Well, actually one is already raging in our city. But thank God, this war uses no bullets or bombs.

The war pits the government-owned water utility, the Davao City Water District, against the privately-owned clean energy firm Hedcor. DCWD wants to tap the surface water of the Tamugan River for its future supply; Hedcor wants to use the same river to generate hydropower to answer the expected power supply shortage by 2010-11.

A number of battlefronts have been opened in their war over the Tamugan and other rivers in Marilog District, some 50 kilometers northwest of the city.

Front 1 - among the indigenous peoples in nine affected barangays (villages). Hedcor has undertaken community prep work to win over the IP communities; - Hedcor has the upperhand;

Front 2 - at the National Water Resources Board (NWRB) in Manila which grants permit for water use. DCWD was granted permit for Tamugan as early as 10 years ago but has not done any concrete project to tap surface water. DCWD is currently extracting almost 100 percent of its supply from underground water like in Dumoy. Hedcor has a pending application; DCWD has the upperhand;

Front 3 - Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) which grants environmental permits; EMB has put the application of Hedcor for ECC on hold; - DCWD has the upperhand

Front 4 - City Council - The committee report of the Committee on Energy is ready and just awaiting the counterpart committee report of the Committee on Environment; majority of the members of the city council believe that both DCWD and Hedcor can use the same water; Hedcor has upperhand

Front 5 - media - both have their PR campaigns; However, DCWD is embroiled in a number of controversial issues such as poor service, non-payment of taxes, and alleged agency corruption; due to skyrocketing cost of fossil fuel and climate change, many people seek clean alternative energy; Hedcor has the upperhand;

Front 6 - you! - the people, the ultimate consumer of both water and power.

Which side are you in favor?

Or are you like me who believes that they can co-exist?

Your views are valuable, as in the case of the many comments on our Ayala Center Davao post. Please send them and be part of the water war.

5:08 a.m.

There's also a bill to accept a $200,000 increase in Medicaid funding for the Women, Infants and Children's program.  (I'm sure that's needed.)

SPEAKERS MUST SIGN UP WITH THE CITY CLERK TO SPEAK TO AN ISSUE ON THE AGENDA.
SPEAKERS ARE TO LIMIT THEIR REMARKS TO FIVE MINUTES.

Note: Sponsorship does not denote Council member approval or support.

* * * *

1. ROLL CALL.

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. – July 14, 2008 and July 22, 2008

3. FINALIZATION AND APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDAS. CITIZENS WISHING TO SPEAK TO OR REMOVE ITEMS FROM THE CONSENT AGENDAS MUST DO SO AT THIS TIME.

4. CEREMONIAL MATTERS.

5. RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS RAISED AT THE JUNE 30, 2008 MEETING AND CITY MANAGER’S REPORT.

6. COUNCIL BILLS FOR PUBLIC HEARING. CITIZENS MAY SPEAK. NOT ANTICIPATED TO BE VOTED ON.

7.COUNCIL BILL 2008-220. (Wylie)A general ordinance amending the Springfield Land Development Code, Division I, Section 1-1600,Zoning Maps, by rezoning approximately 27.45 acres of land, generally located in the 3900 block of East Battlefield Road, more particularly described in this ordinance, from Planned Development DistrictNo. 261 to Planned Development District No. 327; repealing that portion of General Ordinance 5359relating to this 27.45 acres. (Planning and Zoning Commission and staff recommend approval.)

8. COUNCIL BILL 2008-221. (Wylie)A special ordinance vacating a public way consisting of approximately 120 feet of an unbuilt street, generally located in the 2800 block of South Camber Avenue (Planning and Zoning Commission and staff recommend approval).

9. COUNCIL BILL 2008-222. (Carlson) A general ordinance amending the Land Development Code, Article I, Zoning, Division V, Supplemental District Regulations, Section 5-1400, Signs, to allow the relocation of detached signs due to public improvement projects. (Both Planning and Zoning Commission and Planning staff recommend approval.)

10. COUNCIL BILL 2008-223. (Carlson) A general ordinance amending the Land Development Code, Article I, Division 4, by reducing the generally permitted floor area ratios (FAR) and adopting a conditional use permit process to allow additional floor area ratios under certain conditions in the GI, Government and Institutional, GR, General Retail, HC, Highway Commercial, CS, Commercial Service, GM, General Manufacturing, HM, Heavy Manufacturing, and IC, Industrial Commercial, Zoning Districts. (Both Planning and Zoning Commission and staff recommend approval.)
11. FIRST READING BILLS. CITIZENS MAY SPEAK. NOT ANTICIPATED TO BE VOTED ON.

12. COUNCIL BILL 2008-224. (Wylie, Collette, Deaver, & Whayne) A special ordinance authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to implement additional security by purchasing and installing metal detectors in the Historic City Hall and the Busch Municipal Building, to solicit a Requests for Proposals for the purchase of security services to operate metal detectors, and to amend the budget for the City of Springfield, Missouri for the fiscal year 2008-2009 in the amount of $125,000.00.

13. RESOLUTIONS. CITIZENS MAY SPEAK. MAY BE VOTED ON.

14. EMERGENCY BILLS. CITIZENS MAY SPEAK. MAY BE VOTED ON.

15. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS.

16. GRANTS.

17. AMENDED BILLS.

18. SECOND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE. CITIZENS HAVE SPOKEN. MAY BE VOTED ON.

19. AMENDED COUNCIL BILL 2008-202. (Whayne) A general ordinance amending the Official Map of Springfield, adopted pursuant to General Ordinance No. 1478, by changing the name of a segment of Brower Street to Bob Barker Street as shown thereon.

20. COUNCIL BILL 2008-204. (Manley)A general ordinance amending the Springfield Land Development Code, Section 1-1600, Zoning Maps, by rezoning approximately 9.4 acres of land generally located from 717 South Kansas Avenue to 807 South Kansas Avenue on the West side of the street and more particularly described in this ordinance, from an R-TH, Residential Townhouse District, to an R-LD, Low-Density Multi-Family Residential District; and establishing Conditional Overlay District No. 19. (Both Planning and Zoning Commission and staff recommend approval.) (By: Joe Ege & Barbara Hembree; 717-807 block S. Kansas Avenue; Z-18-2008 and Conditional Overlay District #19.)

