Disqus - Latest Comments for 5065

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | City raises water rates

Frank Manocchio — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 21:53:35 -0000

Let's be real.....this process is exactly like the ubiquitous software updates: "If you don't want 'Brand X' to be your default browser, check this box". People had to write a letter or show up to protest the water increase, in other words, you must take the time to "opt out". Do nothing and you have "agreed" .

Regardless which side of the issue you are on, it is disingeneous for the City to infer that
if you didn't support the increase, you must have been for it. Does anyone have any doubt of what would have happened if had actually been put on a ballot. Or, if on our water bills, there was an insert that said mark yes or no on the water rate increase and include with your payment! I guarantee you that the Council knows and that is precisely why they did it the way they did.

Finally, Mr. Siebert's comment that those of us who have been conserving this resource are being "rewarded" by not having to pay penalties just about sums up the different world views between the public and private sector. By his logic, any percentage of taxation of under 100% that we don't pay should be considered a "reward". Any time not spent in incarcerated could be considered a "reward".

Obviously, we in the private sector have not appreciated the beneficience of our "leaders".

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | Update: SJ sergeant kills wife, himself

Frank Manocchio — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 21:26:19 -0000

The Times does a very good job of covering news and events in our town, especially when you consider how small their staff is and how limited their resources are. It is ludicrous to compare them to the SF Chronicle. In this age of the internet, we are indeed lucky to have a local paper that presents the news and issues in a responsible, balanced and professional manner.

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | Two lanes or four, merchants want more business

Frank Manocchio — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:51:09 -0000

Rikard,

Your analysis employs too much business, as well as common sense to ever be considered by the City Council, let alone the "staff". Despite, the participating public's overwhelming preference for
retaining two lanes in both directions at the first two, downtown meetings, the Mayor and the Council, kept the single lane option alive and have promoted it ever since. They continued to push that scenario, in spite of the professional analysis to the contrary of their own hand selected developer, Barry Swenson and his commercial business consultants!

The City, having bought up most of the downtown, stubbornly refuses to acknowledge the realities of, both, the economy and the marketplace. Having gotten the taxpayers "pregnant", they are determined to continue down their ill conceived path, revelling in their relative ignorance of business accumen. The "amatuers" haven't learned much along the way in the past 5 years, so why start now? Unfortunately, they have just about enough RDA money left over, from mortgaging our town's financial future, to complete the debacle.

The downtown businesses, already beleaguered by this dismal recession, best brace themselves
for the "help" that the City is endeavoring to send their way. After all, who would know better what the merchants need than the people who've never run a business? It's not like it was their money or liveliehoods that are on the line.

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | City, Bruce Tichinin settle for $200,000

Frank Manocchio — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 19:03:21 -0000

I'm guessing "our end" (as taxpayers) was considerably more than the alleged $100K deductible. I wonder how much of our crack, staff's time was spent on this as well. No doubt, Tate/Wan were prepared to go to the highest court in the land on our behalves. Fortunately, there were adults in the room (the judge and the insurance company).

Unfortunately, our Mayor and City Atty, by their comments, appear not to have learned the operative lesson of this affair, regardless of what one may think of the relative merits of Tewes/Tichinin sides of the contoversy. Which is that the City Council, in an official capacity, had absolutely no business involving itself (and by extension, we the taxpayers) in this tawdry, little passion play.
The end result is that we have, at least, $100K less out of the General Fund with which to address real needs and problems, let alone the considerable amount of lost staff time, which we can assume they will never reveal, wasted.

At best, this should have strictly been a civil matter between Mssrs. Tewes and Tinchin. I'm guessing that if they (our Council)would have had to reach into their own pockets, rather than those of the taxpayers, they might have gleaned a little understanding from the experience, but alas, it sounds like
another lesson unlearned.

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | West Dunne Avenue closures continue

Frank Manocchio — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:02:12 -0000

Really? Who could have possibly anticipated "the beginning of school", or the possibility that:
""The rain could delay the project and create a big mess out there," Behzad said. " The problem isn't that these things occur, but rather, that they apparently come as a huge surprise to the City Manager and his staff.

