South San Francisco, CA October 3, 2015 Submitted by Your Neighbor
Dear Neighbor:
If you say yes to Measure W, you will be sending $7,000,000 for the next 30 years to the city’s General Fund to be spent for any government purpose which includes salaries and pensions for city employees. Despite assurances of a Citizens Oversight Committee,they have no power over spending. The IRS says unless you make a 6 figure yearly salary,the least able to afford it (working families,seniors, college kids) in this low wage economy, will pay out of their smaller income, 0.5% more sales tax until 2046 on nearly everything with few exceptions. Businesses will pass the cost back to you. IS THIS FAIR ?
Half Moon Bay, San Rafael, recently rejected a much smaller (1/4%) and shorter term (5years) sales tax and so should you, because the city is not in fiscal crisis. Please send a message to city hall to set their priorities consistent with Measure W requests.The community has already done its share. Say NO to Measure W, it is Wrong for SSF.
“Our budget is balanced and we are able to keep up what we have,” says Futrell. (City Manager, Mike Futrell, public statement 7/22/2015 Press Release
And,
*’So. City is experiencing an incredible economic boom” (SSF Chamber of Commerce June,2015 Newsletter. Promising revenues in the future await So.City.
Please VOTE NO to MEASURE W.
-Your Neighbor
Today, Susan Freeman,who just arrived about a year or so ago, has become an expert on the history of South City and already spreading misinformation to voters. She answered a facebook commenter who looked at city public record facts to tell him that he had it wrong, that the 7 million by staff reports, is not what is in the 2016 budget, that its something else. That the measure W funds were going for a police station and a library, and a few other things and nothing else. Just Wow.
Fact: when the analysis by the city attorney states that the funding for Measure W is going into the GENERAL FUND, its is going in a place where whoever is on the council in the next 30 years, should this pass, can use that money for salaries and pensions “any legitimate government spending”. In fact, her husband, the city manager has been heard saying so! How appalling and shameful!
The city continues to misinform(I’m being kind) the public, and everythingsouthcity site quickly pushes opposition way low so the public won’t see it until you get to the second page. Hardball tactics from the city. This site IS corporate owned.
-your neighbor
Dear Neighbor,
Your sarcasm has not gone unnoticed but is painfully ineffective. Not only is a snarky response a sign of a poor argument, it is a sign of a lack of reason. I am, in fact, a nice person, a kind person, and a good writer. I do write a lot (which is two words, by the way). The more important point is that I think and speak for myself and do not need others to craft my thoughts and words. The City Manager has done a great job at the helm, and by direction of the fine City Council which hired him. Yes, I was here for the decision to remove the red light cameras. Why that has any relevance is beyond me.
You continue to reference the fact that I am not from here originally without acknowledging the fact that the majority of the people who live here — and shop here — are not from here originally. The majority of the people who will pay this half-penny tax may not be “from South City” and to your point, that should be a good thing in everyone’s eyes. There are 67, 000 people living here (I among them) and over 100,000 people spending money here (I among them).
No, I am not on the payroll but I do stick to the facts, and in doing so, I do not mislead the voters with the ballyhoo some naysayers have shared. I have personally had to use the 9-1-1 emergency response service and would very much like to see the response times improved. I am sure you care little about my having had to call them since I am not from here originally. However, I have a young son, and he, my husband, and I deserve to be safe and well served by the police and fire that serve the people of this City (like it or not, that includes yours truly). My neighborhood would certainly benefit from police patrols as I do not live in the best of neighborhoods. Unlike so many who have lived here for years, I had to buy a home that costs far more than it is worth in a neighborhood that needs great improvement in public safety and quality of life measures.
Attempting to make a case that I, my family, and my opinions are not welcome here is a very unkind and unChristian-like thing to do. According to the “small town folk,” I have met here, this kind of treatment is highly unacceptable. We all live under the same blue sky.
Again, we must give merit to another’s stand. We should all vote our values — not our fears. I will VOTE YES ON W!
Yours truly,
Susan Freeman
Dear Susan,
Please refer your requests for all your answers to the city manager. You see,I wish I could tell you, but the city keeps changing the reasons why we need to tax SSF citizens. Like we need to protect ourselves from ‘gangs’, well we hired an extra policeman and a community liason, and built a police sub-station that btw, sits empty in the new and rather hardly used boondoggle parking garage in the downtown when we had that problem and now even the local police say there is no ‘gang’ problem–they’re all in jail.
