Vallejo Independent Bulletin - PB Vote Results Are In! -- 5/21/13

Daily Scream
Employee Wages
- 2007
- 2008
- 2009
- 2010
- 2011
Got a Story? - Contact Us!
Latest Videos
- Vimeo Channel
- YouTube Channel

PB Vote Results Are In!

5/21/13

By PB Vallejo

Congratulations Vallejo on drawing the largest voter turnout in a participatory budgeting vote in the U.S. to date! There were so many voters that it’s taken extra time to enter all the email addresses in order to send out this message, so apologies for the delay!

In all, 3,917 Vallejo residents turned out to vote for their top projects May 11-18. Below are the vote results. The top 12 projects can be funded with the estimated $3.2 million allocated to PB by City Council. Additional projects may also be funded, pending available public or private resources. The PB Vallejo Steering Committee will submit the public's priorities to City Council for approval at the Council meeting on Tuesday, May 28th, at 7pm.

Project Name	Cost	Votes
1. Potholes and Street Repair	$550,000	2,298
2. Light Up Vallejo! A Lighting Improvement Project	$170,000	1,620
3. Parks and Recreation Improvements	$621,500	1,323
4. Support School Libraries & STEAM Program	$270,000	1,163
5. Street Cleaning & City Cleanup	$120,000	1,153
6. College Bound Vallejo	$320,000	1,101
7. Community Gardens and Nutrition Education	$146,500	954
8. Small Business Grants for Mare Island & Downtown	$300,000	889
9. The Spay Neuter Project	$165,000	861
10. Florence Douglas & Conversations Senior Centers	$109,150	860
11. Omega Boys & Girls Club Gym Renovation	$60,000	830
12. 150 Camera Pilot with Intelligent Archives	$450,000	802
------------
13. Vallejo Schools Marching Band Programs	$200,000	762
14. Vallejo Blues & Heritage Festival	$92,000	733
15. The Vallejo Flea Market	$25,000	689
16. Mira Theatre Community Center Space: New Roof	$80,000	644
17. Outdoor Fitness Equipment at Waterfront	$50,000	594
18. After School Program Facilities & Mobile Rec Unit	$170,000	582
19. Mare Island Heritage Preserve and Historic Park	$280,500	552
20. Mira Theatre Guild Summer Arts Education	$80,000	449
21. Bring Back the Vallejo Pow-Wow	$20,000	397
22. New Armored Rescue & Communications Vehicles	$270,000	374
23. Traffic Calming Measures (Bike Lanes included)	$415,000	300
24. GVRD Tennis Facilities Improvement	$130,000	283
25. Vallejo Museum: Community Outreach & Education	$29,450	281
26. Volunteer and Community Resource Coordinator	$75,000	277
27. Community Discovery Project to Brand Vallejo	$230,500	256
28. Make our Streets Safer with a Driving Simulator	$100,000	226
29. Public Sidewalks Around Hillcrest Area	$870,000	202
30. Mare Island Way Welcome Arch	$130,000	179
31. Public Art Project to Honor Vallejo’s Music Legends	$50,000	168
32. Small Business Planning Training in Spanish	$33,000	129
33. VallejoPROUD	$136,000	83

The full vote results are also available on the PB Vallejo website.

Comments

Add New

RSS

Anonymous

|May.30.2013

@VPOA contract: you nailed it right on the head. Not only is he being a sanctimonious grandstanding empty sack, but he wants his fellow colleagues and us residents to forget that little ol' decision of his because its "history."

Good try. That mistake gave us our current deficit. That mistake lost us 15 or so cops. Now he wants to use Measure B money to erase that mistake. (Until it sunsets and he's long gone and we're in the hole again.) And he chides us for wanting to spend PB money on some quality of life projects in our community? Because he f-ed up? He's a disgrace.

Marc,
can you bring back that cartoon of Ostrich Davis for the newer people. Once again his head is in the sand...or he's "asleep at the wheel" again.

VPOA contract lowers safety

|May.30.2013

The VPOA raise & bennies that Osby voted for cost the city about $6.5 million a year. Instead of increasing salaries during bankruptcy, if they had frozen salaries, we could have had 28 more officers (@ $225k loaded cost each). Even if you figure a loaded cost of $250k or even $300k ea that still would have been 21+ more officers.