After years of public meetings, studies, reports, the commitment of tens of millions of dollars, and the solemn assurances by the City Council that this and other projects like it are vitally necessary, they are caught flat footed by the fact that schools open every fall, or that the possibility of rain may slow the project?

This leads us to conclude one of two things, either, they are not competent to tackle projects of this magnitude, or, that they have been less than forthcoming with the facts and agendas for these projects.

Neither of which bodes well for the "downtown improvement program", and certainly calls into question their competency to "fix" the downtown. Unfortunately, it will be the downtown businesses and the taxpayers that bear the consequences. Almost everything seems to be an experiment for this group, no matter how many times they've done it or how many consultants they have hired (see Third Street Promenade). Like chickens waking up to a brand new world every day, the learning curve is virtually nonexistent. Actually, chickens may not be that slow.

Finally, the wholesale removal of the mature, native oak trees along W. Dunne hardly contributed to "beautify the road segment", let alone help retain the vanishing, rural appeal of our community.

The real agenda, which has always been, and still remains to be to close two lanes of Monterey in the downtown between Main and Dunne and divert the traffic out of that corridor. Regardless if you believe that that is a good or idea or not, it must be obvious by now that these are not the people that should be charged with the responsibilty of making that decision, let alone attempting the prosecution of it.

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | Commission, public suggest temporary test for downtown street

Frank Manocchio — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 01:07:47 -0000

To date the City has spent almost $265K (they authorized another $20K this spring) to have Callender Associates make presentations, hold community meetings, etc, to get the community's input and then ultimately present the community w/ 5 different plans. At two highly promoted, and well attended, subsequent community workshops, "the Community" was asked to vote on them, as the top two plans were to be presented to the City Council. The public ovewhelmingly picked the two FOUR LANE versions.The City Council grudgingly accepted the peoples choice and then said "but we still want to consider a two lane version". Now, months later, they pretend that the feedback from that process, either, didn't happen, or wasn't a large enough sample of "community input" and use their highly paid consultant to "steer the process" in order to get the desired result (two lanes)that they have been flogging all along.

That is the real reason for the W. Dunne and the Santa Teresa Extensions, and has been all along. To divert the through traffic away from downtown. They've denied, deflected it, pretended that they (the City Council) are just objective observers, but their actions over the past 4 years prove otherwise.

Finally, after negotiating for over a year, with their hand selected developer, Barry Swenson Builder, the City again chooses to ignore, both, Swenson's and his commercial property leasing consultant, who advised the City that the kinds of commercial tennants that the downtown project was trying to target, would be deterred by a two lane configuration and it's resultant reduction of traffic.

This from the Times' own article, dated February 2, 2011:

"Future downtown developer Barry Swenson Builder and the Morgan Hill Chamber of Commerce sent the council letters indicating they think a four-lane design, such as exists now on the street, is the best for economic development, attracting visitors and tenants, and the overall sustainability of the city's downtown development vision."
Once again, the City Council compounds it's own mistakes by ignoring it's own advisors and experts.

Clearly, they are only interested in finding someone that agrees with them and "their original vision", rather than doing the right and smart thing. Hey, it's not their money, nor businesses at stake.

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | Letters: Teenagers and spray paint, a dangerous combination?

Frank Manocchio — Tue, 20 Sep 2011 17:49:29 -0000

Mark-

Regarding your remarks concerning the proposed re-zoning: well said, but with those guys, "appropriate", like facts or common sense, doesn't have anything to do with it.