We’ve had responsible local government. We have a good group of staff employees who are great grant writers, stayed within budget,and doing the best the community can. The council does a nice job but occassionally needs re-direction from the community, like the Red Light Camera issue. You weren’t here then. The council reversed themselves on that one, because we didn’t want them.
You seem like a nice person who enjoys writing alot, mostly cut and paste the city’s same tired talking points,which leads me to ask,are you on the payroll? Tell us something else other than what you’ve said or asked your friends to write on social media.
We’re small town folk, and we like it that way, and would like for you to VOTE NO ON W ~~ !!
-Your Nabe
Well good evening my dearest “your neighbor”:
Thank you for once again checking in with “yours truly.” As a resident for more than 15 months who has paid a house note of more than $4000 a month and annual taxes that will amount to more than double that, I hardly feel like a newcomer but thank you for once again rolling out the red carpet for me. While on that note, might I suggest you meet me for lunch, as I am quite a gracious host and for you, “your neighbor,” I would gladly sit down and share a meaningful conversation, an exchange of the most engaging kind. I would even pay for your meal, tip, and tax!
We could then with civility, separate people from the problem and find some common ground, focusing on interests, rather than positions. I am certain that as two critical thinkers we might agree in advance to engage in the invention of options for mutual gain, while insisting on using objective criteria in debating whether Measure W is good for the people of this city as a whole. You see, that fact is what may be viewed as highest and best for one person may not be seen in the same light, by another. This is why we must always vote our values and not our fears. However, we will never come to such a determination without an understanding of the facts, as they impact us personally first.
I do know that South San Francisco is changing and growing, just like each individual who inhabits this fine city. It is healthy. It is normal. It is expected. It is welcomed, just as I should be. Change is always harder for some than others — and I understand that. “Your neighbor,” as you may have noted, just from my one simple example of biotech, we all know of a few businesses in downtown that have recently opened here and by people from the biotech industry. Many existing businesses, like Amoura Restaurant on Linden Avenue, for one example have directly benefitted from the biotech industry being in South San Francisco but let me also remind you that peripheral businesses afford jobs and money to locals.
Yes, the people in biotech shop here — just ask the guys at Armstrong where they looked when shopping for a new place to open their new brewery. Ask folks where outsiders shopped when they looked to open the San Francisco Wine School, and where the people who opened Amis Crêperie & Cafe, Copper Chimney (an Indian-Pakistani Bistro). Also coming soon is Café 382, at 382 Grand Avenue, and the popular restaurant Ben Tré is relocating to 398 Grand Avenue. On Linden Avenue, brew masters are preparing to open 47 Hills Brewery. Also know of the great support this city has enjoyed from the good people of Genentech. However, the greatest contribution this measure affords can be summed up in two parts: public safety and quality of life.
Undeniably, there are many pros to Measure W, and no one denies it is in fact, a tax; currently South San Francisco has NO LOCAL SALES TAX. A wise, well-informed person understands that a HALF-PENNY sales tax on things such as this would apply to things such as restaurant meals, office supplies and such.
Yes, I will once again copy, cut, and paste the facts about Measure W but only after I once again invite you to meet face-to-face and discuss your concerns. If your concerns are valid we can certain address them, and agree to check the facts, establish how they impact us personally and then vote our values not our fears – and move on. If in fact, this exchange has become about your need to poke the bear, the bear being, me, I would love to meet you and have you gain a better understanding of this reasoned and reasonable person you seem to think you have figured out. Either or both is fine by me, “your neighbor.”
http://www.ssf.net/2162/Frequently-Asked-Questions—Measure-W
I can be reached at 225-620-2085 (yes, a Louisiana cell number that has remained with me through all my years in Baton Rouge, Switzerland, Boston, Honolulu, and now, the charming and quaint little city I so love, South San Francisco). Fee free to call me for lunch — my treat, tip, tax and all. ☺
“Yours truly,”
Susan Freeman
I know you are new to SSF, Susan, so let me ask if you knew that 20K biotech employees leave on buses and DON’T shop here. Maybe you can tell me when they do shop here. While on this topic, the roads that need upgrading, are East of 101, in the industrial section,I saw it for myself, but didn’t the potholes, sorry. Is it fair that seniors, disabled, pensioners,2 job millenials be saddled with the magnitude of what Measure W request?
Also may I point out to you what the IRS website says about sales taxes and those disproportionately burdened so as not to be spreading misinformation? Study after study justifies a NO~! on Measure W.
By the way, nice cut and paste job there to what we already got in our mailboxes.
