PB – Special assessment tax and outsourcing police

[jpinpb]

I should have added lottery to that. Doesn’t the city get some money from that, schools. Just amazes me that the City gets so much money and it never has any for services, streets, water mains, police, fire. Crying about not having any money. It’s like a kid maxed out on a credit card shopping at Nordstrom. Just exactly how much money does it need? When will they if ever have enough? Will we constantly have to feed the monster? Can we send some of these politicians to some financial management class or are they all trained to just put it in their pockets and their friend’s pockets. I’m disgusted and frustrated. Getting off my soapbox now. Thanks for the tolerance in allowing me to vent.

[jpinpb]

Options – Someone posted this on Beach and Bay Press:

“New BARF assoc. could fund maintenance district
Re: Maintenance Assessment District (MAD) Plan for Clean Up.
Let me see if I read this correctly. The solution to cleanup the Mile of Bars (MOB) is to assess fees to not only the creators of this problem but also the victims.

Please explain to me why Ethel, who is 86 and has lived in her home for 50 years, should be forced to pay one red cent for what the MOB creates.

From a commercial point of view, why should RE/MAX or the owner of the building be assessed a fee? I know real estate has been in a rough area, but I missed the notice that with every property sale unlimited tequila shots are provided. We don’t need a MAD, we already are mad.

Instead, I propose the creation of a new organization: Bar Association Refuse Foundation (BARF).

Funds are generated by increasing the cover charge that bars already impose by $1. Nobody will complain about this and the generators that cause the need for waste removal will be paying for it.

Let’s do some math here: 10,000 door charges per week = $10,000 x 52 = $520,000 per year.
I also suggest a 50-cent fee on every shot that is ordered. More math — large chunks of money.
With purchase, the patron receives a sticker that reads MOB, meaning Member of BARF or I’m a BARFer.

This sticker will identify them as people who care about their impact on our environment and are responsible. We as PB pioneers have the will to make this work. After successful results, the rest of the city will be encouraged to create their own BARF districts. I know there are lots of puddles to step over on this road to successfully solving this problem.

Let’s make it our goal to send Ethel on a cruise as a reward for putting up with the MOB for the past 20 years.”

[jpinpb]

Options – Someone posted this on Beach and Bay Press:

“New BARF assoc. could fund maintenance district
Re: Maintenance Assessment District (MAD) Plan for Clean Up.
Let me see if I read this correctly. The solution to cleanup the Mile of Bars (MOB) is to assess fees to not only the creators of this problem but also the victims.

Please explain to me why Ethel, who is 86 and has lived in her home for 50 years, should be forced to pay one red cent for what the MOB creates.

From a commercial point of view, why should RE/MAX or the owner of the building be assessed a fee? I know real estate has been in a rough area, but I missed the notice that with every property sale unlimited tequila shots are provided. We don’t need a MAD, we already are mad.

Instead, I propose the creation of a new organization: Bar Association Refuse Foundation (BARF).

Funds are generated by increasing the cover charge that bars already impose by $1. Nobody will complain about this and the generators that cause the need for waste removal will be paying for it.

Let’s do some math here: 10,000 door charges per week = $10,000 x 52 = $520,000 per year.
I also suggest a 50-cent fee on every shot that is ordered. More math — large chunks of money.
With purchase, the patron receives a sticker that reads MOB, meaning Member of BARF or I’m a BARFer.

This sticker will identify them as people who care about their impact on our environment and are responsible. We as PB pioneers have the will to make this work. After successful results, the rest of the city will be encouraged to create their own BARF districts. I know there are lots of puddles to step over on this road to successfully solving this problem.

Let’s make it our goal to send Ethel on a cruise as a reward for putting up with the MOB for the past 20 years.”

[jpinpb]

Options – Someone posted this on Beach and Bay Press:

“New BARF assoc. could fund maintenance district
Re: Maintenance Assessment District (MAD) Plan for Clean Up.
Let me see if I read this correctly. The solution to cleanup the Mile of Bars (MOB) is to assess fees to not only the creators of this problem but also the victims.

