8 comments

• 

  Mike Ruehle

  10 months ago

  Mayor Foster,
  
  I will vote for your parcel tax ONLY if I know EXACTLY what I will be getting for my money. You have been in office for 2 years; I expect a MUCH clearer definition than TRUST ME. There are numerous similar examples of how my trust has been mislaid in the past by former city and elected officials.
  
  As an SCE executive, did you fund your maintenance department on their promise to fix stuff, or did you require them to define where the money would be spent? Accountability is the key. I know that makes you feel uncomfortable. Almost as uncomfortable as I feel giving you my money.
  
  I hope your campaigners are going to work on project scope definition and stop their campaign that the world will end without the parcel tax. Resorting to scare tactics doesn’t provide me much confidence and won’t get my vote.
  reply
• 

  JuanPardell

  10 months ago

  Mike Ruehle. If your mayor wanted to emphasize the trust factor, he should have held off on the salary increases before revealing that the city's budget deficit was at $16 million. Frankly, there is nothing to trust about this parcel tax measure. Sure, they've earmarked certain improvements. However, there are no specifics as to a timetable, nor where the infrastructure improvements will take place. So far, as to city hall's support of this measure, all you're hearing are euphamisms and dire consequences if it doesn't pass. For example, the mayor states this parcel tax will cost property owners only $10 per month. If you factor in the present value of that money, over a thirty year period, that's perhaps a year's college tuition for your son or daughter. In immediate expense, it can be more gas money, bus fare, food, etc.. Then, he says your city will be in a "death spiral" without this measure. Well, he fails to mention that many who support this proposal, including former Mayor Beverly O'Neill, are largely responsible for creating this fiscal "death spiral." Is it the taxpayers responsibility to repeatedly bail out the bad decisions made by their elected officials. Whatever the case, your city government is asking for more taxpayer money, when it has constantly shown the inability to improve the city's infrastructure and balance it's finances. You don't reward poor performance with another taxpayer handout, and then expect the most effective argument to be, "trust me."
  reply
• 

  drnoe

  10 months ago

  It will be interesting to find out who ponies up the cash to finance this hopeless campaign to try to sucker the voters. The financiers will be providing a classic example (on a much smaller scale, of course) of how city hall has pissed away so much money over the years.
  reply
• 

  Lindaonline

  10 months ago

  Will Ms Ames still rake in the $160,000 a year while on the campaign trail? Or will she take vacation or personal leave, still leaving the tax payer holding the bag?
  Let’s see who donates to this besides large corporations waiting for a healthy contract and possible unions waiting for a Project Labor Agreement. Don’t hold your breath! He has betrayed workers before and will again.
  reply
• 

  Elizabeth

  10 months ago

  Ms Ames will not be pulling a salary from the city, BUT she will be paid by the campaign funds raised by Mayor Foster (her boss). Mayor Foster's goal is to raise between $400,000. - $500,000. My guess is she will be paid approx $200,000 for managing the campaign.
  reply
• 

  City Hall

  10 months ago

  I'm sure there are alot of people around city hall who are quietly looking forward to her absense how ever long it may be. She's an imposing, lightening rod, control freak who knows nothing about running a city.
  
  How can someone who wields so much influence be so unaccountable to taxpayers and voters ? You have to question the mayor's judgement in deferring so much to a single staffer.
  reply
• 

  TheOracle

  10 months ago

  City Hall - you are clearly clueless and have spent no time with the Bob. He is the former CEO of a major corporation who has worked in politics for over 25 years. No one person tells him what to do or what to believe. That's plain insulting to him - and shows how little you know about him and the way he works. Becki is one of the most talented political staffers in California - PERIOD. Bob is lucky to have her. BTW, it's her job to take grief and bs from people like you so Bob can spend his time running the City.
  reply
• 

  John_B

  10 months ago

  City Hall: All elected and appointed City officials are fully accountable to the electorate. That's a fact of governmental life that only lapses when and if the electorate fails to remember that it is they who hold true power, and not those elected or appointed to represent them.
  
  I've had the privilege to meet both Bob and Becki and have found them both to be exceedingly honorable in intent and eminently capable.
  
  But were they not….were they as inept at governing and incompetent in conducting their personal lives as, say, LBUSD Board Member Michael Shane Ellis, then we, the electorate, would have the ultimate power and authority to remove them; Bob by recall and Becki by assuring that Bob's replacement dismissed her.
  
  Fortunately neither Bob nor Becki suffer from the governmental incompetence and personality disorders that Ellis does else they would be properly and promptly removed just like he was...
  
  ...oh wait, that's right, Ellis wasn't removed. To this day he still sits on our School Board. And why? Because the electorate couldn't develop the will sufficient to remove him….couldn’t remember that the responsibility to assure that our government remains ethical and responsive is theirs alone.
  
  Thus, City Hall, we see that, ultimately, any failing in our government is, in truth, a failing in ourselves.
  reply