Friday, September 29, 2017

ICE is targeting sanctuary cities for arrests. Is this what Pacifica is in for?

Federal immigration officials in the Bay Area arrested 27 people this week, most with past criminal convictions, as part of a national sweep targeting cities that prohibit cooperation between local law enforcement and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the agency said Thursday.

The arrests in San Francisco, San Jose, Sunnyvale and Morgan Hill — and more than 100 in Los Angeles — were part of a four-day sweep that began Sunday. Overall, ICE officials acting in eight states and Washington, D.C., arrested 498 people from 42 countries who were in the United States illegally.

Of those, 181 had no previous criminal conviction, according to ICE. The remaining 317 had been convicted of crimes ranging from trespassing to rape, with the largest single offense driving under the influence.

“Sanctuary jurisdictions that do not honor (detention requests) or allow us access to jails and prisons are shielding criminal aliens from immigration enforcement and creating a magnet for illegal immigration,” ICE Acting Director Tom Homan said in a statement. “As a result, ICE is forced to dedicate more resources to conduct at-large arrests in these communities.”


Posted by Steve Sinai

Monday, September 25, 2017

City Council meeting, Monday, September 25, 2017

Attend in person, 2212 Beach Boulevard, 2nd floor. Or view on local television or live feed Pacific Coast TV. If you missed meetings, view on PCT26 YouTube!  The city council meeting begins at 7 p.m., or shortly there following. City Council updates and archives are available on the City Council website.      Channel 26 television schedule, see Monday, 09/25/17.  

Interactive City Council Agenda, 9/25/17.       City Council Agenda, 9/25/17, pdf pages 406.

Image result for Fog Fest, Pacifica pictures
Communications: Fog Fest was fun!
Closed Session, 5:30 p.m.
A.   Government code 54956.8, property negotiations, instructions to negotiators, price and terms of payment:  Friend Development Group LLC, a Delaware LLC, 2212 Beach Boulevard.  
B.   Government code 54956.8, property negotiations, price and terms of payment:  Illard Tong, 310 Esplanade (APN 009-413-010) and 320 Esplanade (APN 009-413-020). 

Open session, 7:00 p.m.
Call to order, roll call, salute to flag.  Closed Session report. 
Special presentations:  1) Fire Prevention month; 2) Local business, Royal Bee Yarn Company, Kelly and Tony Corten.

 Consent Calendar 
1.     Approval of financial disbursements FY 2017-18,
report.  a) 9/7/17.
2.     Approval of City Council meeting Minutes, report.  a) 9/11/17.
3.     Response to SM County Grand Jury report, "A delicate balance: privacy vs. protection", report.  a)  GJ report.  b)  GJ response letter.
4.     Adopt resolution: Recreation Manager job description. a) Report/resolution.  b) Job description.
5.     Adopt Senate Bill (SB) 1, highway/street repair proposed project List.  a) Resolution. b)  Project list: Manor Dr/Paloma Av Bridge deck repair; citywide curb ramps; Palmetto sidewalk, FY 2017-18 pavement rehabilitation.
6.     Community Center event usage fee waiver:  Pacificans Care, 10th annual Speakeasy Night fundraiser, report.
7.     500 Esplanade coastal protection rock revetment repair project:  contract award to Michael Roberts Construction, Inc., $1,425,534.28 from Fund 38, the Disaster Accounting Fund (90% reimbursement from City insurance and CA Disaster Assistance Act, CDAA), report. a) Construction services agreement. 
8.     Resolution to develop a green stormwater infrastructure plan: SF Bay Regional Water Quality Control/Municipal Regional Permit (MRP), provision C.3.j.:  $50,000 from Stormwater Fund 16, (estimated total cost $200,000, report/resolution. a) SM countywide workplan.
9.     Approve wet weather equalization basin project amendment 3, further environmental impact evaluation: Terraphase Engineering, amount $20,000 (total $113,783), report.  a) Contract agreement.
Oral communications. Public; Council, Staff.
Public hearings
10.    Amend various municipal text (TA) codes for accessory dwelling/secondary residential units to conform with CA legislative code 65852.2 (affecting residential property Citywide), report.
a)  Proposed ordinance.  Planning Commission:  b) resolution.  c) report 4/17/17.  d) report 7/17/17.  e) report 8/21/17.  f) Minutes 4/17/17.  g) Minutes 7/17/17.  h) Minutes 8/21/17.  i)  Written public comments.  j)  CA state: AB 2299 and SB 1069 legislation.  k) City: existing regulations.  l) Map: transit 1/2 mile poximity.

