Ahhhhhh ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

I’ll be you actually believe that your “public safety pension” is something you deserved at age 50. Right?

4  1

You or somebody else? Or all of us together?

I have NO respect for people who are divorced from fiscal reality.

1  9

City Attorney Caroline Fowler should be fired. In a clear violation of the Constitution, the City of Santa Rosa imposed a tax on future owners of property without their vote.

Here’s how it works:
The developer, in order to get permits to subdivide the land and build the houses, has to agree that the buyers (AS YET UNIDENTIFIED) will pay a higher property tax for services. These unknown and unknowing buyers of these unbuilt houses will now have to pay more every year in property tax than other property owners do. It is a special assessment, but you’re supposed to be able to VOTE for a special assessment.

In Caroline Fowler’s world, one guy, the developer, can ‘vote’ to have 20 or 30 or 100 property owners pay higher property taxes than everyone else–forever. If he doesn’t do that he can’t get building permits.The Court found this, rightly, to be unconstitutional.

But the city council voted to allow Caroline Fowler to go ahead and try to get an unconstitutional ruling next time around. The council members who voted for this should either get a remedial course in the Constitution, or be recalled.

Ms. Fowler should be fired. She is an embarrassment to the citizens of Santa Rosa, but more than that she has cost us a quarter of a million dollars. Let her work (under another attorney) for another year–her salary should be suspended until she has paid this off.

Is this a dictatorship or is it a representative government?

For more see Santa Rosa Neighborhood Coalition dot com

17  2

Fowler should pay this out of her salary. Dock her starting today.

16  1

Or it could have been used to repair the roads. Anyone know how many potholes can be filled with $240,000??

21  2

And, isn’t a Santa Rosa Junior College cop being prosecuted right now for theft of public funds over a years long period of time? Why yes.

Corruption in Sonoma County… continues.

17  5

Good for the Pacific Legal Foundation !

Thank you.

20  2

Oh, you mean like SMART?

12  2

But, it does allow the CC to hide the information from the public and allow them to make decisions without full disclosure to the public

Hey, that is what politicians do, isn’t it?

15  3

It does cost money to fight the claim, and it seems as though most of this stuff was never shown to the public!

Why?, Because the public never asked for the information! All they ever see is the notice of the closed session, and the CC never discloses what the suit is about, and what the possible repercussions will be!

And, of course, they are never told what the reasons are for the CA recommending the original action of the taxes, and the original decision to fight the case.

Now we need a nice exposure of how much money we collected in the taxes, how much we spent collecting the taxes, how much we will have to refund, how much it cost us to fight the original and appeal, and then a nice figure showing the overall cost to the city for taking the first action!

Ah, I don’t expect to see that very soon!

15  3

How on earth do you expect the City to provide services without revenue? Every damn thing built imposes a an eternal obligation on the City to provide services to developers who collect their unearned profits and run.

Everything ever built requires unending services. That means either endless tax increases on the public as a whole, or pretty damn small fees on the come-and-go developers.

This has NOTHING to do with job creation or the fairness of taxes. It has everything to do with the economic rape of citizens by greedy corporate interests.

2  22