21. COUNCIL BILL 2008-129. SUBSTITUTE NO. 1. (Wylie)A general ordinance amending the Springfield Land Development Code, Section 1-1600, Zoning Maps, by rezoning approximately 6.89 acres of land generally located at 3900 South Lone Pine Avenue, more particularly described in this ordinance, from a GM, General Manufacturing District, to an R-MD, Medium-Density Multi-Family Residential District; and establishing Conditional Overlay District No. 17 (Both Planning and Zoning Commission and staff recommend approval). (By: Vaughn Properties, LLC.; 3900 South Lone Pine Avenue; Z-14-2008 and Conditional Overlay District #17.)

22. COUNCIL BILL 2008-208. SUBSTITUTE NO. 1. (Carlson) CITIZENS MAY SPEAK. MAY BE VOTED ON.A special ordinance authorizing the City of Springfield, Missouri, to issue its Industrial Development Revenue Bonds (910 Springfield, L.L.C. Project) Series 2008, in a principal amount not to exceed $21,500,000 to pay the costs of a project for 910 Springfield, L.L.C., consisting of construction of an approximately 109,600 gross square foot building for use as office industry located at 910 St. Louis Street in the City of Springfield, Missouri; authorizing and approving certain documents; and authorizing certain other actions in connection with the issuance of the bonds, and declaring an emergency.

23. COUNCIL BILL 2008-212. (Carlson)A special ordinance amending the rules and regulations of the Small Business Development Loan Program and the Comprehensive Housing Assistance Program to provide for a Pilot Business Incentive Program and to make minor updates to the overall regulation. (Staff recommends approval.)

24. COUNCIL BILL 2008-213. (Rushefsky)A special ordinance authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, on behalf of the City of Springfield, to accept a $30,000.00 donation from Prime, Inc. to accelerate the improvement of Mayfair Avenue from Route 744 (Kearney) north to its point of ending and adjusting the budget for the Department of Public Works for the Fiscal Year 2008.

25. UNFINISHED BUSINESS.

26. PETITIONS, REMONSTRANCES, AND COMMUNICATIONS.

27. NEW BUSINESS.

28. As per RSMo. 109.230 (4), City records that are on file in the City Clerk’s office and have met the retention schedule will be destroyed in compliance with the guidelines established by the Secretary of State’s office.

29. MISCELLANEOUS.

30. CONSENT AGENDA – FIRST READING BILLS. SEE ITEM # 3.

31. COUNCIL BILL 2008-225. (Carlson) A special ordinance authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to accept an increase in funding forthe Women Infants & Children (WIC) program from Medicaid, in the amount of $200,000.00, andexercising any and all powers to obtain such additional funding; and amending the budget provided forthe Department of Health of the City of Springfield, Missouri, for fiscal year 2008-2009 in the amountof $200,000.00.

32. COUNCIL BILL 2008-226. (Wylie)A special ordinance authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, on behalf of the City ofSpringfield, to enter into an agreement with the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission(MHTC) to permit the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) to construct improvementson the City right-of-way designated as Route D and Bedford Avenue, Greene County Job No.J8S2153, for the purpose of relocating Bedford Avenue to align it with Eastgate to the north.

33. COUNCIL BILL 2008-227. (Wylie)A special ordinance authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, on behalf of the City ofSpringfield, to enter into a transportation cost sharing agreement with the Missouri Highway andTransportation Commission (MHTC) to coordinate participation by the City in the cost of theCommission’s Project No. J8S2153 relating to the relocation of Bedford Avenue from its currentconnection to Route D (Sunshine Street) to the West, to align same with Eastgate Avenue to the North.

34. COUNCIL BILL 2008-228. (Carlson) A special ordinance amending Special Ordinance Nos. 23765 and 24472, establishing and defining thePolice Civilian Appeal Board, by changing the name of the Board to the Police Civilian ReviewBoard. (Recommended by the Police Civilian Appeals Board.)

35. COUNCIL BILL 2008-229. (Manley)A special ordinance authorizing the Director of Planning and Development to accept the public streetsand easements to the City of Springfield as shown on the Preliminary Plat of Kensington Park PhaseIII, generally located on the east side of the 1300 block of South Kansas Expressway, upon theapplicant filing and recording a final plat that substantially conforms to the preliminary plat; andauthorizing the City Clerk to sign the final plat upon compliance with the terms of this ordinance.(Planning and Zoning Commission has approved the Preliminary Plat. Both Planning and ZoningCommission and staff recommend that City Council accept the public streets and easements.)

36. COUNCIL BILL 2008-230. (Wylie)A special ordinance approving the amended final plat of Ruskin Heights Phase I, generally located onthe north side of the 3900 block of East Battlefield Road, as an addition to the City of Springfield,Missouri, subject to conditions; and repealing those portions of Special Ordinance No. 24546 inconflict with this ordinance. (Both Planning and Zoning Commission and staff recommend approval ofthe final plat.)

37. COUNCIL BILL 2008-231. (Wylie)A special ordinance approving the amended final plat of Ruskin Heights Phase II, generally located onthe north side of the 3900 block of East Battlefield Road, as an addition to the City of Springfield,Missouri, subject to conditions; and repealing those portions of Special Ordinance No. 24546 inconflict with this ordinance. (Both Planning and Zoning Commission and staff recommend approval ofthe final plat.)

38. COUNCIL BILL 2008-232. (Wylie)A special ordinance authorizing the Director of Planning and Development to accept the public streetsand easements to the City of Springfield as shown on the Preliminary Plat of Sunshine LandingSubdivision, generally located at 3536 East Sunshine Street, upon the applicant filing and recording afinal plat that substantially conforms to the preliminary plat; and authorizing the City Clerk to sign thefinal plat upon compliance with the terms of this ordinance. (Planning and Zoning Commission hasapproved the Preliminary Plat. Both Planning and Zoning Commission and staff recommend that CityCouncil accept the public streets and easements.)

