‘Russiagate’ Document Shows Depth of FBI Plan To Get Trump, Aliisha Rodriguez

 ‘Russiagate’ Document Shows Depth of FBI Plan To Get Trump

by Alisha Rodriguez

July 26, 2022

Through an open records request last year, Rowan Scarborough of the Washington Times was able to obtain a copy of the FBI’s 2019 case-closing memo for Mr. Trump.

The reporter noted how extraordinary the deeply revealing information was in “how it spelled out possible crimes by an American president — mostly rooted, it seems to me, in that one phrase, ‘well-developed conspiracy.’”

Scarborough’s important deep dive into this document truly exposes the depth of the FBI’s corruption, which is now evident goes beyond the Trump administration. It still continues today, if not more so, as there’s no end to what this weaponized government organization will do to keep (or remove) Trump or anyone from office who doesn’t play by their rules.

To learn more about this, along with how the dossier workforce came together, read Scarborough’s important piece for the Washington Times HERE.

Media and Select Committee Continue to Lie About Sicknick & Feds Drop Assault Charges Against Man Accused in Sicknick Attack, Julie Kelly

ELECTIONS

Media and Select Committee Continue to Lie About Sicknick

The real tragedy behind Officer Brian Sicknick’s story is the way the media and others continue to peddle falsehoods, portray innocent men as murderers, and seek sympathy based on a lie.

By Julie Kelly July 25, 2022

Contrary to Peters’ assertion that people in “conservative media” have “exaggerated” or “sanitized” the events of January 6, it is news outlets such as the Times that continue to do so—without remorse or reflection. Exploiting the early death of a police officer—by all accounts a good man who loved and served his country—to score political points cheapens Sicknick’s life. And it’s not the fault of those insisting on the truth but those who peddle falsehoods, portray innocent men as murderers, and seek sympathy based on a lie. That’s the real tragedy behind Officer Brian Sicknick’s story.

 

NEWS

Feds Drop Assault Charges Against Man Accused in Sicknick Attack

By Julie Kelly July 27, 2022

Federal prosecutors today dropped felony assault charges against one of two men accused of attacking Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick on January 6, 2021. George Tanios of West Virginia was arrested in March 2021 and charged with numerous felonies including assault on federal officers with a dangerous or deadly weapon and obstruction of an official proceeding.

RESPECT FOR THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

After Sunset, Wednesday, 13 June 2007
Flag of the United States of America “illuminated” at night
Devendorf Park
Carmel-by-the-Sea, CA.

"The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living thing."
US Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, § 176. ( j )

A Day of Tribute To Our Symbol of Liberty
"The flag...is a visible symbol of the ideal aspirations of the American people. It is the one focus in which all unite in reverential devotion. We differ in religion; we differ in politics; we engage in disputes as to the true meaning of the Constitution, and even challenge the wisdom of some of its provisions; we inject self-interest and cupidity into most of the ordinary transactions of daily life, but through the sanctifying folds of the flag, the collective intelligence of the nation rises superior to the wisdom of its parts, and thus ensures the perpetuity of the Republic." Major General Arthur MacArthur

UNITED STATES CODE
TITLE 36—PATRIOTIC AND NATIONAL OBSERVANCES, CEREMONIES AND ORGANIZATIONS
Subtitle I—Patriotic and National Observances and Ceremonies
Part A—Observances and Ceremonies
CHAPTER 1—PATRIOTIC AND NATIONAL OBSERVANCES

§ 110. Flag Day

(a) Designation.— June 14 is Flag Day.

(b) Proclamation.— The President is requested to issue each year a proclamation—
(1) calling on United States Government officials to display the flag of the United States on all Government buildings on Flag Day; and
(2) urging the people of the United States to observe Flag Day as the anniversary of the adoption on June 14, 1777, by the Continental Congress of the Stars and Stripes as the official flag of the United States.

TITLE 36 - PATRIOTIC SOCIETIES AND OBSERVANCES
CHAPTER 10 - PATRIOTIC CUSTOMS

§174. Time and occasions for display

(a) Display on buildings and stationary flagstaffs in open; night display
It is the universal custom to display the flag only from sunrise to sunset on buildings and on stationary flagstaffs in the open. However, when a patriotic effect is desired, the flag may be displayed twenty-four hours a day if properly illuminated during the hours of darkness.