Please explain to me why Ethel, who is 86 and has lived in her home for 50 years, should be forced to pay one red cent for what the MOB creates.

From a commercial point of view, why should RE/MAX or the owner of the building be assessed a fee? I know real estate has been in a rough area, but I missed the notice that with every property sale unlimited tequila shots are provided. We don’t need a MAD, we already are mad.

Instead, I propose the creation of a new organization: Bar Association Refuse Foundation (BARF).

Funds are generated by increasing the cover charge that bars already impose by $1. Nobody will complain about this and the generators that cause the need for waste removal will be paying for it.

Let’s do some math here: 10,000 door charges per week = $10,000 x 52 = $520,000 per year.
I also suggest a 50-cent fee on every shot that is ordered. More math — large chunks of money.
With purchase, the patron receives a sticker that reads MOB, meaning Member of BARF or I’m a BARFer.

This sticker will identify them as people who care about their impact on our environment and are responsible. We as PB pioneers have the will to make this work. After successful results, the rest of the city will be encouraged to create their own BARF districts. I know there are lots of puddles to step over on this road to successfully solving this problem.

Let’s make it our goal to send Ethel on a cruise as a reward for putting up with the MOB for the past 20 years.”

[jpinpb]

Options – Someone posted this on Beach and Bay Press:

“New BARF assoc. could fund maintenance district
Re: Maintenance Assessment District (MAD) Plan for Clean Up.
Let me see if I read this correctly. The solution to cleanup the Mile of Bars (MOB) is to assess fees to not only the creators of this problem but also the victims.

Please explain to me why Ethel, who is 86 and has lived in her home for 50 years, should be forced to pay one red cent for what the MOB creates.

From a commercial point of view, why should RE/MAX or the owner of the building be assessed a fee? I know real estate has been in a rough area, but I missed the notice that with every property sale unlimited tequila shots are provided. We don’t need a MAD, we already are mad.

Instead, I propose the creation of a new organization: Bar Association Refuse Foundation (BARF).

Funds are generated by increasing the cover charge that bars already impose by $1. Nobody will complain about this and the generators that cause the need for waste removal will be paying for it.

Let’s do some math here: 10,000 door charges per week = $10,000 x 52 = $520,000 per year.
I also suggest a 50-cent fee on every shot that is ordered. More math — large chunks of money.
With purchase, the patron receives a sticker that reads MOB, meaning Member of BARF or I’m a BARFer.

This sticker will identify them as people who care about their impact on our environment and are responsible. We as PB pioneers have the will to make this work. After successful results, the rest of the city will be encouraged to create their own BARF districts. I know there are lots of puddles to step over on this road to successfully solving this problem.

Let’s make it our goal to send Ethel on a cruise as a reward for putting up with the MOB for the past 20 years.”

[jpinpb]

Options – Someone posted this on Beach and Bay Press:

“New BARF assoc. could fund maintenance district
Re: Maintenance Assessment District (MAD) Plan for Clean Up.
Let me see if I read this correctly. The solution to cleanup the Mile of Bars (MOB) is to assess fees to not only the creators of this problem but also the victims.

Please explain to me why Ethel, who is 86 and has lived in her home for 50 years, should be forced to pay one red cent for what the MOB creates.

From a commercial point of view, why should RE/MAX or the owner of the building be assessed a fee? I know real estate has been in a rough area, but I missed the notice that with every property sale unlimited tequila shots are provided. We don’t need a MAD, we already are mad.

Instead, I propose the creation of a new organization: Bar Association Refuse Foundation (BARF).

Funds are generated by increasing the cover charge that bars already impose by $1. Nobody will complain about this and the generators that cause the need for waste removal will be paying for it.

Let’s do some math here: 10,000 door charges per week = $10,000 x 52 = $520,000 per year.
I also suggest a 50-cent fee on every shot that is ordered. More math — large chunks of money.
With purchase, the patron receives a sticker that reads MOB, meaning Member of BARF or I’m a BARFer.