To watch Osby be so sanctimonious about how he's "for safety" when those contracts forced us to lay off officers is sickening. There is a direct correlation between those higher salaries and a reduced number of officers.

Real Truth

|May.29.2013

re: "I have to commend Mr. Fox for bringing up the issue that the projects proposed for selection should be of benefit to All and not single out a few lucky receipients. But I suppose that went over the heads of many."

Exactly the point. There is a hidden insidious danger lurking that future PBs will ultimately be run by a small "steering committee" cabal of certain people into favoring "projects" towards predetermined (i.e. - favorite) areas of town. This is not true democracy; this is an evolving autocracy edging towards cleptocracy.

Anonymous

|May.29.2013

You got it, Firebug. In 2009 if he hadn't approved that VPOA contract the city would have been getting an extra $6 million a year? $18 million for the past three years. What's the current deficit? $5 million? Do the math. Ozzy is trying to use measure B money to cover his mistake like a cat in a litterbox. And he admonishes his colleagues for pointing out this monumental mistake. I'm thankful Gomes and Brown called him out on it.

GC'er

|May.29.2013

Measure B was narrowly passed as a GENERAL TAX, meaning that funds derived through the measure are able to be dumped into the General Fund for any purpose.

On the advice of consultants a "specific tax", one that would have actually named a purpose and could only be used for it, was defeated at the time.

If the special tax were decided on and the measure would have passed all this groping for a piece of the pie could have been avoided. If it were to have failed, well there is always another time to press for it. California is great at that!

To revisit this matter is useless as
the decision has been made, a general tax for 10 years it is, done deal.

Breaking off a third of Measure B funds for PB and slicing it into small segments instead of popping the Big One into a project like #1, is of questionable benefit at this time.

For the first time in Vallejo history people, those who were willing to invest time, were able to determine "something" through their input, other than at the ballot box.

How much money, time and effort has been spent to date as a result of PB? Should the coming together and ego stroking of a small percentage of Vallejo
residents determine what is a priority or not for all of Vallejo?

Certainly, a large amount of brain storming has occurred, a noble concept here in Vallejo, where the majority of people are shrouded in apathy, but none the less very vocal about the work of the engaged.
The list of 12 projects is before the council. It can be picked apart one by one..... and each one has pro's and con's.
How many potholes can be filled on
#1) $550.000 vs. #3) Park & Rec Improvements @ $621.500?
Which leads me to the following question: Did we, the property owners, not just recently give GVRD an
additional $48 to spend on exactly that, Parks & Rec?
Is GVRD, the entity tasked to keep up Parks and Rec facilities, equally spreading this wealth throughout the community or are those who are seated at the GVRD table guiding funds to favorite spots?

Did We The People not just recently receive a lightening upgrade, "dim bulbs to bright bulbs" on our light poles and yet PB item #2 Light Up Vallejo may receive $170.000 for additional lighting, including tree adornments/enhancement for the downtown upwardly mobile strollers and additional lightpoles for areas previously ignored?

We continue to cry about NOT being safe in our neighborhoods. I am very secure in the believe, before all else and despite the efforts made by our safety personel with very limited men/women power, that we remain uneasy while out and about and until that changes, our down town will not be a place very many of us will frequent, despite pretty tree alumination!

#8 Small Business Grants for Down Town and M.I. $300.000.
This automatically will eliminate any small start up not in the mentioned area from receiving that benefit. Are we trying to force businesses to locate into areas they do
not want to be by dangling a green carrot before them?

# 4) Support School Libraries & STEAM Program $270,000
We do have a school district whose plush address and dismal leadership should not be rewarded with additional funds derived from the taxpayer.

If STEAM oriented goals are avoided in VCUSD teachings so far,(and why?) the program should be fostered through partnering with technology giants and available Grants. If a district can not discharge pupils after 12 years of even basic learning, I am not willing to give them more, even if it is a measly $270.000.

I have to commend
Mr. Fox for bringing up the issue that the projects proposed for selection should be of benefit to All and not single out a few lucky receipients. But I suppose that went over the heads of many.

Firebug

|May.29.2013

If Ozz had not voted for raises for cops back in 2009 there might be less of a deficit. He was trying to use PB monies to bail him out of his own misspending.