COMMENT:
Respect for the Flag of the United States of America means, in part, properly displaying our flag. Needless to say, at a minimum, Americans expect their elected representatives to comply with proper protocol. Unfortunately, Mayor Sue McCloud displays her Flag of the United States of America at her residence 24/7 without proper illumination between sunset and sunrise as prescribed by the U.S. Code. Her demonstrated lack of respect for our flag is merely one aspect of a disturbing pattern of governance behavior; and that is, she acts as if proper protocol and the laws do not apply to her. Moreover, she “governs” not with a vision for the collective, long-term interests of Carmel-by-the-Sea and Carmelites, rather she “governs” to impose her personal will and agenda on Carmel-by-the-Sea and Carmelites. And in so doing, she has corrupted our city administration, particularly the City Administrator, the Police Chief/Public Safety Director and the Acting City Forester, by using them to aid and abet her in her flagrant violations of the Municipal Code, Local Coastal Program and State laws.

Mission Trail Nature Preserve: New Pedestrian Footbridge on “Mission Vista”

ABSTRACT: At the City Council’s meeting on January 8, 2008, the City Council approved a Resolution accepting a $10,000 grant from the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District (MPRPD) for construction of a new pedestrian footbridge in Mission Trail Nature Preserve. Photos of the site of the proposed pedestrian footbridge are shown. BACKGROUND and selected excerpts from the GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA and the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District Parks, Open Space and Coastal Preservation Grant Program are presented. COMMENTS are made regarding the footbridge spanning the gully on “Mission Vista,” the financial resources of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and the context of only $100,000 designated for the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District Parks, Open Space and Coastal Preservation Grant Program for FY 2007/08.

In Background, Site of Proposed New Pedestrian Footbridge
Mission Trail Nature Preserve
Near Rio Road Entrance

Close-Up of Site of Proposed New Pedestrian Footbridge

Site of Proposed New Pedestrian Footbridge
View towards the Carmel Mission

City Council Agenda
Regular Meeting
January 8, 2008

VII. Consent Calendar
These matters include routine financial and administrative actions, which are usually approved by a single majority vote. Individual items may be removed from Consent by a member of the Council or the public for discussion and action.

F. Consideration of a resolution accepting a $10,000 grant from the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District (MPRPD) for construction of a new pedestrian footbridge in Mission Trail Nature Preserve (MTNP) and authorizing a transfer from the Capital Improvement Reserve until grant funds are reimbursed.

BACKGROUND:
In August 2007, the City applied to the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District (MPRPD) for a grant to construct a new pedestrian bridge in Mission Trail Nature Preserve (MTNP). The proposed footbridge is located near the Rio Road entrance, to the east of Serra Trail and the Doolittle Trail sign and bench.

On November 15, 2007, Acting City Forester Mike Branson was notified by Joe Splane III, Finance & Administrative Services Manager of the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District (MPRPD,) that the Board of Directors of the MPRPD awarded the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea $10,000 for a Mission Trail Nature Preserve Footbridge.

On the City Council’s Consent Calendar for the January 8, 2008 meeting was a Resolution accepting the $10,000 grant from the MPRPD for construction of a new pedestrian footbridge in MTNP; the Resolution was approved at the City Council's meeting.

GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
AND
THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

FOR FY 2007-08 PARKS, OPEN SPACE AND COASTAL PRESERVATION GRANT PROGRAM

Selected excerpts, as follows:

This Grant Agreement is made and entered into as of this date: December 3, 2007…

1. GRANT AMOUNT AND STATEMENT OF WORK
A. Scope of Project – The District has allocated grant funds to the Grantee in the maximum aggregate amount of $10,000 to be used for the eligible costs associated with the project as described as follows:
1. Installation of a new footbridge at Mission Trail Nature Preserve

2. TERM OF AGREEMENT
The Grantee shall complete the Project as outlined in the Grantee Application on or before November 30, 2010…

MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
Joseph Donofrio, General Manager

Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District
Parks, Open Space and Coastal Preservation Grant Program

Selected excerpts, as follows:

GUIDELINES

The MPRPD Parks, Open Space and Coastal Preservation Grant program was established to assist local public agencies and community groups with funding for improvements of community and neighborhood parks, open space and preservation of coastal areas. Funding for the program is from the MPRPD Parks, Open Space and Coastal Preservation Assessment District revenues. For FY 2007-08, a total of $100,000 is available for allocation to eligible projects.