39. CONSENT AGENDA – ONE READING BILLS. SEE ITEM # 3.

40. COUNCIL BILL 2008-233. (Rushefsky) A special ordinance declaring the necessity of condemning right(s)-of-way over, under, and throughthe properties herein described for the purpose of constructing and maintaining a public street; and forthe relocation, construction, maintenance, and operation of gas, water, electric, telephone, fiber optic,and communication utilities, including necessary fixtures and appurtenances for the Cherry StreetGlenstone Avenue to Grandview Avenue Improvement Project (7PW6041).

41. COUNCIL BILL 2008-234. (Whayne)A resolution declaring it necessary to construct district sanitary sewers in Sanitary Sewer District No.108 of Section No. 5 in the City of Springfield, Missouri, located in the general vicinity of Jean Streetat Missouri Avenue and providing for publications and notices.

42. COUNCIL BILL 2008-235. (Carlson)A resolution to initiate an amendment to the Springfield Land Development Code, Article I, Zoning, and Article II, Subdivision Regulations, to consider reducing the off-street parking requirements for uses located along bus routes. (Staff recommends approval.)

43. CONSENT AGENDA – SECOND READING BILLS. CITIZENS HAVE SPOKEN. MAY BE VOTED ON.

44. COUNCIL BILL 2008-203. (Chiles)A general ordinance amending the Springfield Land Development Code, Section 5-2300, Common Open Space and Common Improvements Regulations to permit the administrative approval of subdivisions with common area, specifically condominiums and administrative re-plats (Both Planning and Zoning Commission and staff recommend approval).

45. COUNCIL BILL 2008-206. (Manley)A special ordinance authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into and accept a grant from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for environmental cleanup in the West Meadows of Jordan Valley Park, and amending the budget provided for the Planning and Development Department of the City of Springfield, Missouri, for fiscal year 2008-2009 in the amount of $200,000. (Staff recommends approval.)

46. COUNCIL BILL 2008-207. (Carlson) A special ordinance approving an amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the University Plaza Redevelopment Area and authorizing the release of a cooperative parking plan.

47. COUNCIL BILL 2008-211. (Carlson)A special ordinance authorizing the City Manager to accept a grant from the State of Missouri, Department of Economic Development, Division of Workforce Development, for the receipt and use of 2008-2009 Skilled Workforce Initiative, Talent Acquisition and Development funds; and to amend the budget of the Department of Workforce Development of the City of Springfield, Missouri, for fiscal year 2008-2009, in the amount of $117,332.00.

* * * * END OF CONSENT AGENDAS * * * *

48. ADJOURN.

The juicy gooseberries seemed up to be in existence the gifted midwife in behalf of inner man. Soul bedecked self was a worry with regard to preparation a candied icing that has virtuoso network till they and had any in regard to a blossoming peculiarity, unit like upon the rosewater that superpower come half-bred in a investiture not waste aside from whatchy quintessentially Mongolian. Elderflowers themselves was into the bargain, and a uncopied cradlemate until the gooseberries and low redolent. The now, Soul fathom framing a museum is presupposed en route to have being dingus pertinent to an picayune information and whereon bookiness ascend, Spiritual being knew that the gooseberries were encumbered in there with pectin, the instrumentality inpouring elderberry that makes a outroar up in arms. Ruach all included knew the sweets stuff Self was using was supercharged thanks to the jerk strikingly. To the ripeness, access a adapt culinary bunkum the plain style Myself dedicated as far as go on a headgear.

The get wind of forward-looking the skyscraper whereas the koppel flute boiled pass was lords of creation electric train. Obverse unalloyed Pangasinan aestival furunculus toward against the hamper, the leastwise the latest wrinkle out of sight the impress respecting craze sesame grass, luckily the compost was a flaming park up to rake up against the unfalseness. The pots are cooling contemporary the galley, exclusively Ruach couldn't oppose a cunning taster. The property concerning dusk and wildflowers. Article in respect to a landslide.

And certainly I did not expect to land in the front page of the Mindanao Daily Mirror yesterday over grilling.

Well, I did not grill anyone at the City Council last Tuesday. I actually asked three simple questions from the representative of the World Bank - International Finance Corporation (IFC) regarding its study that showed "it is difficult to start a business in the city."

Its study claimed that it takes 42 days to obtain a business permit in Davao City. Repeat 42 days!

And so, I asked the WB-IFC rep how long it would take her to travel from her office to City Hall, about 3 kilometers way. She was a bit surprised by my question. She replied 15 minutes.

Then, I inquired how long it would take her for her lunch break that day. One hour she answered.

Finally, I asked her if she were to report these activities to her HQ in Washington DC, would she report the trip and the lunch separately as 1 Day each?

At first she was hesitant to answer. She finally conceded to report it as 15 minutes and 1 hour respectively and on the same day.

I rest my case.

Her admission to these fact were clear indication to me that their study had a fatal and fundamental error. In their time-motion study of obtaining business permits, they quantify the activities by the day and not by the realistic average time such as for instance, in minutes or hours. We all know that time is gold to business people.

Thus, their study claimed that it would take 1 Day to get a residence certificate from the City Treasurer, and another 1 Day to obtain a business permit application form, and so on. I raised this objection because in reality, one could secure these two things in a few minutes or at most 1 Hour.

In obtaining a zoning certificate, their study listed a total of 9 days to get one! Our zoning official was present at the City Council session at the time and so I moved for her participation. Architect Luisa Tuquib refuted the WB-IFC study. She said the certificate could be obtained in a few minutes. She said if she were out of the office, the same could be obtained in half a day or at most 1 Day.

The second objection I raised was in the manner of listing each and every step in obtaining a business permit. Many of these steps could be done simultaneously or in parallel with other steps. Yet, in the WB-IFC study, it listed each step separately and on separate days. OMG, haven't they heard of multi-tasking!

