Posted by Anne More, a resident of the Terra Linda neighborhood, on Oct 22, 2009 at 8:15 pm
Wonder why Marin's daily newspaper can't bother to do a reasoned analysis piece like this on such a major issue in the County's largest and most diverse city?
Posted by Robert, a resident of the San Rafael neighborhood, on Oct 22, 2009 at 9:39 pm
The City of San Rafael must repeal its sanctuary ordinance for illegal aliens. Detect, detain and deport. Then the police would not be spending so much time rounding up drug addicts, prostitutes, deal with riots etc in the Canal.
Everything wrong in San Rafael is due to hordes of illegal aliens who have overwhelmed the schools, the police, and everything else.
There would be plenty of money for construction furthermore if the rapacious firefighter union was not so overpaid and did not interfere incessantly in city elections.
When the unions back off, I will support a bond issue. They have outrageous pensions spiked by overtime and gold plated benefits to boot. Enough already.
Posted by Debi, a resident of the San Rafael neighborhood, on Oct 23, 2009 at 10:19 am
As to the issue of immigration, this is not a racist issue. We're just simply tired of paying for services for people who don't pay taxes. It's just that simple. If more money goes out than comes in...hello! Do the math.
Posted by Larry Luckham, a resident of the San Rafael neighborhood, on Oct 23, 2009 at 10:53 am
All in all a balanced presentation though I do question a couple of Mr. Ford's statements.
He is wrong on a couple of key points, including the interest rate on the bonds. Unless I missed something the interest rate on bonds is fixed at issue. Bank construction loans are never at fixed rates, they vary with the index they are pegged to, sometimes more than one a month. That’s a sad fact that I’m all too aware of having had many of the same.
Gary is also naive if he thinks that “benefactors” will step up to buy the City of San Rafael like benefactors stepped up for a non profit, non political arts project like the Rafael Theater. And, if he thinks that “a bank” would provide either a construction loan, or the take out permanent financing needed once construction is complete then maybe he would be willing to commit his bank to that.
A couple of points on the public/private partnership issue. First, some members of the Critical Facilities Committee attended a conference on public/private partnership in San Jose where there were presentations on all aspects of that approach. At the time of that conference the State of California did not have the legal framework in place that would support most public/private partnership projects though a bill was moving through the legislature to cure that. Next the Critical Facilities Committee had a presentation by Balfour Beatty Capital, Inc. one of the largest participants in public/private partnerships and determined that at the present time there was simply not a feasible way to accomplish all of what we needed to cover with that mechanism. Finally, public/private partnerships are a procurement mechanism and for non-revenue producing projects, not a funding mechanism. In other words, a public/private partnership on a toll road could be made to pay for itself without imposing a tax. A non revenue producing project cannot. A tax would still be needed to pay for public safety buildings.
Posted by Mark, a resident of the Corte Madera neighborhood, on Oct 23, 2009 at 5:14 pm
When the city assessed its options, city officials came to an interesting conclusion: Voters would look more favorably on a general obligation bond measure than a parcel tax measure. No substantive difference exits between the two. With either one, property owners still are assessed a tax. As Measure G stands, property owners would see an initial estimated charge of $16 per $100,000 of assessed value. That amount would increase to about $41 during the 30-year life of the measure, which needs a two-thirds majority to pass.
"No substantive difference exists between the two?" HELLO
At least with a general obligation bond an owner of a Canal studio condo is not paying the same parcel tax as the owner of the Home Depot or Embassy Suites.
Posted by resident, a resident of the San Rafael neighborhood, on Oct 24, 2009 at 11:42 pm
Where does the author of this article get off assuming that there are racial undertones or any racism at all regarding this Measure G issue? Illegal is Illegal. Wanting to uphold the law and prevent people from breaking the law is not steeped in rasicsm. It does not matter what nationality, race or religion a criminal is. The author revealed their slant when they forgot to add "illegal" before immigrant, regarding how some peoples "illogical attack on cities that support immigrants". Oh, so now it's racist and illogical to support rule of law? "implied rasicm colors the debate" because some people voice their objection to illegal activity? Really !
Posted by Bob, a resident of the San Rafael neighborhood, on Oct 26, 2009 at 10:37 am
Barbara Hellers comments are truly unbelievable and so typical of an out of touch, money hungry politician "like every homeowner, you pay for upkeep and there is just not enough money left over for a new roof". Well I've got news for you Barbara, San Rafael is full of decent neighborhoods with decent hardworking taxpayers who meet their personal upkeep obligations and maintain their properties very well. The city does need building infastructure upgrades and this need did not appear overnight, but over decades. But you in city gov't. have been asleep at the wheel, mishandling our funds and now cry wolf. Fix one building at a time with available funds. BUDGET properly. It's what we in the real world do to maintain our homes. Don't insult us with an $88,000,000.00 TAX.