Statement of Intent

The primary objective of the grant program is to provide funding for improvements or significant repairs/replacements at neighborhood community park facilities, and open space and coastal areas.
Priority consideration of community and neighborhood park and open space improvement projects that may be considered for funding include (but are not limited to) the following:
1. Projects that increase the safety of park users, particularly young children e.g. replacing older playground equipment with newer, safer equipment.

2. Projects that enhance ADA accessibility.

3. Projects that enhance public awareness and appreciation of parks, recreation and open space, such as trails, overlooks, benches, interpretive signage programs.

4. Projects that involve the acquisition of land that will be used for permanent public parks or open space.

5. Projects that enhance coastal preservation efforts.

COMMENTS:
• A footbridge spanning the gully on “Mission Vista,” just east of Serra Trail near the Rio Road entrance is critical to pedestrian access to Mission Vista and Doolittle Trail.

• With the financial resources of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea (annual budgets $11- $12 million and reserve funds $8 - $10 million), this park infrastructure improvement should have been funded years ago from an annual budget. The Mission Trail Nature Preserve footbridge project illustrates our City Council’s philosophy of authorizing park infrastructure upgrades and improvements contingent on receipt of grants.

• Since the MPRPD only has $100,000 designated for the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District Parks, Open Space and Coastal Preservation Grant Program for FY 2007/08, the City can well afford to fund necessary and critical improvements to Mission Trail Nature Preserve from the city’s budget so that projects in less affluent cities can be realized in Monterey County.

REFERENCE:
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Fiscal Year 2007-08 Mid-Year Budget Adjustments
General Fund
EXPENDITURE ADJUSTMENTS (cont'd):

Department/Category: Capital Improvement
Account #: 01-87601
Adjustment: $5,000
Description: Mission Trails pedestrian footbridge
Vendor: Various
Notes: Mission Trails Park grant project funded by Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District. Matching funds needed for environmental review, other agency permits, foundation expenses.
(Source: January 8, 2008 Meeting Agenda, http://www.ci.carmel.ca.us/)

