Jaywalking Fisherman Gets a Rude Warning from Pacifica Cop
Raw Cookie Dough Linked to E. Coli Outbreak


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

If there was an explicit statement by the San Francisco City Attorney to that effect, then it would be interesting to read it -- in context, of course.

As to the $50 million number, I remember a $50 million high-end estimate in that range for a no-golf complete "restoration" assuming considerable off-haul. I do not recall any such estimate for any other alternative.

I do not believe the County of San Mateo is looking at any activity that would approach such an expense, so there must be some interesting and speculative assumptions behind such a figure.

San Mateo County Supervisors Groom and Tissier's offer that San Mateo County take this property would saddle San Mateo County taxpayers with more debt -- to hold up a rising sea. That's an endless proposition that would be a tombstone for the endangered species at the site. Is this a good use of San Mateo County taxpayer money? Who benefits?

The San Francisco city attorney has explicitly stated that San Francisco will not maintain responsibility for the many liabilities attached to this property.

Will any concessionaire take on the open-ended multimillion-dollar liabilities the property offers? Or will the public pay? SMC Supervisors Groom and Tissier could not find $200,000 to save popular Flood Park -- will they find more than $50 million to keep the ocean from washing out Sharp Park golf course? Does Pacifica intend to levy another property tax to cover these liabilities?

Honestly, I don't think K. Jana is a real person but a computer-generated spambot that spits out W.E. links and gibberish. That's just my opinion, though ;)

Mike, I have asked that question so many times of Ms Jana. She won't answer. She never answers a direct question.

How long will taxpayers keep funding Golden Gate Park? Dolores Park? Stern Grove?

How long will the taxpayer continue to fund Sharp Park?

SF Planning and Urban Research report finds the current situation is not sustainable.

Report summary, and link to the report:

I hope Mayor Lee vetoes this absurdity.

Finally -- some fiscal sense. Way to be, San Francisco!

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)