Posted by anon, a resident of the Mill Valley neighborhood, on Oct 26, 2009 at 5:26 pm
I would think that the only disturbing theme to some would be the need to want to get illegals out of San Rafael. Or keep them in, but have them get their citizenship.
We do spend millions of dollars every year, if not directly on illegals, we spend it on related costs resulting from illegal immigrants.
But this is a sanctuary town that matches its sanctuary city, San Francisco. People everywhere around here are quick to coddle and stick up for illegal immigrants, the majority of whom happen to be from Mexico or other Latin American countries, when these people should be deported immediately. Why do we allow these expenses to take over what we should really focus on?? Cleaning up San Rafael!
I think we are doing ourselves a big dis-service by not supporting meaure G.
I can't stand listening to all those people who defend the cradling of illegal immigrants util they're blue in the face. Why should we take care of people who are dragging us down? I think the problem with illegals is monumental and has seriously affected the quality of life in San Rafael and Marin in general.
Posted by johnnymarin, a resident of the San Rafael neighborhood, on Oct 26, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Pure and simple, they are here ilegally. Send them home and we will adapt to what ever is the result. I know how to mow a lawn and hammer a nail. All those teens playing football and baseball can get a job doing what we did when we were kids. The girls can go back to doing laundry and cleaning the kitchen (opps, did I say that).
Posted by anon, a resident of the Mill Valley neighborhood, on Oct 27, 2009 at 10:56 am
I tell ya, I just don't understand where these people in these towns came from who have this overly sympathetic need to make room and board for all the ILLEGAL immigrants who have overrun San Rafael.
It's gotten so that you can't even drive out of Bellam Drive, near Franklin's Mufflers or that great restaurant "LeCroissant", and attempt to get back on to the freeway to head south into San Francisco without the fear of either running over the massive groups of Mexians that are either on foot or in their cars. And if they are driving, they go out of their way to cause accidents or provoke them.
That whole area in there is a mess.
It's a disgrace because San Rafael must have been a pretty cool place at one point. Even my husband used to live in an apartment in the canal area back in the early 90's before the influx took over.
And there are people on this site who write letters asking for heartfelt love and compassion for these people!
Why? Why should we be understanding and care about groups of people who come in and affect the area in such a negative way?
Posted by Rae, a resident of the Novato neighborhood, on Oct 27, 2009 at 8:24 pm
I once walked into an alumni event in another county. One of the organizers asked what I did for a living. I mentioned the government office I then worked for. He immediately responded, "I'm self-employed and I have to pay for my own pension!" I mean, out of nowhere! This was a man who'd graduated twenty years before me, at least, snapping at a (relative) kid who in today's economy will never enjoy the career and financial stability he has enjoyed.
But resentment is the name of the game. It's always the other guy who's getting something for nothing, getting special treatment, isn't really deserving -- never ourselves. Home mortgage deduction? "Good, I deserve it!" Health care for the needy? "Bad -- not with my money, they should try working for a living!"
Posted by David Mayer, a resident of the San Rafael neighborhood, on Oct 28, 2009 at 2:31 am
I pay my own health care and still find my own retirement. I am new to State Government because I want to help get Californians's back to work. I could make 3 times my current furlough salary of $14 an hour. I'm in this for public service not sucking on the Government TIT. If elected I'll forgoe the monthly salary and propose dropping the platimun health care and other benefits City Council gets for a PRT-TIME gig.
Posted by Fred, a resident of the San Rafael neighborhood, on Oct 28, 2009 at 1:43 pm
Wow! And I thought the issue here was firehouses. It seems that some people are more obsessed with immigrants, illegal or otherwise, than public safety. The the smell of racism is pretty strong.
San Rafael is still a pretty cool place, in fact, a very cool place.
Nice to know that Mr. Mayer would forgoe the monthly salary if elected to the city council. Council members don't get a salary. They get something like $600 to cover their out of pocket expenses. From my experience over the last 20 or so years most of them, at least the ones that retired from other careers, put in 20-40 hours a week on council business, driving their personal cars to meetings and neighborhoods, etc. How many of you whiners would put in 40 hours a week as a volunteer? Unless you're prepared to walk in the other guy's shoes you're just hot air.