Here’s another fact: Calif.cities carefully weigh a tax increase of this magnitude for this length of time. Most do it for a shorteer time, not 30 long years, and certainly not based on a few hundred opinions as did the city. In fact it is an unpopular tax for reasons mentioned.
Your opinions are welcome, lets stay with facts so as not to confuse the voter. Thanks.
“Your neighbor,” for additional fact-based information that may be of interest to you and others, the City of South San Francisco retrofitted the library on Grand Avenue to be seismically safe in 1996. The City of South San Francisco also did the same for City Hall on Grand Avenue in 1998, as referenced above. These are very important improvements, and I am certain most, if not all, would agree. However. it is without a doubt that making such improvements to the very building that houses our first responders is critically important — without argument.
As for your comment “tax increase on those who would be burdened disproportionally…” this is not the case. As stated before, Measure W is NOT a tax on your home or property and non-city residents who benefit from city services will share the cost of those services. For example, many people work here but do not live here – think biotech for example. They will pay for half of the entire tax! Why would any resident not want to vote for such a measure? Residents will NOT have to pay this sales tax on prescription drugs or groceries or auto repairs, for examples. Instead it would apply to things such as restaurant meals, office supplies and such. This is a great opportunity for the people if this City because all of the safety initiatives and quality of life programs are LOCAL, serving citizens of South San Francisco. So we get ALL of the benefit but cover only half of the cost.
As suggested above, you might want to actually get to know your hard working and capable City Manager, Mike Futrell. He is quite personable and has an open-door policy. He can be reached by cell at 650-676-0173. Contact him and in a reasoned manner (remember it’s best to operate from the thinking quadrant not feeling quadrant when discussing opposing views).
Also, there is some helpful information on Measure W here: http://www.ssf.net/2161/19515/Information-About-Measure-W?activeLiveTab=widgets
With all due respect, and I mean DUE respect, “Your neighbor,” you are quite sadly and most pitifully mistaken if you think attacking people rather than problems is a principled negotiation skill. You are also oratorically stumbling down a muddied footpath my friend if you wish to tangle with me when it comes to facts — and the open, honest, direct and effective presentation of such. I am gifted at operating from the thinking quadrant and giving merit to another’s stand — where warranted. Your operating from the emotional quadrant has no negative bearing on me whatsoever, and let me point out that it has absolutely no positive bearing on the issue at hand, which is the absolute need for improved public safety and grander quality of life for those of us who reside and pay taxes in South San Francisco — and yes, that includes me. If what you say it true about having shopped at that former department store then you admit that I will in fact be paying the half-penny tax far longer than you. I am willing to pay this for seniors such as yourself who I believe deserve the assistance programs Measure W will afford. Might I also remind you that South San Francisco taxpayers include my husband (as you pointed out), myself, and someday, our son for whom the future of South San Francisco should be top-of-mind. We as a community owe it to our children to ensure South San Francisco is a place they too want to live, work, and play. That said, you make a great point. We can live anywhere — yet we LOVE it here and CHOOSE to live here in South San Francisco. Daily, we dedicate serious consideration of ensuring South San Francisco is as great or better tomorrow as it is today. It is my belief every citizen should do the same.
Unlike you, I’ll not ask permission to inform you, “Your neighbor.” I will simply state that you woefully give too little credit to the collective intellectual capital of the people who live, work, and play in this great city of South San Francisco. The people who expect to be well served by their public servants and well protected by their police and firefighters understand that professional measures have been taken to test the integrity of that very building to which you refer. You may have conversation after conversation with city planners of old all you wish. Show me recent quantifiable documentation that states the MSB is seismically safe. You will not — because you cannot. Again, let us turn to your misinformation, and I will point out that both the library on Grand Avenue as well as City Hall on Grand Avenue have already been retrofitted to be deemed seismically safe. The same needs to be done for the Municipal Services Building. Remember “your neighbor” that people are not ignorant — and that facts are true whether “your neighbor” chooses to believe them or not.
I will also CORRECT you in your statement that Mike Futrell “came on board” a little over a year ago. Your bright, hard-working, extremely capable, very well accomplished City Manager (husband, father, USN-06, JD, MBA, MA, BS) was unanimously asked to serve in said capacity by public servants directly elected to serve the fine people of South San Francisco. If you have not met with him, you should, as he is quite approachable and has an open-door policy. He, just as I, is willing to answer any questions you may have. However, you must know that he is a progressive leader who hosts a respect for the past while understanding the need for preparing for the future. Recall, “your neighbor,” that someone before you, did the same.