PART III: Why it is Important to Hire a City Approved Tree Service: A Case Study

ABSTRACT: PART III presents the Forest and Beach Commission Agenda item on the “illegal tree pruning of a Monterey cypress located on the west side of Vizcaino Ave. three homes south of Mountain View Ave." Selected excerpts from City Forester Mike Branson’s Staff Report are presented. COMMENTS are presented. And relevant REFERENCES from the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Municipal Code are transcribed. CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA FOREST AND BEACH COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Thursday, July 3, 2008 I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL COMMISSION MEMBERS: KATHLEEN COSS (ACTING CHAIRPERSON) JOE FORD (ABSENT) LESLIE KADIS NANCY JOHN, CHAIRPERSON (ABSENT) TAD PRITCHETT VIII. ORDERS OF BUSINESS 2. Discussion of illegal tree pruning of a Monterey cypress located on the west side of Vizcaino Ave. three homes south of Mountain View Ave. STAFF REPORT: City Forester Mike Branson, dated June 25, 2008. Selected excerpts, as follows: A “12” diameter, 18’ tall Monterey Cypress...” “The tree canopy was tipped back, the main leaders (2) were topped, and the center thinned out…The tree will continue to grow but will in the long-term either develop several leaders or flatten out into a short dense canopy.” The City Forester requested the City Attorney attend the July meeting “to address any specific questions from the Commission regarding illegal pruning.” PUBLIC COMMENT: • Barbara Livingston of Friends of Carmel Forest spoke of the Friends disappointment in the Staff letter to the property owners, including the City’s failure to ask for the name of the tree pruner, the City’s lack of relevant excerpts from the Municipal Code with respect to required permits, et cetera and the City’s lack of a requirement that the City require a replacement tree. • Maria Sutherland spoke of a list of tree topping consequences, the opportunity to educate other property owners about correct procedures, et cetera and setting a precedent with a fine. DICUSSION OF COMMISSION & CITY FORESTER: • City Forester Mike Branson stated that he heard from the property owners and they were “apologetic.” Branson characterized the incident as “unfortunate” and “undesirable.” He admitted that the pruning of trees on public property without a permit is a misdemeanor and a violation may be addressed by civil action, but he stated that any citation issued would be issued to actual offender, in this case the "gardener," not the property owner. Moreover, since there are no eyewitnesses and the gardener in question could deny he pruned the Cypress tree, there are basically no consequences. Commissioner LESLIE KADIS spoke of “no consequences” and Commissioner TAD PRITCHETT stated that there is “no excuse for ignorance.” Alas, the Commissioners mostly spoke in generalities about educating Carmelites through an article in The Carmel Pine Cone and informing realtors. Since City Attorney Don Freeman was not present as requested by City Forester Mike Branson, the Commission decided to explore further the issue with the City Attorney and City Administrator over the next couple of months and report to the public at the September 2008 Forest and Beach Commission Meeting. COMMENTS: • While City Forester Mike Branson was well versed in the Municipal Code regarding required permits, violations, misdemeanor and civil action, he expressed more concern for the person who may be under pressure from his client or ignorant of proper pruning practices and city tree policies than for the Municipal Code and the topped Cypress tree. Ergo, he himself failed to place the item on a Forest and Beach Commission agenda and expressed no interest in investigation or determining the “gardener” who violated the Municipal Code or pursuing action which would lead to the issuance of a citation and/or civil action. • Overall, the Forest and Beach Commission appears to be an ineffectual body with members who are ignorant of the Municipal Code and/or undemanding in terms of enforcing the Municipal Code to the fullest extent. • Remarkably, to City Forester Mike Branson’s comment about no eyewitnesses, Forest and Beach Commissioner Joe Ford, who lives next door, to the south of Robert & Hong Hai Dubroff, was present the day of the pruning and was not in attendance at the Forest and Beach Commission Meeting. REFERENCE: Carmel-by-the-Sea Municipal Code Chapter17.48 TREES AND SHRUBS 17.48.050 Required Permits. B. Trees on Public Property. Any person desiring to remove or prune any portion of a tree or shrub, except Genista, growing in or upon any public street, way, park, or place within the City, or any person desiring to cut any wood, foliage, or roots from any tree on private property when more than one-half of the basal cross-sectional area of such tree is on City property, shall file an application for a permit consistent with CMC 17.48.060, Permit Applications. If, in the opinion of the City Forester, the tree or trees should be removed because of disease, infestation, or clear and present danger to persons or property, the trees shall be removed at City’s expense. (Ord. 2004-02 § 1, 2004; Ord. 2004-01 § 1, 2004). 17.48.150 Enforcement. A. Violations. It shall be unlawful for any person to violate any provision or fail to comply with any of the requirements of this chapter. A violation of any of the provisions or failure to comply with any of the mandatory requirements of this chapter shall constitute an infraction. B. Penalties. Any person convicted of an infraction under the provisions of such sections shall be punishable by fine only as follows: Upon a first conviction, by a fine not exceeding $250.00, and for a second conviction or any subsequent conviction within a period of one year, by a fine not exceeding $500.00. 1. Cutting, removing, or pruning of trees on public property without a permit shall be a misdemeanor. 2. In addition to the penalties provided for herein, any violation of such sections may be addressed by civil action. C. Suspension of Permit. Removal of trees, pruning or root removal without a permit shall be grounds for suspension of any permits granted for construction or demolition for a period of up to 90 days, said period of time to be determined by the City Forester. During the suspension period, the property owner or her/his designee shall make application to the Forest and Beach Commission to obtain the necessary permit. Upon the review of the application, the Forest and Beach Commission: 1. May require replacement trees to be planted upon completion of construction; 2. May require an amount of money equal to the value of the lost tree(s) to be deposited in a deposit account to be used for reforestation; 3. May, in the event a tree is damaged and the City Forester determines that it may die within one year, require a sum of money equal to the tree’s value to be deposited with the City in a deposit account for a period of time not exceeding one year. If the tree dies during that period the City shall use the money for restoration. The City Forester shall determine the tree’s value using criteria established by the International Society of Arboriculture. (Ord. 2004-02 § 1, 2004; Ord. 2004-01 § 1, 2004).