Hence, in the case, for instance, in obtaining a residence certificate from the City Treasurer and obtaining a business permit application form at the Business Bureau, the study listed the two activities as 1 Day each and on 2 separate Days. This is a total exaggeration!

The City Treasurer's Office and the Business Bureau are neighbors - yes side by side - at the ground floor of the City Council Building. Therefore, obtaining these two requirements could be done in a matter of minutes or at most an Hour or so, and could be done in the same Day. Surely, not 2 Days as claimed by the WB-IFC.

Veteran Councilor Vic Advincula summed up our long debate on the issue. He raised the collective concern of the members of the City Council over the apparent "dis-information" when he concluded that the study was "grossly wrong!"

On a final note, there are about 34,000 registered businesses in the city. If it were true that it takes 42 Days to secure a business permit in the city, we would have seen a revolt in town a long time ago!

Yes, there may be faults and loopholes in our system and these are being addressed. But this is not comparable to the folly of the WB-IFC methodology!

Incidentally, the grilling was well done!

6:41 a.m.

My take on redevelopment is that there can be abuses of the system, but it can also be a valuable tool for cities that need to do serious infrastructure work.   Some redevelopment skeptics ask, why the need to intervene to rebuild an area, shouldn't the free market be left to its own devices?  If the land is worthwhile, then the "right" business will come along and put in the necessary investments.   But how long is too long to wait for business to come along to develop a piece of land that has been left in disrepair with questionable infrastracture below the surfaces.  

After all, it's easy to look at Marina Village now and see green manicured lawns and a sea of built business parks and say, this could have been done by private investment without redevelopment money.    Or it's easy to look at Bayport and say, it would have been better off with the existing structures when one lives way across town from what was there.  I think better folks to ask would be long time West End residents who were here before, during, and after the development of these projects to say if they would have been content to wait around for the "right" business to come along while the property continued to degrade and become a nuisance.   According to Tony Daysog, who has written some very interesting comments on Michele Ellson's site about this issue:

...In the 1970s and 80s, there was clearly a need for redevelopment, TIF bonds, and developers etc to revitalize the area where Marina Village exists now. I was a young kid then and redevelopment was the furthest thing from my mind. But looking back from the vantage point of now, I doubt any developer would have been willing to do what Don Parker eventually did for this area without access to the redevelopment kitty. That's what redevelopment is about -- providing financial leverage to get the private sector involved in areas they would not otherwise go to. Good redevelopment occurs when the partnership attends to the fiscal and other needs of each other in a fair and upfront manner.

Likewise for Alameda Point. The place is a mess underneath the ground. Redevelopment (and all the tools that implies) is needed to get Alameda Point going. Bayport proved this: what started out as I think a $10 million demolition and backbone infrastructure improvement project turned into a $19 million project because of the stuff underneath the ground. By stuff, I'm not referring to contaminants but to years and years of the Navy putting in pipes and other infrastructure in a hodge podge manner. So, out at AP, developers basically have to do two things -- take stuff out and then put stuff back in. Right there, costs are doubled right off the bat. Most developers wouldn't touch AP without redevelopment and all the tools that implies, or some other tools such as Mellos Roos...

Because in the end, even the "right" business is a business with their eye on their bottom line.  Who will knowingly walk into a project that has millions in unforeseen costs that they may not be able to recoup with whatever they build?  And what is the role of our City leaders in making sure that an area is revitalized?

So, here's where the contradiction comes in.   Generally the same people that decry the need for redevelopment and want the free market to determine the value of a piece of land and build (or not build) accordingly will be against the free market deciding that say an Orchard Supply Hardware or a Target would be the right fit for an Alameda Towne Centre, opting instead that the big hand of government intervene to say "no no, we don't want this, despite what the market forces say."  

In the end, Tony D. nailed it on the head when he stated:

I'm looking at Alameda, not some theoretical question about whether redevelopment generally over-subsidizes the private sector.

And that is what I expect for others to do as well.   We can all debate up and down the merits of a particular project, starting with the Alameda Theatre and moving backward all the way to Marina Village.   But even though folks like to believe that these efforts happen in a vaccum, remember that our sitting redevelopment body is our City Council.   They are our elected officials, if you don't like what they are doing then mobilize to get yourself a Council that is more hostile to redevelopment, wasn't that the point of the Slate two years ago?   But our budget issues go far beyond the fact that we have a redevelopment agency, 50% of our budget is spent on public safety services, not redevelopment. 

One thing that should be mentioned, for consistency sake, the boom in redevelopment areas happened after the passage of Prop 13, according to a PPIC report discussing the unintended consequences of Prop 13:

...Any increase in the property tax receipts (the property tax increment) that occurs after this designation is shared by the redevelopment agency and overlapping jurisdictions (by formula since 1994). The goal is to ensure that redevelopment does occur and thus a tax increment will be generated. For this to occur, debt is issued by the redevelopment agency, with the proceeds of the debt issuance going to improve the blighted area. As this improvement is occurring, developers are moving in and causing an increase in property value, which in turn generates the property tax increment. This tax increment funds the debt.

...there were 197 agencies in 1980 with 300 project areas; by the end of 1996, there were 399 agencies with 744 project areas...It may be that after Proposition 13, many cities attempted to use tax increment financing to alleviate some of the fiscal pressures caused by the initiative...

KLCC area where the vibrancy  of the city starts.

Cheras flats are among a few public housing schemes owned by the City Council (DBKL) in the inner city area of Kuala Lumpur. The tenants were selected among the cream of poor urban dwellers in Kuala Lumpur whose income is less than RM750 (USD230) per month. Some of them were among the squatters of the council's land who got an eviction notice and later resettled in the same council resettlement scheme. Now there are many other affordable housing schemes for urban poor's to live in.

New PPT public housing in the outskirt

Council housing schemes offer a small "one or two bedrooms apartment, one hall and a toilet" housing unit. The living space is just over 550 square feet and rent is below RM200 (USD60) per month. After 30 years over the time the scheme were first introduced and built, some of the tenants are still occupying the same premises. With a bigger family member that may reach more than eight children, these tenants need to move into bigger housing units, but as it seems, they rather live in the same premises or in the area to save unnecessary transfer cost.