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | Two lanes is the way to go for downtown

Frank Manocchio — Tue, 20 Sep 2011 17:36:36 -0000

To date the City has spent almost $265K to have Callender Associates make presentations, held community meetings, etc, to get the community's input and then ultimately present the community w/ 5 different plans.At two highly promoted, and well attended, subsequent community workshops, "the Community" was asked to vote on them, as the top two plans were to be presented to the City Council. The public ovewhelmingly picked the two FOUR LANE versions.The City Council grudgingly accepted the peoples choice and then said "but we still want to consider a two lane version". Now, months later, they pretend that the feedback from that process, either, didn't happen, or wasn't a large enough sample of "community input" and use their highly paid consultant to "steer the process" in order to get the desired result (two lanes)that they have been flogging all along.

That is the real reason for the W. Dunne and the Santa Teresa Extensions, and has been all along. To divert the through traffic away from downtown. They've denied, deflected it, pretended that they (the City Council) are just objective observers, but their actions over the past 4 years prove otherwise.

Finally, after negotiating for over a year, with their hand selected developer, Barry Swenson Builder, the City again chooses to ignore, both, Swenson's and his commercial property leasing consultant, who advised the City that the kinds of commercial tennants that the downtown project was trying to target, would be deterred by a two lane configuration and it's resultant reduction of traffic.

This from the Times' own article, dated February 2, 2011:

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | Council to consider sharing sales data

Frank Manocchio — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:57:48 -0000

Richard,

Spot on! Unfortunately your argument is handicapped by a surfeit of sound business practices and common sense, which pretty much makes it unintelligible to the denizens of City Hall. Naturally, they think that they can "work backwards" from the highest sales tax revenue to determine which potetential businesses to target.

No point in letting the private sector sort it out, via a combination of entrepreneurial skills and their own capital. Their approach is to rely on the "experts" who helped create the downtown's problems to solve them. Previously, with a healthy RDA larder, they operated under the assumption that no mistake was too big to overpay on, after all it was only the taxpayers' money.

This latest exercise will result in very little accomplished other than exhausting the last of the RDA's funds, nothing more.

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | 800 and counting

Frank Manocchio — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 20:47:27 -0000

"But that process is long and costly, and while city officials hope to start a general plan update within the next couple of years they aren't sure they will have the funds to do so. "

.......Interesting, they (city officials) spent over $20K to have two consultants attend just two (2) meetings for the Santa Teresa Extension Neighborhood Meetings last fall: their traffic consultants ($13K+) Fehr & Peers, and someone to "facilitate" the meetings, Apex Strategies ($7.8K). Ms. Goodman subsequently facilitated another meeting for the rebranded "Hale Extension" (the miracle of marketing) just a few weeks ago, presumably for another $4K.

Why would you need a facilitator to run a neighborhood meeting for the City? Let's let Apex Stategies explain it (from their website, Ms. Goodman's CV):

“Since completing the mission of the
Traffic Authority, Ms. Goodwin has been Principal of
Apex Strategies, counseling and assisting public agencies and private parties
in favorably
positioning their projects and programs with the community and the media.”

This is just the tip of our RDA 'consultant's recovery program', funded with RDA "lucky bucks" these past five years, but now, sadly, they might not have the funds to do a general plan update. Perhaps, someone could make a movie blaming it all on the Governor.

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | Letters: We should invest in a water reclamation plant in Morgan Hill

Frank Manocchio — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 17:25:14 -0000

They've already spent the lion's share of RDA funds on other, more "important" infrastructure projects, as well as becoming the "market maker" downtown. Your idea is DOA, as it makes way too much sense. Plus, they would have been loathe to make a "finding" for a project outside the Redevelopment Area.

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | Power out in downtown Morgan Hill

Frank Manocchio — Tue, 05 Jul 2011 21:51:44 -0000

W. Dunne and Del Monte. Right where the W. Dunne Widening Project excavation is going on. What an amazing coincidence. I'm sure it wasn't the back hoe's fault.

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | We must pay for the society we want

Frank Manocchio — Wed, 08 Jun 2011 22:39:00 -0000

Are you quite certain that "there's no free lunch"? Apparently, a dozen of Alameda's "first responders" got paid to watch that courageous woman, who presumbly just like them, "did not have the proper equipment or current certifications to conduct water rescues" retrieve that poor soul's body.

