Original post made
on Oct 8, 2007
It appears that our MacMansions will not get matching MacServices. Even their friends are unwilling to buy them MacSewers, MacPoliceStations, MacLibraries.
These are orphaned projects.
Stanford Medical Center will need MacServices. In fact, it already does, and Palo Alto will not pay for them.
Perhaps it's time to consider separating Stanford services? Could they possibly administer their services less effectively and efficiently than the City now does?
I suspect those who pushed the storm drain tax got their storm drains in their street (new ones to replace the old as there was some water on their street when it rained) and now --to H with everyone else.
The mayor dosen't run the city. The council majority (developer backed and live in N.Palo Alto enclaves) dicides where the city is headed and does. (New "Heritage Park--and Clark building---$10, to 20 million). and tunnel under r r tracks to nowhere)
A new Mitchell Park library and community center bldg is needed, but the police building is over sized and gold plated and is proposed in a terrible, isolated location. N.Palo Alto has a "main library,fancy art center, theater and community center and childrens library.
S. Palo Alto has a old, small library, small bldg next to it and a old run down Cubberly bldgs that are used by Foothills college and other private groups.??
Congratulation Palo Alto Weekly for having the guts to print the weblinks of October 2nd, mostly from "Knowledge, support low for Palo Alto Bond Measures", and for encouraging "free speech" and the free flow of ideas in Palo Alto.
At last we have a forum where Palo Altans can be open and express their views I hope our Staff and City Council will read and take note. And, I hope this will encourage others to step forward and express themselves pro or con in a helpful and constructive manner.
This is Tim Gray, candidate for Palo Alto City Council. I am urging the current City Council to declare Financial Discipline the most urgent need for Palo Alto. See my web site: Web Link
Financial responsibility must be demonstrated before we can earn the trust of the community to approve bond funding. It's easy to talk about infrastructure, but the citizens will not fund the needs if we can't demonstrate best practices. The City must triage financial discipline to the top of the agenda if we really want the bond measures to have any chance of approval.
Just look at the standards that the large charitable foundations have for supporting not-for-profit organizations -- i.e. "your own house has to be in order before funds will be provided."
Applying benchmarking to the budget and demonstrating best management practices must be achieved before the City can ask tax payers to chip in. What is standing in the way of the library and public safety facility bonds is the belief that the City has not demonstrated adequate financial care in daily operations. It is urgent that we address that concern head-on.
We can fund things like street improvements and underground utilities if we apply just a little fiscal discipline in City operations, and stop thinking that just because there is the appearance of a little surplus, we can just spend it.
Infrastructure needs that can be conveniently overlooked in any one budget year, but that is taking the politically expedient path of not having to say no. I am not a not a name caller, but our current infrastructure deficit is an accumulation taking the easy path vs. taking a stand for the long-term health of the City.
I am not taking contributions and I am not seeking endorsements. I will take a stand for the long-term vs. the politically expedient. I know that my independence will offer a voice really needed by the City. See the "Budget" section of my web site: Web Link
Best regards, and offered in the spirit of cooperation.