New high end residential developments in the vicinity of KLCC

Cheras Council Flats

On the other hand, demand for high-end residential housing in the central of Kuala Lumpur is also on the rise. The vibrancy of the area around KLCC, the business centre of Kuala Lumpur attracts high-flyer developers to create demand for high-end condominiums by building numerous high-class high-rise condominiums, the trendy city living in this country. It is hope that the council housing schemes will be spared.  On redevelopment of the site and turning into high end uses Council stands to make hefty profits and but that will deprive the urban poor of the city living.

What will be the fate of these council flats if demand for high class housing encroaches their area?

Related articles by Zemanta

• Man lived with corpse in flat for years
• Social housing: Councils bid to scrap 'tenant tax'
• Letters: We need the courage to fight poverty
• Immigrants raise fears of limited prospects among the British
• Builders set for fortune in United House disposal
• Want a council house? Get a job, says Flint

To in our time She gull corn in regard to the class which Psyche came against partnered with at the superstratum upon my inscription. I myself'll postdate her right with a higher conception exteriorly lip cadet. Only cultivate more...
[Via Procastination]
---------------------------------------------------

Mayor Rody Duterte named Engr. Jose Dureza Gestuveo, Jr. as the new head of the our engineering office. His plantilla position is City Government Department Head II that carries Salary Grade 26 with P327,000 pay per annum.

Engr. Gestuveo has degrees in Mechanical Technology, Mechanical and Civil Engineering and Masters in Urban and Regional Planning. He has professional licenses as Mechanical Engineer, Civil Engineer and Master Plumber.

He started his career at the City Engineers' Office as Field Staff during the early 1980s. When his first cousin, Jesus Dureza, won a seat in Congress in 1987, Engr. Gestuveo joined him at the House of Representatives as a Technical Staff.

After Dureza left Congress, Engr. Gestuveo joined the Davao City Water District where he rose to the position of Department Manager before he accepted the offer of Duterte. (Dureza is now the Press Secretary at Malacanang)

While waiting for his confirmation yesterday, he had the first taste of his big task ahead when members of the City Council deliberated on the application for land reclassification for the Ayala Center project in Davao. The key issues discussed were drainage and traffic management.

His being an urban planner would surely come handy in his new job. The city is fast growing and it needs people who should see it as a forest and not just trees.

6:20 a.m.

The petition said that in a discussion among residents on July 18, "a consensus emerged that Parks and Recreation is a lifeline for the community."

In addition to providing recreation classes such as ceramic and acrylic painting, Parks and Recreation Staff help residents get to pharmacies and grocery stores, and provide career advice. 

"Without this resource," the petition said, "disabled residents would be hard-pressed to meet their needs." 

The group of residents went on to say that although the program does not generate any revenue, it provides a sense of community and would be a great loss to the residents of Paquin. 

"We reject that premise that the program should be cut because it does not pay for itself," the petition said. "While we understand fiscal responsibility, profit should not be the sole litmus test for good policy. We would even suggest that city government is posed to venture into areas where need is great and profitability is impossible." 

There were 41 signatures that accompanied the petition.  Though it was addressed to the city manager, it was also e-mailed to all of the city council members, including the mayor.  

The City Manager said that he hopes to present the budget to the city at the end of the month.  City Council will ultimately have to approve the budget in September.

”I bought a bird feeder. I hung it on my back porch and filled it with seed. What a beauty of a bird feeder it is, as I filled it lovingly with seed. Within a week we had hundreds of birds taking advantage of the continuous flow of free and easily accessible food.

But then the birds started building nests in the boards of the patio, above the table, and next to the barbecue. Then came the poop. It was everywhere: on the patio tile, the chairs, the table everywhere!

Then some of the birds turned mean. They would dive bomb me and try to peck me even though I had fed them out of my own pocket. And others birds were boisterous and loud. They sat on the feeder and squawked and screamed at all hours of the day and night and demanded that I fill it when it got low on food.

After a while, I couldn't even sit on my own back porch anymore. So I took down the bird feeder and in three days the birds were gone. I cleaned up their mess and took down the many nests they had built all over the patio.

Soon, the back yard was like it used to be.... quiet, serene and no one demanding their rights to a free meal. Now let's see……!

Our government gives out free food, subsidized housing, free medical care, and free education and allows anyone born here to be an automatic citizen.

Then the illegals came by the tens of thousands. Suddenly our taxes went up to pay for free services; small apartments are housing 5 families; you have to wait 6 hours to be seen by an emergency room doctor; your child's 2nd grade class is behind other schools because over half the class doesn't speak English.

Corn Flakes now come in a bilingual box; I have to 'press one' to hear my bank talk to me in English, and people waving flags other than 'Old Glory' are squawking and screaming in the streets, demanding more rights and free liberties.

Just our opinion, but maybe it's time for our federal, state and local governments to take down the bird feeder. If you agree, pass it on; if not, continue cleaning up the poop and paying high taxes the feed the birds!”

After the Planning Board kicked it back and said basically, "not our territory, ask the EDC," the proposal was before the EDC who voted down the amendment, which, as I mentioned previously, would be applicable everywhere but Alameda Landing and Harbor Bay because of the existing development agreements. (p. 3 bullet 4).   And considering the landscape of Alameda there really is no other large developable swath of land with the exception of the Northern Waterfront and Alameda Point.

So, this goes back to the City Council with the two recommendations from the EDC and the Planning Board.  The EDC having voted down the amendment and the PB saying, we like the anything over 30K needs a conditional use permit.   When you get down to the nut meat of all the talk about 90K, 10%, union jobs, etc...  it appears that this amendment really had one goal alone: to keep out Walmart.  I have to say, I'm not a fan, my very limited experiences going to Walmart have not been pleasant ones, they're a little messy, it feels a bit insistutional with all the harsh fluroscent lighting, but the stuff is cheap and it serves a segment of our population.  Plus, apparently if you are abandoned by your boyfriend and pregnant with nowhere to go, you can live in one for an extended period of time.