PB Pride; Osby disgrace

|May.29.2013

I am so proud that Vallejo adopted PB, and has brought it to a fantastic result. Even though I wouldn't have voted for some of the winners, the process has been amazing -- and unlike our petty mayor, I support the will of the people.

Osby was a disgrace at last night's Council meeting, spinning off on a tangent about how Measure B fund should only be used for police officers. Hmm, first of all, Measure B was a general tax, not a specific tax -- so by law it couldn't be allocated to one project.

Second, the Council vote on how to allocate Measure B was held at least a year ago. That ship has
sailed; last night's vote was to ratify PB results, not revisit the Measure B allocation.

Anonymous

|May.29.2013

Plus don't forget that our elected officials are us. This isn't their jobs, they do it as community service. PB was therefore approved by us and enacted and voted on by all of us.

Community Activist

|May.24.2013

Anonymous, working extreme hours to run your business is no small feat, kudos to you for working so hard. As a dedicated volunteer working on PB I do take exception to your assumptions. If the status quo was working the process would not have been necessary so we the people came up with an innovative and forward thinking way of doing things a little differently. Call it what you will but take the time to get your facts straight.....the assumptions you make about those involved in the process are dead wrong. The best and brightest INVOLVED citizens (productive earners, retired folks,
students, activists, politicians & others) came up with solutions....not just more bitching. The positives far outweigh the negative anytime you gather more voices in a democratic process. Get out of your self imposed box and look around at the excitement in the air, PB is good for all Vallejoans and putting us on the map in a positive light for a change. That has to be better than the gloom and doom news we are saturated with by "The Old Guard" media.

Blue Tick

|May.24.2013

Now you've got your marching orders, lets see how well and how fast you comply.

Anonymous

|May.23.2013

That's a good point. In fact, the history of native California peoples in our beautiful bay region is probably our best historical asset. We have living ancestors of the original peoples and a good argument can be made for investing in their story. From a selfish standpoint, native historical points of interest could generate revenue for the whole town.

Anonymous

|May.23.2013

norman is only one native american. why should everyone, non-native people as well as native americans, be punished for his bad behavior?

Anonymous

|May.23.2013

Yeah, see that line under #12? Nothing under that got money.

GeoWes

|May.23.2013

The money would not go to Wounded Ego, anyway. Had they got the award, it would have gone to Eric Fisher and Midge Wagner's pow-wow party

GeoWes

|May.23.2013

Wounded Ego didn't get his pow-wow? Look at #21.

Jay	\|May.23.2013

I am quite pleased that #12 made it onto the list. We aren't going to be able to afford a large increase in headcount for the VPD for some time; cameras are relatively inexpensive and don't require health or retirement benefits. This pilot study may show a desperately needed way forward for Vallejo.

Anonymous

|May.22.2013

So sorry Wounded Ego didn't get his PowWow funding.

Maybe if he associated with reputable people instead of HWSNBN and his ilk, the community might have had more faith in their project. I steered far clear of that one.

Anonymous

|May.22.2013

#12 - I am so glad Vallejo residents are so well read - '1984' is upon us. It is inspiring that 3% of Vallejo residents took time to cast a vote. PB is a good idea, but items should really be chosen on normal voting dates when more people will actually show up.

Carpetbaggerwatch

|May.22.2013

Way to go Marti. Screw the anal-retentive dinosaurs who think that our representative form of government is working perfectly. It has been working perfectly for the safety unions in this town and the politicians they own but not for the rest of us who pay the bills. Thankfully times are changing and it seems the current majority of the city Council is representing those of us who live here. Our new city manager listens and then does his job. He clearly Takes direction from the Council and listens to the entire community. I don't I was agree with him all the time but I like what I see so
far. I don't always agree with my mother for that matter!

Anonymous

|May.22.2013

@I'M PEACHy, great post!!!!!

I'M PEACHy

|May.22.2013

Trying to understand which of the 12 projects that won indicate "..declining society where low income or no income earners are deciding how to spend the money of the dwindling number of productive earners" the senior center because they are all retired or the spay and neuter clinic cause they're all dogs and cats? And where are they spending the money of productive earners since it's funded by a sales tax which we all know is a regressive form of taxation where the low to no earners pay a higer percentage per their total income than the high earners?

wharf rat

|May.22.2013

Yes Anon & Anon You are right ! We can talk about structural systems and the asociated finances all day long ....
Yet We have never achived anything with real relevence , We just continue to "pay as We go" We support a "flawed system"
reminisent of historical fuedal systems
well known in history ... All of these Systems failed over time due to numerous
issues .. Perhaps some day We will evolve and find Our place ! ...

uts	\|May.22.2013

Pat YOURSELVES on the back!
Because you wont get one from me.