I don't recall hearing or seeing any images of similar behavior by Japanese first responders during the recent, tsunami tragedy and its' nuclear aftermath.

Perhaps, if one had cynical nature, one might possibly draw the conclusion that their (Alameda's) inaction may have been partially motivated by doing things strictly by the manual....the union manual, in a misguided attempt to use the incident as a "teachable moment" in order to to educate the public about the hazzards of addressing public sector pay, benefits and pension issues. I hope that that isn't the case.

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | Downtown properties back on the market

Frank Manocchio — Fri, 20 May 2011 13:55:04 -0000

roberth,

A partial answer may be found here, according to the "Water woes short capital projects" article on this site:

" The CIP, along with a separate allotment for downtown improvements and private assistance, also reflects an approaching end to about $110 million in bond proceeds acquired by the Morgan Hill RDA in 2007, according to city manager Ed Tewes. For the next five years, the CIP budgets about $22.3 million to be spent from the proceeds. Another $15.9 million in the proceeds is available for unspecified downtown revitalization efforts, which could include a Monterey Road streetscape project, assistance to developers on redevelopment projects, parking and other downtown improvements.

The City has at least $15.9M mad money left in the RDA cookie jar. I suspect the hang up between
Swenson and the City is how much of that BSB can convince them to part with. The so called deal has never "penciled" without a massive infusion of taxpayer money, otherwise somebody would have done it with private money. One theory is that we build an underground "public parking" structure with RDA funds, thus providing the developer with, not only parking, but a foundation.

They overpaid for the property to begin with, they've removed it from the tax rolls, they've saddled the taxpayers with the risk, many of the interim RDA rental properties have had their rents reduced or forgiven, they bought out existing leases, etc. They will probably have to subsidize it to get it moving forward, and make no mistake about it, they are DESPERATE to get it moving forward. Sort of like when Jack traded his cow for the magic beans.

So what would lead you to question the City's competence "when it comes to developing property for private business purposes".

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | Water woes short capital projects

Frank Manocchio — Thu, 19 May 2011 22:54:42 -0000

Interesting, the City spent well over $10M for the Granada and the adjacent building, almost $4m for the Third St. Promenade, purchased all manner of additional downtown properties for parking, paid $1.9M for an "option" to purchase a property valued at $2M, are currently in negotiations to purchase the "Sunsweet" property, etc. as they burned through the $110M++ over the last 4 years, but alas, didn't/don't have any money for our water and wastewater "infrastructure".

On top of that, they have 4 pages on their website devoted to water conservation, and now having convinced us to conserve, want to charge us more for our good faith efforts. Meanwhile, the Council is considering spending an additional $1M from reserves to "balance" the upcoming budget deficit, because in large part, the employee unions are no longer willing to defer their scheduled RAISES, let alone consider reductions in wages or benefits.

"Another $15.9 million in the proceeds is available for unspecified downtown revitalization efforts, which could include a Monterey Road streetscape project, assistance to developers on redevelopment projects, parking and other downtown improvements."

"City staff have already recommended a 10-percent increase in both water and sewer rates starting Jan. 1, 2012, though that could jump even higher when the results of a rate study by an independent consultant are released in the coming weeks."

Really???

Perhaps a second collection after the Mayor's upcoming budget sermon would be in order.

Can you say "Taxpayer Bail Out" ?

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | City budget proposal lays off 18, hires seven new employees

Frank Manocchio — Sat, 14 May 2011 21:15:33 -0000

Sorry Buzz, but the City Atty's contract is carved in stone (see item # 15). Steve Tate signed the contract in 2008, which I presume was negotiated by Tewes and approved by the Council.

Furthermore, they just recently re-affirmed it (5-0) at the last Council meeting where they "amended"
the contracts, essentially they have agreed to forego a 2% pay increase, for next year only. Tewes
got his contact extended through 2014 for this consideration.