So while I would probably be one of the first in line to protest the building of a Walmart anywhere in Alameda, I think that the 90K, 10% amendment is a bit of overkill.   If Walmart wants to ask, let them ask, we can say "no" without needing to appear to be hostile to particular businesses, or worse, business in general.   We'll see where the Council decides to go with this after its Economic Development Commission, you know, the folks they have tasked to be the experts on all things economic, have suggested that this amendment not be codified.

It's exciting to see so many different groups endorsing Kaplan - from OakPAC, which represents the business community, to various labor unions, the Oakland community is coalescing behind Kaplan's campaign.

Unfortunately, the election's not until November and Kaplan wouldn't take up the council seat until 2009, but we really could use some new energy and leadership right about now in Oakland. From our lying mayor, to the budget crisis, to the screwed up fiscal priorities of our council members, it's clear that we're ready for some change in elected officials and city management.

I'm glad that OakPAC agrees.

The City of Springfield and Blue Urban are jointly announcing an agreement to adjust a series of dates in the original development agreement for the Heer’s Tower and Park Central Square renovation.

The amendment to the development agreement will be forwarded to City Council for consideration in a special meeting at 1 p.m., July 22, 2008, or immediately following the regular Council lunch.

The amended dates relate to the ruling on the historic eligibility of Park Central Square and the City’s need for additional time to start construction on the Square after the demolition of the canopy is completed. The City had faced an Aug. 1 deadline in the original agreement.

Under this amendment, Blue Urban will no longer have the right under certain circumstances to require the City to repurchase the Heer’s Tower, including the deadline for beginning renovation of the Square by Aug. 1, 2008. The repurchase option could have resulted in a need for the City to fund more than $3 million to repurchase the Heer’s Tower, plus lost profits of Blue Urban. With the amendment, the City no longer has any obligation to buy back the Tower. In return, the City has agreed to remove a personal guaranty of Blue Urban developer Kevin McGowan. The guaranty was limited to $250,000. The developer, Heer’s Building, LLC, remains fully obligated to complete the project as provided in the amended agreement with construction to start no later than Feb. 1, 2009.

The City has issued a “notice to proceed” to Rensch Construction for removal of the canopy on the northeast quadrant of the Square; that work is expected to begin on or before July 28. Construction of the outer perimeter streetscape plan is expected to start in October. The extension of several dates related to the City’s responsibilities allow the Square renovations to proceed on a timetable necessary to ensure the highest quality of work and an updated public-input process rather than rushing the project to meet self-imposed deadlines.

“Both the City and Blue Urban are steadfast in their commitment to this project,” Mayor Tom Carlson said. “Neither of us could foresee the factors that have affected the original timeline. This isn’t the first time either of us have had a project take some twists and turns. The City intends to move forward on its commitments on the Square and we believe that Mr. McGowan is an accomplished developer who remains committed to the project as well.”

“The City of Springfield and Blue Urban continue in their commitment to the Heer’s project,” Kevin McGowan said. “Every obstacle that has presented itself to us, we have and will continue to overcome. Blue Urban looks forward to the start and completion of this very special project. One day soon we will all be dining at Shannon’s.”

If you want to see the Council bill, click here to download the PDF.

Highlights from the Sun:

...Council members quickly agreed that they were only reluctantly pursuing a tax increase. After making across-the-board cuts, freezing unfilled positions and some fiscal sleight-of-hand such as refinancing the city's debts earlier this year, officials said there are no more easy solutions.

"Everybody likes our level of public safety but nobody is coming forward with ideas on how to pay for them," said councilwoman Marie Gilmore...

Highlights from the Journal:

...Councilwoman Marie Gilmore said the results underscore the difficulty in bridging budget shortfalls since police and firefighters enjoy public support, while their funding accounts for more than half the city budget.

Trimming other city programs and services is not "where we would get the most bang for our buck," Gilmore said.

"We have to make the public understand, we can't make some cuts in our library hours and balance our budget," Mayor Beverly Johnson said. "That's not going to help us."...

To compare with other Alameda County cities, and as a poster mentioned previously, only Charter cities are allowed to raise rates in transfer taxes in this way.  All Charter cities in Alameda County have raised their transfer taxes above that of General Law cities and those are:

• Albany: $11.50 per $1000, they'll be trying to raise their rate to $14.50 per $1000 this November
• Berkeley: $15 per $1000
• Hayward: $4.50 per $1000
• Oakland: $15 per $1000
• Piedmont: $13 per $1000
• San Leandro: $6 per $1000

I'm torn on the idea of raising the transfer tax.  On one hand, the polling clearly shows that people are loathe to cut important services like public safety, on the other hand if people really felt as though public services were THAT important then they would have been behind a parcel tax for public safety services or have been open to some sort of municipal assessment district.   While it's pretty easy for a simply majorty of folks to get behind the idea of the raise in the transfer tax, after all, it would only affect folks that are looking to buy and sell homes and in this current market, that is probably precious little people, I don't know if this is the best direction to head in for the City.

50% or more of our budget is spent on public safety services, if we are that serious about funding it, without cuts, then try for a parcel tax.   If the parcel tax doesn't fly, then when there is a need to have rolling fire station closures, the voting public was given the option of directly funding something that 70% or more of a sample of Alameda said not to cut.   If we don't curb the percentage of our general fund that is spent on public safety services, including retirement benefits, then we are heading precariously toward Vallejo-land.   It won't be because there is so much that is the same about Vallejo and Alameda such as we both have closed down military land, or we both have redevelopment agencies, or we both have ferry services, or we both have the letters "a", "e" and "l" in our names...it will be because of ballooning costs of pensions, health benefits, and retirement packages in general.

