Fact Checking the Debates

We received our latest postcard from the Peebles Propaganda Post Box regarding the rebroadcast of the debate between Messrs. Loeb & Peebles. I went to my stack of Pacifica Tribunes and pulled for perusal the August 23 edition which detailed said debate. The following are direct quotes:

"Alluding to $17 million in new revenue, based on his own accounting of the maximum proposal, he (Peebles) said the money could be spent at the discretion of the city council "

This is what I call a "Magical Mystery Number." It's magical like a conjurer pulling a rabbit out of a hat, and its mystery is how it disappears when one tries to chase it down. There has been no breakdown or accounting of this $17 million and Mr. Peebles certainly has avoided the pesky details.

"I can't do a plan that does not involve mixed-use because it would not conform to the city's Redevelopment Plan which you wrote and you know that," Peebles said.

If I may quote the Redevelopment Plan:

"The overall policy guidelines in the General Plan and the LCPLUP (Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan) indicate that residential uses are not suitable in the West Rockaway and Headlands areas and do not require such uses in the Quarry area." (IV,3., d.)

There is no mention of "mixed-use" (Residential-Commercial) in the Redevelopment Plan.

In listening to the broadcast of the debate, I heard Mr. Peebles make the statement: (and I paraphrase here):

"Ask Peter (Loeb) why he supported a sewage treatment plant where he wanted a redevelopment area."

Why indeed put a sewage treatment plant in close proximity to one's own house? Maybe it's because it never happened. Peter Loeb was long out of public office and had nothing to do with the decision that was made regarding the location of said plant.

I'm beginning to feel as if the factually-challenged Mr. Peebles either views Pacificans as the biggest idiots to ever come down the pike or he just thinks that mud slung on his opponents here sticks better in a foggy climate.

Lionel Emde
Edgemar

The above was printed as a letter to the editor of the Pacifica Tribune on September 20th, 2006, and is republished here with the author's permission

member login