tinfow was the city Assistant Manager.

A nice article about Lorie Tinfow's expertise was submitted to this blog by Councilmember Mike O'Neill, 11/9/13, here. Also, the City Council meeting, 9/9/13, when Lorie Tinfow was hired is here. Her resume is included.

Meantime 416, "repeating the same dumb thing over and over is the definition of stupid". (Albert Einstein may also have said that, but if he were alive today he might say, "try Google".

Anonymous said...

She knew about felony molestation but didn't notify the police.

Kathy, and your ok with that. Read the full report from the district attorney.

Anonymous said...

416 Lorie Tinfow did nothing wrong in that Walnut Creek mess. It is nice of her to handle council's little announcement of their missing 4 million which btw is now nearly 5 million, til we hear more. What's a new city manager for, if not to air out the dirty laundry hidden for years? Hidden in plain sight. The smarter bears knew. Bet on it! The turn-over in city managers was the perfect opportunity to come clean. And that's not to say that Ms. Tinfow didn't give council a big fat shove in the right direction. Self-preservation. The lack of a satisfactory explanation about the money is council's decision. The CM could do it if they wanted it done. They don't.

Anonymous said...

715 wasn't she one of the three who were exonerated?

Anonymous said...


Read the report. She knew about the child molestation and did not call in law enforcement.

A lie of omission is still a lie.

Kathy Meeh said...

755, zero wrongdoing, moot issue. Time to move on now.

And this is the modern era, what you provided at 715 was a Contra Costa Times, 7/10/13 newspaper article, "Walnut Creek city manager knew of Lesher Center misconduct, report clears employees." (Again, Lorie Tinfow then was part of the "employees" category, the Assistant City Manager, not the City Manager.)

Sometime back (probably sometime in late 2013), we had a comprehensive blog conversation about this, links to the "Report" (with page numbers, paragraphs, etc.) were provided.
As I recall, protocol was followed, a staff meeting was called by Lorie Tinfow to discuss the issue, with reporting to the City Manager. Nothing significant, other than moving the information forward.

Anonymous said...


Are you on Tinfow's payroll?

Kathy Meeh said...

1016, no I'm on a quest to rid the world of slimy, innuendo, comments which are bogus, not fact.
At 755 didn't you say, "a lie of omission is still a lie"? Welcome to your world.

Anonymous said...


She left Walnut Creek, as did the previous City Manager?

Walnut Creek to Pacifica is a couple steps down!

George Costanza said...

It's not a lie, if you really believe it's not a lie.

Kathy Meeh said...

1049, no. Lorie Tinfow is City Manager (not Assistant City Manager) in Pacifica. That's a step up. Kudos to her, and to our 2013 City Council for hiring her!

Meantime, Tinfow has hired a seasoned management team (Assistant City Manager (a CPA); and, an Economic Development Manager. That's needed City management structure, hopefully leading to City survival.

1050, against scientific findings, some people believe the world is 10,000 years old. Believe it or not, that's still a lie, (hence delusional).

Anonymous said...

Kathy you said General Manager. Looks like we both goofed:

Lorie D. Tinfow
City Manager

Lorie D. TinfowThe city manager is the city's chief executive and is responsible to the city council for the proper and efficient management of all municipal activities. The city manager advises the council on the city's planning and financial needs, as well as other municipal matters, implements all laws and ordinances, manages city facilities, prepares and manages the budget, carries out the city's business and administers the policies of the council. The city manager directs and coordinates the various departments and municipal services through appointed department directors who directly supervise and administer the various staff and operational elements of the city.

Kathy Meeh said...

232, "we both goofed". For that reason, I removed both our prior comments, (mine was corrected and replaced at 226). It's Saturday, we both get a pass.

Meantime, your 232 City Manager range of duties description is both welcome and perfect!

Anonymous said...


I cut and pasted it from the city website

Anonymous said...

Quite a few city employees left Walnut Creek in the aftermath of an incident centering on how the city handled a city employee charged with molesting a minor. The departures may look suspicious but really aren't unusual. Such investigations are hard on camaraderie and working relationships whether or not someone did something wrong. Then, again, maybe she simply wanted to take the next career step to city manager. Not getting any younger. Easy to be a Monday-morning quarterback and find fault, but in the situation she actually faced and with what she knew and when she knew it, she did nothing wrong. That was the official finding. Can't ask for more than that unless your purpose is innuendo and character assassination with a big scoop of ignorance on top.

Anonymous said...


So if you looked out your window and a child was being molested or beaten you would look the other way right?

Going from assistant city manager in Walnut Creek, to city manager in Pacifica is still a step down. If you don't believe me drive around Walnut Creek, and then drive around Pacifica.