11.    Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission (EPC) 2017 Annual Report, City report. a)  Commission report. b)  EPC Final 9/25/17.
12.    Economic Development Committee (EDC) Annual Report, City report.
13.    Ordinance making Pacifica a Sanctuary City, report/ordinance.  a)  Federal expenditures 2017- 2018- and 2018 - 2019.  b)  Senate Bill No. 54
14.    CalPERS reduction in discount rate, annual impact, report.  a) Bartel Associates: actuarial issues. 
15.    City homeless issues, report.  a) Homeless Count (1 day).  b) Outreach Team Mid-Year Report FY 2016-17.
Adjourn.     Note Fog Fest photograph from Pinterest, with link to  Pacific coast fogfest 9/23-24, 2017. 

Posted by Kathy Meeh

Wednesday, September 20, 2017

Some reasons for my opposition to Measure C rent control

Assar Lindbeck is Professor of Economics at Stockholm University

First, I don't believe in price controls. Government regulation to allow for fair competition - yes. Price controls - no. We're not Venezuela, even though at times the rhetoric from the NIMBYS and Pacifica Progressive Alliance folks makes me wonder. Our economy was designed so that when demand and prices are high, new supplies are allowed into the market to drive down those prices. The NIMBYS are not allowing new housing supplies into the market, so demand and prices stay high. 

Did rent control solve the problem of high rents in places like SF, San Jose, Berkeley, or Manhattan? Considering they have among the highest rents in the country, it's tough to say anything other than, "No." 

Second, people think rent control solves the issue of high housing costs, and therefore they ignore the need to increase housing supply. That's what happened in SF. The city finally recognized the problem, and for the last several years has been on an accelerated program to add housing. That's when rents started to stabilize. 

Third, I've known plenty of mom and pop landlords who invested a lot of their savings into buying their rental property, and who work hard to maintain it. Many of them don't have the money to hire a property manager, so instead of relaxing during their free time, they're at their rental properties fixing things, painting, cutting the grass, trimming the bushes. Yet the NIMBYS characterize them as wealthy, greedy property tycoons who can easily afford to take a hit when it comes to rental revenues. 

Fourth, rather than pinpointing people who really need help, it's a lottery. People who could use the help but don't live in affected units don't get a break. Renters who have good incomes and don't need the help end up being subsidized by landlords who could very well have less income than the renters. 

Fifth, in order to make up for limited revenues from existing tenants, landlords have to jack-up rents for new tenants beyond what they otherwise would be. Rent control doesn't solve a problem. It merely pushes the problem from one group of renters onto the backs of other renters and landlords. 

Sixth, landlords lose an incentive to maintain their properties. That brings down property values in the neighborhood, and makes those neighborhoods less desirable places to be. 

Seventh, the rent increases are capped so low that costs could easily exceed revenue from rent. And I don't believe landlords should be made to grovel before a city board for permission to raise rents to cover costs, any more than any business should have to ask the city for permission about what they can charge. I've been in Pacifica long enough to know that any city rent control board will purposefully make it so difficult and expensive to ask for a rent increase that landlords won't even bother. 

Eighth, I hate seeing the NIMBYS that have caused the problem in the first place escape responsibility for their actions. They need to recognize they're a big part of the problem and stop blocking new housing. 

Finally, as brutal as it sounds, if you can't afford to live here, you can't afford to live here. I used to rent and moved out of apartments because of rent increases. It sucked and was stressful, but I survived. If businesses can't find workers because workers can't afford to live here, it's up to the companies to increase pay. It's not the responsibility of landlords to provide a supply of workers to businesses. And again, it would sure help if NIMBYS stopped working to prevent increases in the housing supply. 