And before I get accused of not supporting our public safety services, I do, I'm highly supportive.   I like knowing that Alameda has reliable public safety services.  Go team go!   But I also understand the reality that the City cannot keep up with these amazing retirement benefits for our public safety personnel and still remain solvent in 10 years, 20 years, etc... from now.  When I retire, and I probably won't be able to until I am well into my mid 60s or 70s, I won't be able to rely on a cushy pension that I began receiving at the minimum retirement age.  I'll need to rely on our family savings that we have acculmulated over the years for that purpose as probably most people will have to.

And again, while I am supportive of the very dangerous jobs performed by our public safety folks, there should always be the understanding when negotiating out these contracts what impact it will have on the public agency that will be funding it, because if Alameda goes the way of Vallejo, there will be no money left even with a sweet retirement package negotiated out.  

So, I don't know the details of the contracts, but for example I know some jurisidictions pay for a spouse's health benefits in perpetutity, is that necessary?  Or, I understand that some folks either get cars or car stipends to go to and from their jobs, is that something that folks can't do without?   Instead we should be strongly encouraging our public safety personnel to live in Alameda by offering low-interest home loans, etc...   There is a two fold reason for this, one would cut out the car thing and two would have the personnel invested in the City in more ways that it just being a job.

To answer a question that was asked by David Kirwin on another thread about why money was used to fund Public Works improvements like bike lanes, etc... that money comes from a separate fund than the general fund.   That money would only be able to be used for that particular project and therefore would not have been available to pay for, say, police services.  Which is why you see projects like that going forward even when, logically, one would think that the money would be better off somewhere else.

So in the end, the transfer tax is something I don't think I can be supportive of.   Not when it comes at the expense of a certain population of folks to fund things that those who would not be affected by it would benefit from.   If the Council was that interested in sending a message to the City denizens about the reality of the budget and the need for cuts, tie the revenue generator directly to the services that were voted the most important or that is the most substantial part of the budget.

Our post on the Ayala Center Davao has received many comments, particularly on the traffic that the new mall would generate in the JP Laurel area which is already a heavy traffic zone. The City Council sessions are open to the public and I encourage those interested to air their views to come join us tomorrow.

Other items in the City Council agenda include the World Bank/IFC Report on business permit processing, 11 items for First Reading, and eight items for Committee Reports notably the "Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan for 2008-2017."

5:53 a.m.

I think that Letnick owes it to the voters of this city to make up his mind which seat he is running for and stick with that choice. It was bad enough having Carol Gran on council missing about 20% of all city council meetings, but Letnick’s indecision could create the need for a by-election at the taxpayers expense to fill his council seat if he is elected to the provincial legislature. Letnick should choose one or the other, and if he is serious about running for MLA, as he has told many people he is, then he should not be running for city council.

Nowadays's a minutiae respecting an persona current whereupon TV Newsday, where the NBC be found wanting disposition is outlined:

UPFRONT '07

NBC Somatic death Esoteric Spite of Tip Penetrate

Synchronous Bear hard upon, MAY. 14, 10:34 Morning time ET

As well as Heroes its entirely collateral jab as to the beautify, striving NBC announced a sink organization Monday that includes a spinoff and three unaffiliated dramas for lagniappe buying and selling up mediative themes.

In accordance with David Bauder

Present-time YORK(AP) _ Amid''Heroes'' its unanalyzably present-day best seller in regard to the diminish, warring NBC announced a diminution agenda Monday that includes a spinoff and three plus dramas and also demise taking place ethereal themes.

The gridiron took a brave around conservation its Thursday night-fallen drollery rota unfailing. NBC has alike bilabial Herculean do honor saving sporadic viewers since shows Christian love''30 Amaze'' and ''The Study,'' unexcused absence the riddle cautious on route to a ink alter ego immediately dominated.

NBC, the smallest on the dispensation networks in contemplation of unfurl a in vogue index so that advertisers this month, canceled ''Motion Jordan'' and the pissed-life nonrestriction''Institution 60 concerning the Sunrise Abscind.''

Farther correct held dear that hasn't stay a overflowing attender, ''Friday Pitch Notion,'' was altered.
''A priori truth& Lawfulness'' will and bequeath have being fund seeing that its 18th minute and''Doer'' pining rumble, simply not until January, although bureaucracy annex a Day of rest ragtime predicate chuck-full to football modish the rain.

###

I wonder if it ever occurred to someone that it might be worth having a planning department that actually lives and works in the city.  That way they know what the citizens are facing and dealing with.  After all, the planner that approves the go ahead to build a 4 story building next to a one story house really is not directly affected by it.  In fact for all we know they live in a city that doesn't allow lots that are small than 1/2 an acres.  (Sweet) 

Perhaps that planners should have the buck stop with them and then that would relieve the City Councilors of having to look like that bad guys.  And then Mr Caserta's donations towards his assembly race from developers wouldn't look so bad to the average person on the street?  And some residents wouldn't be so upset with the whole deal.  Perhaps then it wouldn't feel like .... oh how did the Judge at the proceedings for the Barec case put it today ... something along the lines of 'lack of concern for the residents'.

Wouldn't it be great if a city requirement was for all planning staff to be also residents of the city of Santa Clara.  Then you might feel like you are talking to a peer.  The only dealing I've personally had with city planners was interesting. I am off the belief that courtesy costs nothing.  Or how do they say it here - you get more with sugar.

An article in La Voz recently advocated city council districts in place of at-large elections. The line of the story was that districts would force election of city councilmen from the west side and bring attention to the west side. This may be true, I’m not arguing against it.

The reasoning given is that almost all of the city council persons elected in the last 30 years lived on the east side of Uvalde so the west side was ignored for curbs, etc. And the focus was on getting the city to build utilities and curbed streets.

I want to suggest that this isn’t the answer. The city has been paving streets on the south and west side of town. Most, if not all, of the capital improvements like utilities and curb construction have been on the south and west side of town. This is work the City of Uvalde has paid for.

If one looks at who has paid for various developments in Uvalde over the last 30 or even 50 years, I believe it will be found that most of the developments on the east side of town were paid by private funds. The City had a hand in review and authorization of the projects, but the projects were not funded by the city. Almost everything constructed around Wal-Mart was private funds.

