Blogmaster's note: Someone suggested I post the following, which I noticed is also on pacifica.city, so I'll give my buddy Dan Stegnik credit.
**********************
Average Pacifica Homeowner will Pay $2790 for New Library Plan, Median Home Buyer this Month will Pay $5451.00
We asked San Mateo County what the average home in Pacifica was assessed at and the answer for 2015 was $403,044.
That means the average homeowner in Pacifica would pay approximately $2790 over thirty years under the proposed Library general obligation bond plan.
It's likely 6% more due to the 2016 turnover but for now we'll keep it simple.
Homeowner costs will be significantly higher for homes with more valuable assessments and the median new homeowner will be asked to vote to tax themselves an additional $5451.00 each over the likely thirty year lifespan of the bond.
**********************
Blogmaster's note part II: I happen to think people care more about yearly costs rather than the total costs over 30 years. Hardly anyone stays in their house that long. Credit Sesame says people are living in their homes for an average of 9 years now.
Multiply the proposed $23 per $100K of assessed value to get your yearly rate. There's no concrete proposal yet, and it may be the case that certain people, like seniors, will be exempt from the tax. Or maybe not.
I took the survey that tried to gauge peoples' opinions on a new library and how much they would be willing to pay. I'd vote for it for sure if it was $50-$60 a year. At the proposed rate, it will be a little over $100 a year. I don't know. I'm inclined to vote for it, but I live pretty close to the proposed site and often pick up books from the library on Hilton. I'm not sure what people who currently use the Sanchez Library get out of the deal.
Posted by Steve Sinai
19 comments:
Credit Suissse
They were also major players in the Sub-prime ponzi scheme.
Pacifica has way too many problems and can not afford a $30,000,000 to $35,000,000 million dollar library, just so the sitting city council can put there name on a plaque.
When the roads are paved, when Highway 1 is fixed, when the poop plant is fixed, When the Seawall(not retaining wall) at Beach Blvd is fixed, then we can talk about the library.
Stegnink's post is grossly misleading. I bought my house in 1974. So did a lot of other people that are still here. I'm a layman so I hope we can get some professional real estate people to check in with their thoughts on his "Sky is Falling" assessment of his numbers. I know my assessment will be nowhere near what he is claiming. Really no reason to post something like that on his "my way or the highway" blog. No opportunity to rebut his fabrications there. He ought to man up and post those here.
WTF do we need a new library for???????? We are voting "no" regardless of assessment because, as 12:54 notes, Pacifica has far greater needs. Once those needs are met, we will be more than happy to pay for a new library (assuming we have not already died of old age).
Where is the library survey?
The library survey is closed now. The city sent them out on June 1.
Why doesn't Pacifica deserve something nice. An anchor, along with the rest of the project there, for a thriving downtown. 2:01, you sound angry. The "far greater needs" you talk about all cost money. The city needs to generate some growth to generate that cash flow. Pacifica may be the only city in the bay area that has had negative population growth over the last decade or so. Why is that? There's nothing here, that's why.
Steg, and his blog, is mean-spirited. Produces BS information.
Larry
Punch your address into Zillow, you might be amazed how much Pacifica Real Estate has gone up in the last 3 years.
The tax assessed value and the current market value is two completely different things.
"Pacifica may be the only city in the bay area that has had negative population growth over the last decade or so. Why is that? There's nothing here, that's why."
A lot of people like it that way.
3:37, Pacifica deserves lots of nice things -- but spending tens of millions of dollars to build a new public library is not smart. Neither is believing that a new library will generate significant cash or growth. While I fully agree that Pacifica deserves (nice, well-planned, non-tacky) attractions, people will not be coming to Pacifica to see its new library, so building it for the purpose of inspiring growth does not make sense.
Steve -- thanks for the info. on the survey. I didn't get one , so clearly I am not on the pre-approved, results-driven list.
3:37, I beg to differ. Do a little research and you will find that a new modern library does draw people to it. A lot of people. When you have a location that is drawing a lot of people you have a critical mass that desires amenities like restaurants and shops. Check it out yourself. Don't believe me.
Modern well equipped libraries are popular amenities for cities to offer these days and are hubs for community events, including offering summer lunch programs for low income kids. However, our city is so spread out along the coast and transportation between neighborhoods so difficult that we would be better served with maintaining & upgrading the units we have now rather than spending millions on one new unit and completely abandoning access to the large population in Linda Mar. That just doesn't make much sense.
Don Peebles was willing to donate the land and help pay for a new library in the Quarry many years ago. Unfortunately the same people who demonized him and his project are at it again with the new Quarry owner. These people have no shame or common sense. They certainly have no expertise or concern for Pacifica as they steer our town into economic calamity. These are the same people who are suing to prevent improvements on Highway One, appeal every proposal to develop revenue generating projects (unless it benefits them) and celebrate that Pacifica is a rusted-out, failing town. Anything to keep outsiders away.
Selfish. Selfish. Selfish.
"Don Peebles was willing to donate the land and help pay for a new library in the Quarry many years ago." LOL. That promise was worth the paper it was printed on.
2:31
How do you know that?
Barry book worm, it would be helpful if you would provide citations to articles/research to support your theory that the type of library under consideration for Pacifica would draw the kinds of crowds that will result in people spending money in nearby businesses. While it is true that some large public libraries do attract tourists because of their unique collections, amazing architecture, and/or their historical significance, that kind of library is not what Pacifica would be getting in exchange for $35 million+. Ours would be geared towards the kinds of community events Sharon mentions, which do not generate income. A conference center may generate limited income, but not enough to make the library a worthwhile investment.
I agree with Sharon, invest a reasonable amount of money in the two libraries we already have and call it a day.
(If we really want to attract tourists with spending power, Pacifica should be talking to George Lucas about locating his museum here. That would be a real draw.)
@3:13, because Peebles was an out-of-state developer, and all developers, especially out-of-state ones, are evil, greedy liars. Or so the NIMBYS say.
Has the oracle, steink chimed in on the quarry yet? He seems to have an unlearned opinion on everything else. Maybe he has "sources" that can start baseless rumors. Just saying.
"(If we really want to attract tourists with spending power, Pacifica should be talking to George Lucas about locating his museum here. That would be a real draw.)"
That or the new Warriors Arena.
Snowballs in hell are staying frozen! I agree with Steve's Warrior stadium idea. But this year the whales are bringing in lots of new tourists. It's entertaining to see them all looking out and sqealing when a whale shows off.
12:01
Ya but there is nowhere for the tourists to spend any real $$$.
Oh wait they can buy a sandwich at Safeway or a couple items off the $1 buck or less menu at Taco Bell.
Post a Comment