This sticker will identify them as people who care about their impact on our environment and are responsible. We as PB pioneers have the will to make this work. After successful results, the rest of the city will be encouraged to create their own BARF districts. I know there are lots of puddles to step over on this road to successfully solving this problem.

Let’s make it our goal to send Ethel on a cruise as a reward for putting up with the MOB for the past 20 years.”

[4plexowner]

Part of the challenge in PB is that commercial rents near the beach are so high that there are only two business models that have a decent chance of succeeding (given the demographics of PB near the beach):

1. applying tattoos
2. serving liquor

The non-alcohol, non-tattoo businesses that have been in PB long-term most likely own their property. I know of one business owner along Garnet who bought several commercial condos 20 yrs ago and continues to operate a business in one of them. His rent is $0 so he doesn’t have to apply tattoos or serve liquor to stay in business.

I find this issue interesting. The cost of doing business near the beach encourages alcohol. The last count I saw on liquor licenses in PB was 428 (if I remember correctly) – that’s a lot of businesses selling alcohol in a small area! The more alcohol we have near the beach the more issues we have with drunks.

Potential solutions:
– tax alcohol consumption – $1 per cover charge and $0.50 per shot served sounds good to me
– prohibit alcohol service and tattoo parlors via zoning
– institute rent control
– tax commercial property owners who choose to rent to alcohol serving or tattoo applying businesses – or require a new monthly permit fee for these property owners – there is some fairness here IMO since the high rents are part of the problem – note that this tax / permit is just a twist on rent control

None of these solutions are ‘free market’ which I profess to believe in. I wonder what a truly free market solution would be to the issue of alcohol in PB – would alcohol take over, go away or find some happy medium?

[4plexowner]

Part of the challenge in PB is that commercial rents near the beach are so high that there are only two business models that have a decent chance of succeeding (given the demographics of PB near the beach):

1. applying tattoos
2. serving liquor

The non-alcohol, non-tattoo businesses that have been in PB long-term most likely own their property. I know of one business owner along Garnet who bought several commercial condos 20 yrs ago and continues to operate a business in one of them. His rent is $0 so he doesn’t have to apply tattoos or serve liquor to stay in business.

I find this issue interesting. The cost of doing business near the beach encourages alcohol. The last count I saw on liquor licenses in PB was 428 (if I remember correctly) – that’s a lot of businesses selling alcohol in a small area! The more alcohol we have near the beach the more issues we have with drunks.

Potential solutions:
– tax alcohol consumption – $1 per cover charge and $0.50 per shot served sounds good to me
– prohibit alcohol service and tattoo parlors via zoning
– institute rent control
– tax commercial property owners who choose to rent to alcohol serving or tattoo applying businesses – or require a new monthly permit fee for these property owners – there is some fairness here IMO since the high rents are part of the problem – note that this tax / permit is just a twist on rent control

None of these solutions are ‘free market’ which I profess to believe in. I wonder what a truly free market solution would be to the issue of alcohol in PB – would alcohol take over, go away or find some happy medium?

[4plexowner]

Part of the challenge in PB is that commercial rents near the beach are so high that there are only two business models that have a decent chance of succeeding (given the demographics of PB near the beach):

1. applying tattoos
2. serving liquor

The non-alcohol, non-tattoo businesses that have been in PB long-term most likely own their property. I know of one business owner along Garnet who bought several commercial condos 20 yrs ago and continues to operate a business in one of them. His rent is $0 so he doesn’t have to apply tattoos or serve liquor to stay in business.

I find this issue interesting. The cost of doing business near the beach encourages alcohol. The last count I saw on liquor licenses in PB was 428 (if I remember correctly) – that’s a lot of businesses selling alcohol in a small area! The more alcohol we have near the beach the more issues we have with drunks.