All that said, I've publicly commented in council chambers and at rent control study sessions that I'd go for rent control that capped rent increases at 15% per year, and required longer notification times for rent increases. Seems like a decent compromise between those of us who would prefer no rent control, and those who want a more onerous version.

Posted by Steve Sinai

Sunday, September 17, 2017

Planning Commission meeting, Monday September 18, 2017

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 planning commission meeting begins at 7 p.m., or shortly there following.  Planning Commission updates, archives are available on the City website: City Council Agendas, and City Planning Commission.  Channel 26 television schedule, see Monday, 09/18/17.  

Interactive Planning Commission meeting, 9/18/17.     Planning Commission meeting, 9/18/17, pdf pages 192.

Communications: Public oral. Study Session, none.  Closed Session report, none. Presentation, none. Consent items, none.

Image result for Pedro point, Pacifica, CA picture
Item 3.  Small Pedro Point mixed-use
development.  Welcome, what's in it for me?
Consideration items
1.    Construction of a new Pacifica library:  provide site selection land use criteria to the Library Advisory Committee, report.  a)  City Council agenda SMC JPA summary report, 11/23/15.  b)  City Council meeting minutes, 11/23/15 minutes.  c)  City Council meeting agenda item, 3/27/17.  d) City Council meeting meeting, 3/27/17.  e)  LAC site evaluation matrix.

Thursday, September 14, 2017

Pacifica must fight coastal erosion

City Council puts residents at risk

By Jim Wagner, Mark Stechbart        
Pacifica Tribune Aug. 30, 2017

When city council loses focus on the most critical issue facing Pacifica—ocean rise—homeowners and businesses will lose. Or maybe the warning should be homeowners will pay a huge price.
Ocean rise planning for Pacifica coastal areas is underway. Sounds ok, but this plan will decide who wins or loses—which properties are protected and which properties are left to ocean erosion.  Pacifica is faced with a policy menu ranging from uncontrolled erosion known as managed retreat to state-of-the-art engineered artificial off-shore reefs, berms, revetments, boulders and seawalls like the Dutch have used for 1,000 years.
What may shock anyone with a home or business investment along or west of  Hwy 1 is this city council has not taken a position against managed retreat. Yes you heard us right—managed retreat, letting the ocean chew its way east, is on the table for debate through this coastal planning process.
Moreover, the consultant hired by the city for $185,000 to plot the future of west of Hwy 1 has a decided fascination with managed retreat. As an example, the hired consultant wrote a letter to San Francisco stating the Sharp Park golf course should be closed and flooded to wetlands.  This plan would involve removing the protective sea wall, and letting the tides in.
Here’s the homeowner danger-- a flooded golf course with no western seawall blows a large hole in Pacifica right up to Hwy 1. It also brings the ocean to the doorstep of the south Palmetto neighborhood and west Fairway neighborhood.
Your city council hired this outfit on a 3-2 vote.
Managed retreat exposure elsewhere in town certainly involves the Rockaway business district, anywhere in west Sharp Park; the Linda Mar beach ; the middle school and all neighborhood houses.  A huge percentage of Pacifica businesses are west of Hwy 1; most of our hotels;  thousands of homes; a big chunk of our affordable rentals at the north end and millions of dollars of sewer, water, power and communication infrastructure. Let’s not forget the threat to Hwy 1, our only north-south arterial. How will anyone commute out of town if Hwy 1 is cut? How will anyone sell a home anywhere in town if potential buyers are afraid Hwy 1 will be cut?
Congresswoman Jackie Speier recently objected to a managed retreat scheme at Sharp Park, as follows:
“I write to express my opposition to proposals to abandon or prohibit the maintenance of the sea wall at Sharp Park golf course in Pacifica. Proposals like this continue a series of thinly-veiled and ideologically-motivated attacks, all unsuccessful in the courts, against the golf course, the wetlands protecting endangered and threatened species, and the nearby residential neighborhood.”
Here is our suggested work plan for Pacifica homeowners who want to keep their home value and businesses who desire to stay in business—we must make this city council agree to reject managed retreat as a "solution". Anything less threatens this community. Require the consultant to find and design solutions that protect this community.  Additionally, let’s continue to support our members of Congress, State Senate, Assembly and Supervisor as they secure funding to protect our coast.
In the last election, a billion dollar bond was approved to protect the interior of the SF Bay from ocean rise. SF Int’l airport, Google, Facebook, and Hwy 101 will be protected. So will Millbrae, Palo Alto, Foster City and Burlingame. None of those entities agreed to managed retreat, nor should they. So Pacifica can say no as well.
The rest of our task is clear. This consultant will make introductory presentations to the City Council and the Planning Commission in September, 2017. A technical working group and a Community Advisory Group will be organized, each of which will hold 3 meetings, starting in Dec., 2017. Stakeholder/community engagement meetings will also be in Dec., 2017.
As we raise this alarm, we will speak at these meetings even during the busy holiday period. You will get communications to your homes outlining progress, or asking for emails to hesitant council members who won’t commit to rejecting managed retreat.
Your home value and the economic vitality of this town are in question.   We can use existing technology to protect our coast and way of life, or you get to figure out how to move your house and get a boat for your commute.
( Wagner and Stechbart are long term Pacifica residents active in the Pacifica Business and Community PAC supporting forward looking solutions to Pacifica issues)