The Council threw away an opprtunity to set the tone for negotiations with the rest of the employees. Here are the contracts: http://www.morgan-hill.ca.g...

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | 14 city employees receive pink slips, animal control on the chopping block

Frank Manocchio — Fri, 13 May 2011 21:00:57 -0000

I'm not knowledgable regarding Gilroy's situation, but, I can assure you that having attended the majority of the City Council meetings and budget workshops over the past 4 years, we are not in the red because of the fire services budget.

It has been a combination of the Council's profligate spending, their repeated and steadfast refusal to acknowledge the dire need to address declining revenues, bloated personnel costs, as well as their addiction to the RDA "lucky bucks". Essentially, the RDA is the credit card that they have used to hide and "charge" many of these unsustainable costs.

Additionally, they have been drawing down the reserves to maintain their unsustainable levels of spending in order to achieve the "soft landing" they have been promising with their not so "Sustainable Budget Strategy". You can ask the unfortunate 14, who are receiving their pink slips this week, about the softness of that "landing". Thus far, the true beneficiaries of that strategem are the City Manager and City Atty. Go figure.

In the past 5 years, the annual level of RDA supplement to the General Funds for administrative costs has risen fron $2M to $7M. It is clear, no matter it's future make up, that the RDA will not be able to provide that level of funding going forward. At least 16 positions are charged to the RDA, including 50% of the costs of three highest paid employees.

For the past 4 years the Council has assured us that the RDA and the General Fund are two completely separate entities which exist for different purposes, that one doesn't affect the other.
The last few paragraphs of the article above say otherwise.

The RDA is analogous to a home equity loan, we tapped it to remodel, put in a pool, buy some toys and take a vacation from reality. Now, not only have we used it up, it is not being rolled over. The party is over.

We are about to witness all manner of wailing, moaning, and gnashing of teeth during the upcoming
budget deliberations. Some of the pain was unavoidable, but the majority of it has been totally self inflicted.

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | Both sides need the same facts for a debate

Frank Manocchio — Thu, 12 May 2011 17:05:08 -0000

readandunderstand

You may be on to something. I was originally opposed to charter schools because, while I loved the idea of "competition" and it's potential benefits, I was concerned with the possibility(probability) of fraud by unscrupulous operators and charlatans. The bottom line is, this is not just a "money" problem. If I thought that we could solve the problem by throwing more money at it, I would happily vote to do so.

However, the exact same people who have helped run this thing into the ground are still at the helm. The system's performance has been a disaster by just about any metric you care to measure it with. I spent my first 25 years of voter elligibility, naively voting yes on every single education bond measure put in front of me, from pre-school to higher education, be they for facilities, more teachers or programs. Who knows how many billions that would amount to? It seems like the more that was spent, the shoddier the product produced. So now I am asking questions first, before voting to write any more checks.

What I am opposed to is throwing more money, mindlessly, at a broken system in order to continue receiving diminishing returns. The real victims are the children that are not being properly prepared to face an increasingly competitive world.

We need to seriously re-examine the whole system from top to bottom. Do we really need so many districts and all the redundant management costs they entail? Why aren't books purchased competitively? Why can't incompetent teacher's be fired? The issue of seniority vs. merit needs to be brought into equillibrium. Etc.

Finally, it irks me, that the CTA would publicly promote the idea that they are in favor of the election, when they are lobbying behind the scenes to, in fact, circumvent it. The Republicans, by the way, have not exactly covered themselves in glory on this issue as well, but since they are all but irrelevant in Sacramento, they availed themselves of the only tool that they have.

This State has real problems and all the clowns, on both sides of the aisle, are still playing games and doing what has become Job One for both parties, protecting their sinecures and turf.

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | 14 city employees receive pink slips

Frank Manocchio — Tue, 10 May 2011 22:01:25 -0000

Some Department heads are apparently treated differently than others. Last Weds, the City Council approved (on a 5-0 vote) to amend the contracts of the two highest paid City employees, the City Manager and the City Atty.