A great leader understands that in some cases, trying to reason with certain people is like affording medicine to a dead man. Both parties must be open to listening, learning and then taking action. Might I suggest you 1) Check the facts, 2) Understand the value of what Measure W brings to the people of South San Francisco, 3) Decide whether public safety and quality of life are important to you, 4) Attack only problems, never people, and 5) Vote your values not your fears.
As you can see “your neighbor,” I need no one’s defense — nor does our quite capable City Manager. Both our records speak volumes for themselves and I am happy to stand toe-to-toe with you any day of the week should you wish to debate such records. However, since this is not about you, me, Mike Futrell, as you attempted to make it, but instead this is about Measure W, I will again graciously take this opportunity you have afforded me to share the FACTS on Measure W, as follows:
FACTS:
Currently South San Francisco has NO LOCAL SALES TAX.
State charges 7.5 cent sales tax
County charges 1 penny sales tax
BART charges half cent sales tax
There is a deal with the state that of the 7.5 cents they will give a penny of that to South San Francisco…during the economic downturn they didn’t outright pay South City that money. The state instead found a way to loan that same money to themselves. Simultaneously, that and many other actions, South City suffered a death of a thousand cuts. As a result of those cuts, South City ended up losing $15M. We need a local revenue that the state CANNOT touch.
• YES on W ensures South San Francisco maintains rapid 911 emergency response times for police, fire safety services, neighborhood patrols, crime prevention and gang suppression programs – without worrying about public safety budget cuts.
• YES on W improves the quality of life by maintaining our streets that are in need of over $18 million in repairs, fixing potholes and preventing further disrepair.
• YES on W maintains and enhances programs for senior citizens and disabled residents.
• YES on W expands safe recreational and library spaces for seniors and students, including after-school and summer programs so important to keeping kids off the streets, out of trouble, and away from gangs and drugs!
• YES on W keeps our taxpayer dollars LOCAL, funding OUR services and priorities! We need local control for local needs. Let’s keep OUR money in South San Francisco.
• YES on W is fiscally accountable, including: Independent Citizens Oversight; no tax increases without voter approval; mandatory audits; and public reporting, to ensure funds are spent on OUR priorities.
• Measure W is NOT a tax on your home or property and non-city residents who benefit from city services will share the cost of those services.
• Measure W was developed with input from hundreds of South San Francisco residents!
Susan Freeman, I understand you are the city manager’s wife, and he came on board a little over a year ago, and now has a 3 years contract with SSF, starting this June(?) That makes you a newcomer, hardly an authroity over some of us who have lived here to shop at the old department store turned Municipal Service Building.
May I inform you that I spoke to former city planners and they say that MSBuilding is seisicmally safer than the Grand Ave. Library that is getting renovated?
But that is not the point here. We are talking about SSF’s fiscal situation and whether it is ok to ask for an unheard of tax increase on those who would be burdened disproportionally. Your husband would not be affected because he makes a 6 figure income. I don’t think we have many of those here, in SSF.
Measure W is rife with words to stoke the flames of fear using “gang”language, to appeal to an array of groups. Basically alot thrown to the voter to see what sticks. What shameful politics.
Further,the money is going to a place in the city budget that would make it very easy to bypass any of the capital projects on Measure W if the council in the next 30 years changed their minds, despite an oversight committee. This measure asks the public to allow the city to incur debt to fund those projects. NO !
Alana Gomez, you are quite incorrect. The Municipal Services Building (MSB), was in fact built in 1959 (NOT the 1980s), and is seismically unsafe. It was built as a Department Store NOT a Police Operations Center and 911 Dispatch Center.
In the 1970s the City Council asked the people of South San Francisco for a tax to build a new Police Station and they said, “No.” As a result, the City has been forced to use this old Department Store for such critical public safety services such as First Response, ever since. Most dangerously, if there should be an earthquake that compromises the building’s integrity in any way, the people we rely on most to keep us safe, are themselves, in danger. Police cars park beneath that very building to which you refer. Who will help us when we call 911, if the police are trapped in the MSB after a seismic event?
The earthquake in Napa just last year should be a wake-up call to this community, that South San Francisco must fix this problem. It is not a matter of IF something bad will happen — it is a matter of WHEN.
Mentioned on FB regarding replacing seisimically unsafe buildings, is referring to Measure W ballot requests to replace but not specifically,the Municipal Service Building built in the 1980s.If its that unsafe why is it still being used for the city council meetings? Groups? events?police dept? That building is only 30 years young, compared to the Grand Avenue Library(circa 1920) that is undergoing
renovation.