Anonymous

|May.21.2013

Vallejo's demographic is heavily weighted to dependents on society. If they are given control of the treasury, the whole structure will collapse. It's a form of socialism and it has never worked out well for the people living under it. Our representative democracy is designed differently. It has worked well in high functioning countries like the US.

Also, the capital investments require on going operations budget and/or maintenance budget. It might feel good to spend the one time money but in the end you're left with a similar fate as the Lawrence Hall of Science project. You can't support
the investment without a steady funding stream.

This is a happy placebo trying to cure a serious structural problem in Vallejo.

Anonymous

|May.21.2013

"By finding a way to circumvent this design mean one of two things: Either the elected individuals are not outstanding or the design of government is flawed."

Or maybe both which is why I love the PB process.

JMA	\|May.21.2013

Anonymous, you had ample time to make your vote count on PB regardless. PB was in the local news via Television, Web, newspaper, word of mouth and fliers all over town! Please enlighten us and explain how you came up with your conclusion? Did you conduct a study or research?

This is the best thing to happen to our City and while I respect your opinion, you should have given much more thought to your approach! We want everyone to be part of the solution and not part of the problem! TY.

Clarke Johnston

|May.21.2013

Just not understanding the conclusion that Anonymous is drawing here. I don't see voting in the PB as any indication, in any way, of one's employment status. I didn't attend any of the meetings, but certainly did find time to vote. So their conclusion, I'm afraid, is one that only briefly deserves consideration, and then fairly prompt dismissal. Now, as to "design" of government, certainly Vallejo's type of city charter is an area for lively arguing. Too, the quality of elected officials, both past and some present, is a matter for zesty discussion. But I'm still not seeing the working
citizens/not working citizens aspect of this trial run for PB. Might changes improve the process? Those more closely involved in the process are able to smartly address that. Fine-tuning and listening to feedback are always worth the time. Overall, this exercise has acquitted itself pretty well, earning a pretty good grade, I'd say.

know vallejo

|May.21.2013

"making a living in the private sector is so difficult and requires so many hours that civic functions are almost impossible to attend." many private sector employees not only managed to vote, but to volunteer time as delegates and committee members.
"...declining society where low income or no income earners are deciding how to spend the money of the dwindling number of productive earners..." how did you conclude that the people who voted for the PB projects were low to no income earners? i've been involved in a wide range of projects in vallejo over the years with very
diverse groups. the PB process was, from the first meeting to the last ballot, the most diverse project i've ever been a part of. it crossed all socio-economic lines, all religions, ages, races, sexual orientation, gender, political party lines, education levels, neighborhoods. the people who worked hard on this project and volunteered countless hours to make it a sucess should be very proud of themselves. they are truly outstanding citizens and give hope that things can and will change. and kudos to marti brown for introducing this preposterous idea to our little burg.

Anonymous

|May.21.2013

Here's something to consider.

Those of us left in Vallejo working extreme hours to keep small businesses running, making huge tax payments on property and income were not able to make many of the meetings. Making a living in the private sector is so difficult and requires so many hours that civic functions are almost impossible to attend. I applaud those of you who prioritized this effort and I think the projects identified for funding are good. PB may feel like a victory but I fear it is yet more evidence of a declining society where the majority of low income or no income earners are
deciding how to spend the money of a dwindling number of productive earners.

This form of government is designed for the citizens to elect outstanding individuals who will make wise decisions on our behalf. The majority of citizens should be out working and earning a living by whatever means available to them while the very, very few of their elected officials are exercising responsible management of the public treasury. By finding a way to circumvent this design mean one of two things: Either the elected individuals are not outstanding or the design of government is flawed.

Liking it

|May.21.2013

...and of course all of the members of the Steering Committee! woohoo

Liking it

|May.21.2013

That is fantastic news. Thank you Marti Brown for all your effort. This is great for Vallejo!