The fourteen prospectively pink slipped employees will be comforted to know that their burden is not completely unshared. Our City Atty is sacrificing his cost of living increase, for this year, estimated to be 2%, as his sacrifice to our budget shortfall. No doubt, he would have done more, but he was constrained from further sacrifice by this meddlesome clause in his employment agreement with the City:

15. No Reduction in Benefits The City shall not at any time during the term of this Agreement reduce the salary compensation or financial benefits to WAN

Evidently, the Ten Commandments weren't the only things carved in stone that Moses carried when he descended from the mount.

Those unfortunate 14, who will now most likely be grappling with the issue of how to meet their mortgages, should find solace in the fact that our City Manager and City Atty have been provided for w/ generous, below market rate (at the time) housing loans by the taxpayers of our fair city. It should be pointed out, that in this latest adjustment, Mr. Tewes' $750.00 per month "Housing Allowance", ....Wait "what's that" you ask?.... No, it's not part of his taxpayer provided mortgage, it's.... well let's quote the agreement itself:

8.1.1 Housing Allowance CITY shall pay to TEWES Seven Hundred and Fifty Dollars $750.00 per month as a housing allowance.

What about that housing allowance? They've re-named it, converting it to "regular salary", with apparently no cost savings, but, a good faith effort to keep the taxpayers' blood pressure under control. No point in getting people unnecessarily apoplectic. The Miracle of Marketing, so while the cost remains the same, the spin is new and improved! That's your City Council, always looking out for you!

From the Executive Summary regarding the City Manager's Amended Agreement:

"In addition to the waiver of CPI adjustments the proposed amendments to the City Manager'sagreement also revise the agreement to convert the City's annual monthly housing allowance ($750) to regular salary and to reduce the City's annual costs by:

Capping the amount of leave time that may be accrued

Reducing the City's contribution to a qualified deferred compensation account

Eliminating the City purchase of a laptop computer

The Finance Director has estimated that together these proposed amendments will save the City about$18,000 in FY 11- 12 and $27,000 in FY 12-13."

There was no detailed explanation of how these purported savings were to be realized within the report. Presumably, no longer accruing leave time, means that he will just take it or lose it. Which means we pay sooner rather than later. So that would be a push.
Eliminating the computer saves about $1000/year. I suppose that the rest, pending further clarification from on high, will just have to be taken on faith.

In the meantime, the wretched 14 should take comfort that they do not suffer alone or in vain, as it's clearly no bed of roses for their leaders, those "First Amongst Equals", who have selflessly led by example, and will remember them fondly, as tragic, but necessary collateral damage.

Damn the pay cuts, full speed ahead!

To view the actual documents and terms: http://www.morgan-hill.ca.g...

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | Both sides need the same facts for a debate

Frank Manocchio — Tue, 10 May 2011 18:40:42 -0000

I agree completely, you are not entitled to your own "facts".

You left out these facts, no doubt, inadvertently: Nationwide, our (CA)teachers rank 6th in pay. It isn't because Californians don't value education, K-12 education made up 42 percent of state expenditures in the 2010-2011 fiscal year, and Proposition 98 requires that at least 40 percent of the state’s general fund be devoted to education spending.

Personally, I am in favor of putting the so called "tax extensions" on the ballot for the people to decide, and while I am not personally afilliated with any political party, I think it is only fair to point out that it is not only Republicans that have been opposing the general vote on the "tax extensions".
Apparently, not all progressive Democrats and/or educators are in favor of allowing the people of California to vote on the tax extensions either (excerpt from the SF Chronicle, 4/13/11 Matier & Ross column):

"The leader of California's largest teachers union said Tuesday that Gov. Jerry Brown should bypass voters and seek the approval of the Legislature for new taxes to close the state's deficit.David Sanchez, president of the California Teachers Association, said the union could have a harder time supporting an election later in the year, which is what would have to happen if the governor were to keep his campaign pledge."If the governor were to propose an election say in September or November, it no longer becomes a question of extending the current taxes," Sanchez said. "It then becomes a question of raising taxes, which would be extremely more difficult and challenging (for) voters to pass."The governor is facing mounting pressure to drop his campaign pledge to put tax extensions and increases on the ballot. Sanchez's statement carries weight because the teachers association is one of Brown's most powerful labor allies and would presumably be a key source of funding for any tax campaign."