Posted by Bob, a resident of the San Rafael neighborhood, on Oct 28, 2009 at 8:11 pm
I agree with you Fred. I thought this was supposed to be about firehouses and public safety structures as well. But when the current, incumbent city council chooses to make our fair city a sanctuary city, specifically for the benefit of criminals and non law abiding citizens and burden us with all of the financial and social ramifications of such, this is what you get.
My wife, children and myself were in a major car accident recently. We were rear ended by a speeding, DUI, uninsured, unlicensed, illegal. The cop at the scene told us that the illegal perp profile makes up the majority of his calls, as well as those of the fire department / paramedics.
The cost of this problem is beyond debilitating and it's effecting every aspect of our lives weather we choose to see it or not.
It has nothing to do with race for most of us, but rather playing by the rules and rule of law.
We can't keep spending money that we don't have. A new fire station doesn't cost $88 million. Build one at a time, with properly budgeted funds, when and if the city council can get their act together and treat the city budget with the responsibility and stewardship that tax payers deserve.
Posted by Fred, a resident of the San Rafael neighborhood, on Oct 29, 2009 at 9:35 am
OK Bob, we agree that this should be about the fire & police buidings. To me that means we should be concentrating on the need for replacing those and not using other issues as excuses for not doing what needs to be done about those buildings.
Perhaps I don't happen to agree with you, and others, on the issue of immigrants in our community, or the city's decision to not go after those who came here are here without the benefit of getting a green card. But, that's a separate issue from wheterh our firehouses are up to snuff. Let's have that discussion elsewhere. The same with our respective views on elected officials. But, does it really make any sense to vote against improving our publis safety facilities just because you object to some other policy?
I imagine that when you were in that accident paramedics were there to help within minutes. Am I correct? What if the next event is the so called "big one" earthquake. Wouldn't you want those paramedics and firefighters out helping you, your family and your neighbors? I think you would. The can't do that if their building fails trapping them and their ambulance, or necessitating that they first rescue themselves before aiding others.
This is where, I think, we all need to keep a clear head and deal with the specific issue on the table, in this case public safety buildings.
By the way, I looked at the latest city budget on the city website, and the study they did about replacing these buildings. There's about $60 Mil in the budget with, it looks like, no spare change. The study says the the downtown combined police and fire station will cost $40 mil, give or take, and fire stations numbers like $7-8 mil. I don't see any way you pay for building replacement without going outside the budget somewhere. Check it out yourself. All the numbers are there.
Posted by Rae, a resident of the Novato neighborhood, on Oct 29, 2009 at 12:23 pm
I notice the article says there is no organized opposition, just griping in letters to the editor and (anonymous) Web posts. But this is how Sarah Palin's political career started. She steamrollered some small town, talking about abortion and religion, when everyone else was talking about the potholes at 1st and Main. Work those wedge issues, rile those resentments! Before you know it, someone who doesn't understand or believe in public services is a heartbeat away from the Presidency -- or in charge of Fire Station Seismic Integrity the day the Big One hits.
Posted by anon, a resident of the Mill Valley neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 9:19 am
Don't worry, the issue is still firehouses. But it rolled over into public safety, which then rolled over into excess people out on the street or vagrants or the current situation with illegal immigrants or people out on the street.
It's really nothing to do with "racism". It doesn't matter what country they're from, if people are out there in droves and causing pile-ups at crucial street corners where there otherwise would be plenty of room to pass or the ability to drive safely, then it's a concern.
In this case, most of the people on any given day lately in San Rafael, happen to be of Latin decent, or probably Mexican or whatever they are.
If they were Swedish, I'd be complaining about the Swedes out there causing trouble, but they happen to be Latin Americans at the moment.
Posted by Not a Banker, a resident of the San Rafael neighborhood, on Nov 2, 2009 at 6:04 pm
Hello, San Rafael does not have a "Sactuary City" ordinance.
This issue is our safety. Mr. Ford's seceret "Bankers Solution" has no specifics except borrow with no source of income to pay for it. Come on, the Bankers were behind the total collapse of our economy, pushing junk mortagages. How can you trust a "banker" to figure this out with a more "nimble option". How nimble? What neighborhoods would loose their fire station?
Every station is stuffed to the gills now with fire and paramemdic trucks. Who would be left unprotected with the undefined "smaller nimble plan"?
Why not move our fire trucks into the proposed County public safety building, Ford proposes?? Blow smoke and kick the can down the road That is what Bankers do. We need to protect ourselves now.
View in an RSS Reader
E-mail this topic.
Print this topic.