Submitted by Mark Stechbart

Tuesday, September 12, 2017

Fall ballot, Measure C panel discussion: Saturday, September 16, 2017

Email from Connie Menefee, President, Pacifica-Daly City Democrats Club, On behalf of the Executive Board, 9/12/17.

Image result for rent control for me, not you picture
Rent stabilization for some:
any other ideas?
"On Saturday, September 16th, Mayor Pro Tem John Keener, Thursday Roberts (Campaign Manager, Fair Rents 4 Pacifica), Councilwoman Sue Vaterlaus and Kathleen Moresco (Chairperson of the Stop the Hidden Tax Committee, No on C) will participate in a panel discussion at the Pacifica-Daly City Democrats Club monthly meeting to examine all sides of Measure C (Pacifica Rent Stabilization & Just Cause for Eviction Ordinance) and assist Pacifica voters in making an informed decision on how to vote on November 7th.

The meeting begins at 9:30 a.m. in the rear banquet room at the Sharp Park Golf Course Restaurant.  Breakfast is available at $12, or continental at $6 or just coffee at $3.  However, no purchase is necessary and the meeting is free and open to the general public."

Submitted by Connie Menefee, President, Pacifica-Daly City Democrats Club

Reference.  City of Pacifica, "Rent stabilization and Just Cause Eviction."  Related organization promoting Measure C, Fair Rents for Pacifica, Facebook, Petition wording/comments. Related.  Pacifica Riptide/Deirdre Martin/Fair Rents, 5/13/17, PCTV 4/19/17, "Fair Rents community meeting."

Related articles. The Daily Journal/Samantha Weigel, 4/13/17. "Rent control in the works for Pacifica:  First local City Council to pass tenant protection measures, may head to ballot." "For the first time in decades, a city council in San Mateo County is about to enact controversial tenant protection measures. Pacifica renters could see some temporary relief from rising rents or sudden evictions after the coastal City Council narrowly voted Monday to place a moratorium on landlords issuing steep increases or removing tenants without cause. The rules would be temporary as the council returns next month to discuss placing a measure on the November ballot — a year after divisive elections in Burlingame and San Mateo voters ended without changes. Six Bay Area cities had rent control measures on last year’s ballot with those in Richmond, Mountain View and Oakland succeeding. In San Mateo County, only East Palo Alto has such provisions for renters.Pacifica Tribune/Jane Northrop/Staff Writer, 4/26/17. "A divided Pacifica faces rent control again."

Posted by Kathy Meeh