Furthermore, I wonder how exercised you would be about the people's right to vote if the issue were a vote on a decrease in taxes? Just asking.

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | New Caltrain proposal would save all trains, stations

Frank Manocchio — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 14:35:52 -0000

An explanation is certainly warranted.

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | Eye roll, head shake and a 'puh-lease'

Frank Manocchio — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:45:46 -0000

You missed Mr. Frazer's point completely. He was making an argument about the priorities of our local officials. Education should be one of the most important priorities in any society. Here in Morgan Hill,
we have diverted $330M+ away from our schools, security and roads for various RDA projects, some needed, and some, outright boondooggles. Meanwhile, a select few developers, individuals, as well as a vast army of consultants, have benefitted from the RDA's largesse.

It is disingenuous on, either, your part or the Council's to say that one doesn't affect the other. They do, particularly here in Morgan Hill where many of our schools are on the "underperforming list'. The communities with the most stable property values are the ones with the best school systems. Plain and simple, good schools translate into high property values, as people will pay a large premium to send their children to good schools. High property values translate into stable or rising property taxes with which to provide essential services. Which, unfortunately, isn't the case here in our little berg.

Apparently the California Teacher's Association is sounding a lot like Glenn Beck as well, as they agree with Mr. Frazer and have also made the link between tax dollars diverted from schools and essential services with their opposition to RDA's. Perhaps they are just exhibiting their "lack of critical thinking" as well.

http://www.cta.org/About-CT...

Whether you take it out of the front pocket or the back pocket, it is still coming out of the same pair of pants, the taxpayer's, and no amount of sophistry will alter that fact.

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | City to rebid CRC solar project

Frank Manocchio — Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:34:58 -0000

The fact that they are "fast tracking" the project in order to spend the RDA money before the State does....

"So city staff only had a few days to send out requests for qualifications and bids to a network of area solar power companies, evaluate the proposals and make a recommendation to the council, Eulo explained."

for a $2.5M expenditure, does not instill a high degree of confidence in the probability of success for this venture. The old cliche "Act in haste, repent at leisure" springs to mind for some reason.

On the bright side, should the project go south and become a disaster, there is already a built in excuse for those responsible: 'We were under a time constraint and had to make a rushed decision.'

After all , it's only tax money, and as everyone knows, there is plenty more where that came from.

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | High-speed rail offering station grants to Gilroy, six other cities

Frank Manocchio — Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:01:57 -0000

Ahhh...the sweet sound of the first buckets of cash being tossed into the trough,..... if you listen closely, you can hear the thundering hooves of the rapidly, approaching "consultants".

Re: MorganHillTimes.com | 'Unfathomable' scenario coming true

Frank Manocchio — Wed, 06 Apr 2011 18:46:34 -0000

I agree, while possibly tragic, this was totally '"fathomable". The fact that last year, the State used up the last of it's "smoke and mirrors" to "balance the budget" was not exactly a secret. Furthermore, the deficits were forecast. In the short term, and for the school district, that's the only one that matters, the State is broke. The truth is that, however distasteful it may have been, the District Administration should have planned for this possibility. Perhaps they should have floated the Parcel Tax idea, last year?

Their lack of foresight and planning hardly engenders confidence that additional taxes are going to be used any more efficiently. Conducting business as usual and hoping for the best is hardly good management practice.

Finally, I imagine that it was the teachers' union that got the lay off deadline passed into state law to enhance their job security, thus limiting the flexibility of the administrators. Perhaps, everyone should be "noticed" each and every year, in order to allow the adminsitrators some flexibility to manage and adapt, or would that look too much like the evil, private sector?