Potential solutions:
– tax alcohol consumption – $1 per cover charge and $0.50 per shot served sounds good to me
– prohibit alcohol service and tattoo parlors via zoning
– institute rent control
– tax commercial property owners who choose to rent to alcohol serving or tattoo applying businesses – or require a new monthly permit fee for these property owners – there is some fairness here IMO since the high rents are part of the problem – note that this tax / permit is just a twist on rent control

None of these solutions are ‘free market’ which I profess to believe in. I wonder what a truly free market solution would be to the issue of alcohol in PB – would alcohol take over, go away or find some happy medium?

[4plexowner]

Part of the challenge in PB is that commercial rents near the beach are so high that there are only two business models that have a decent chance of succeeding (given the demographics of PB near the beach):

1. applying tattoos
2. serving liquor

The non-alcohol, non-tattoo businesses that have been in PB long-term most likely own their property. I know of one business owner along Garnet who bought several commercial condos 20 yrs ago and continues to operate a business in one of them. His rent is $0 so he doesn’t have to apply tattoos or serve liquor to stay in business.

I find this issue interesting. The cost of doing business near the beach encourages alcohol. The last count I saw on liquor licenses in PB was 428 (if I remember correctly) – that’s a lot of businesses selling alcohol in a small area! The more alcohol we have near the beach the more issues we have with drunks.

Potential solutions:
– tax alcohol consumption – $1 per cover charge and $0.50 per shot served sounds good to me
– prohibit alcohol service and tattoo parlors via zoning
– institute rent control
– tax commercial property owners who choose to rent to alcohol serving or tattoo applying businesses – or require a new monthly permit fee for these property owners – there is some fairness here IMO since the high rents are part of the problem – note that this tax / permit is just a twist on rent control

None of these solutions are ‘free market’ which I profess to believe in. I wonder what a truly free market solution would be to the issue of alcohol in PB – would alcohol take over, go away or find some happy medium?

[4plexowner]

Part of the challenge in PB is that commercial rents near the beach are so high that there are only two business models that have a decent chance of succeeding (given the demographics of PB near the beach):

1. applying tattoos
2. serving liquor

The non-alcohol, non-tattoo businesses that have been in PB long-term most likely own their property. I know of one business owner along Garnet who bought several commercial condos 20 yrs ago and continues to operate a business in one of them. His rent is $0 so he doesn’t have to apply tattoos or serve liquor to stay in business.

I find this issue interesting. The cost of doing business near the beach encourages alcohol. The last count I saw on liquor licenses in PB was 428 (if I remember correctly) – that’s a lot of businesses selling alcohol in a small area! The more alcohol we have near the beach the more issues we have with drunks.

Potential solutions:
– tax alcohol consumption – $1 per cover charge and $0.50 per shot served sounds good to me
– prohibit alcohol service and tattoo parlors via zoning
– institute rent control
– tax commercial property owners who choose to rent to alcohol serving or tattoo applying businesses – or require a new monthly permit fee for these property owners – there is some fairness here IMO since the high rents are part of the problem – note that this tax / permit is just a twist on rent control

None of these solutions are ‘free market’ which I profess to believe in. I wonder what a truly free market solution would be to the issue of alcohol in PB – would alcohol take over, go away or find some happy medium?

[jpinpb]

All I can say is punishing homeowners is not the answer. They suffer enough by having to tolerate the BS from the bars. Rent control on businesses that are non-alcholic sounds fair.

[jpinpb]

All I can say is punishing homeowners is not the answer. They suffer enough by having to tolerate the BS from the bars. Rent control on businesses that are non-alcholic sounds fair.

[jpinpb]

All I can say is punishing homeowners is not the answer. They suffer enough by having to tolerate the BS from the bars. Rent control on businesses that are non-alcholic sounds fair.

[jpinpb]

All I can say is punishing homeowners is not the answer. They suffer enough by having to tolerate the BS from the bars. Rent control on businesses that are non-alcholic sounds fair.

[Author]

Posts