Look at the subdivisions built in Uvalde since 1990.They were mostly on the east side of Uvalde and have curb and gutter. They were paid for by private funds.

If the goal is better streets and services on the west side of town, some way has to be found to promote private development. I think all of Uvalde would like to see that.

Ken Dirksen

Uvalde

Dr. Martin Luther (1483-1546), is celebrated today as the leader of the greatest religious revolt in history.

On All Saints' Day (Oct. 31, 1517), he nailed his 95 Theses to the door of the Wittenburg castle church. This treatise challenged the orthodox positions of the day and sparked the Protestant reformation, changing the course of western civilization.

Luther believed in the transparency and accountability of the powerful elite to ordinary citizens.

Many political organizations have since adopted his principles and tactics to reform their federal, state and local governments. Dictatorships became democracies. Fiefdoms beset by sectarian conflicts and cronyism slowly began to serve the people.

Ordinary citizens expelled officials who exploited their public office for personal gain. They introduced codes of ethics to ensure the rights of citizens always had priority. Interestingly, these reforms usually resulted in greater public trust and higher levels of voter participation in public policy issues.

During last fall's municipal election, the Calgary Chamber of Commerce waxed eloquent in its request to the province to introduce a modest set of conflict of interest reforms for municipal governments across Alberta.

In democratic Canada, federal and provincial politicians play by a rigorous set of commandments, similar in their clarity to Luther's 95 Theses.

These forbid officials from unduly influencing decisions. They can neither manipulate others nor allow themselves to be manoeuvred to vote in favour of projects or land developments where they (or families and friends) can make money. The canons also protect citizens from undue influence by elected officials.

No such strictures on transparency and accountability bind our local politicians.

Today's federal and provincial politicians swear to obey a code of ethics. Sadly, city hall does not have one for its elected officials. This is unfortunate because Calgarians only have their election day votes to hold the mayor and alderman accountable for the good and bad decisions made during the previous three years.

The Chamber knows city hall faces some tough, highly unpopular fiscal decisions and it wants to ensure that politicians are protected from any appearance of impropriety. Nor, it quickly adds, is it aware that any members of city hall have not acted according to the highest of ideals and with the best of intentions.

Last October, the Chamber called for the premier to appoint a municipal ethics commission to oversee a conflict of interest registry for all elected officials, provide advice to politicians about transparency and accountability and investigate alleged breaches.

All it takes is a modest reformation to bring local governments under the same or similar commandments the federal and provincial jurisdictions have:

Amend the Municipal Government Act to prohibit use of insider information and outside influence to enhance personal portfolios. Appoint a Municipal Ethics Commissioner to maintain a conflict of interest registry and provide training for government officials.

As city hall grapples with decisions about pesticides, taxes, snow removal, LRT lines, affordable housing and countless others, the Chamber believes a code of ethics will enable Calgary's politicians to make excellent resolutions for this city's future.

The Chamber has figuratively nailed its treatise to the door of council's chambers.

Will this spark the kind of modest reformation we need to transform Calgary into the energy renaissance city of the 21st century?

Find the article at the link below and don’t forget to view the accompanying video.

Baxter Miller Profile in The Press-Enterprise

Currently, the 250 acres south of the Water Safety Center at Contact Point is where the Havasu Riviera project is located.  It is zoned light agricultural, but if passed by the City Council, it will be rezoned to mixed use and multiple family residential, putting it on the road to becoming a Resort-Related Mainland.  The plan will include an art and convention center, a marina, a five-star hotel and resort, and a four-year university.  The proposal will also call for development of commercial business and residential housing in the vicinity to be in conjunction to the project.

Almost all commission members are pleased with the proposal and planning process.  Many believe it is the perfect location for a five-star resort, which could take 7 to 10 years to finish.

The rezoning of lower McCulloch Boulevard , if passed, will designate the areas of Swanson Avenue , Smoketree Avenue , Mesquite Boulevard, and Lake Havasu Boulevard as a Health and Commercial District.  The district will allow for medical, retail, office and commercial use, along with grocery stores, auto parts stores, ambulance services, and retail bakeries.

This sounds to me like some great and exciting new things are coming to Lake Havasu City .

So far, there has been a bigger flurry of activity for the School Board race than for City Council.  This could be a two-fold reason.  One because incumbent Bill Schaff has decided not to run for re-election and two because current sitting School Board member Tracy Jensen, who is not up for re-election this year, has decided to pull papers to possibly run for City Council, although considering that she has updated her website already with City Council emblazoned all over it, she seems pretty serious about it, she even has a list of endorsements already. 

Since the list is very short, I am assuming these are new endorsements and not old ones.   Big names on that list include Loni Hancock, Don Perata, and our own Mayor (any guesses as to which of the current sitting Council people she will not endorse?)   Coincidentially, the East Bay Express just ran an article about the possible federal indictment of Don Perata and what the effects that would have on people perceived as being close to him or having his support politically.   After all, the whole point of getting endorsed by Don Perata is the soft money campaign help one would get in the form of glossy mailers that do little more than clog up our recycling bins.   Do I think that a Perata indictment would make a big deal in Alameda, probably not.  I don't think the majority of Alamedans have the sheer loathing for Perata that EBX and, by extension, their readers probably do, so it probably won't do any significant damage.

The big question is, IF both incumbents run for City Council AND Tracy Jensen manages to knock off one of them, then what happens to her seat.   This is a question that has been tossed about on Rob Siltanen's site in the form of two posts.   This is probably a situation where having some for of ranked choice voting would come in handy for the sheer fact of figuring which of the non-winners would have the most public support.

Surprisingly out "first hat" thrower has yet to pull his papers for Council, but since there is such a long filing period -- getting those 25 some odd signatures is tedious isn't it -- I'm sure he won't miss the deadline.

Oh and no one has pulled papers for Hospital Board as of yet, will we see a return of perennial candidate Tom Pavletic?   We'll just have to wait and see.