PowerPoints: Carmel River-History, Restoration and Protection and Water Supply Problems and Possible Solutions in the Monterey Peninsula Area

ABSTRACT: At the Carmel Residents Association May Meeting yesterday, Larry Hampson, Water Resources Engineer, Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD), and Darby Fuerst, Interim General Manager, MPWMD, presented PowerPoint Presentations entitled Carmel River - History, Restoration, and Protection and Water Supply Problems and Possible Solutions in the Monterey Peninsula Area, respectively. The Mission of the MPWMD, an Area Map and information about Larry Hampson and Darby Fuerst are presented. HIGHLIGHTS of the PowerPoint Presentations are presented. THE MISSION OF THE MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT IS TO MANAGE,AUGMENT AND PROTECT WATER RESOURCES FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMUNITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT. DRAFT AREA MAP The Monterey Peninsula, Carmel Bay, and South Monterey Bay Region CRA May General Meeting: Larry Hampson and Darby Fuerst Water problems and solutions, plus history and ecology of the river Larry Hampson, Water Resources Engineer B.S. Engineering Science, graduate-level courses in river mechanics from Colorado State University M.B.A. University of Colorado Licensed Civil Engineer in Colorado and California Water Resources Engineer for the past 17 years Hampson has focused on the sustainable use of the river by balancing restoration and protection of stream-side habitat with the needs of riverfront property owners and the Monterey Peninsula. Darby Fuerst, Interim General Manager B.S. Geological Sciences M.S. Hydrology and Water Resources Administration Certified Professional Hydrologist with the American Institute of Hydrology 23 years as a Hydrologist, Water Resources Manager and currently as Interim General Manager for the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District. Highlights of Carmel River - History, Restoration, and Protection, A Presentation to the Carmel Residents Association, October 23, 2008 by Larry Hampson, Water Resources Engineer • Topics include, History, Ecology, Restoration and Protection • Threatened Species Protected in 1996 and 1997 Steelhead and California Red-legged Frog • Court Battles, Citizen Efforts, Better Management Halt Degradation of River 1974 - suit over groundwater extraction in mid-Valley 1976-77 - Carmel River Watch (CREW) established 1983 - 84% yes vote for river restoration program 1984 – MPWMD orders pumping to be shifted downstream 1987 – four complaints filed against Cal- Am with SWRCB 1990 – EIR on water allocation results in expanded Mitigation Program for river 1995 – SWRCB issues WR Order 95-10 1996-97 – listing of steelhead and California red-legged frogs spurs tighter federal controls of activities along the river 2000-2005 Cal-Am surface diversions further curtailed 2008 – Coastal Conservancy sponsors Sand Clemente Dam removal and river re-route 2007-08-09 (?) - SWRCB revisits Order 95- 10 • What Are the Threats to Resources of the Carmel River? Los Padres Reservoir may continue to impound sediment from the upper watershed Loss of surface storage may result in less flow downstream in the summer Lack of sediment may destabilize streambanks Armoring of streambanks is likely to continue after large floods Diversions in lower river continue to affect vegetation and aquatic habitat Global warming may cause larger swings in temperature and rainfall • Moving Forward Significant bond act funding may be available to continue restoration and mitigation efforts Private and non-profit groups such as the Big Sur Land Trust and the Planning and Conservation League are interested in restoring and maintaining the watershed San Clemente Dam to be removed by State Coastal Conservancy New water supplies for the Monterey Peninsula are projected to be completed within eight years - these projects will allow a reduction in diversions from Carmel Valley • River Reroute and Dam Removal Maximize the Public Benefits • Mitigation Program Direct Measures Seaside basin injection/recovery Fish rescue, rearing, habitat improvement Irrigation of Carmel River riparian corridor Vegetation management/modification and augmentation Streambank and channel restoration Highlights of Water Supply Problems and Possible Solutions in the Monterey Peninsula Area, A Presentation to the Carmel Residents Association, October 23, 2008 by Darby Fuerst, Interim General Manager • Distribution of California American Water Production by User Type Approximately 55% Residential • Physical Limitations on Water Supply Extreme annual and seasonal variability of streamflow in the Carmel River Inadequate surface water and groundwater storage capacity in Carmel River Basin Infrequent, but certain drought events, i.e., consecutive dry or critically-dry inflow years Threat of seawater intrusion in Carmel River and Seaside Groundwater Basins • Legal Limitations on Water Supply State Water Resources Control Board Order No. WR 95-10 against California American Water (CAW) Order 95-10 requires CAW to reduce its diversions from the Carmel River by approximately 75% • Water Supply Requirements MPWMD has estimated that 12,500 acre-feet per year (AFY) of replacement supplies are required to meet existing water demands and comply with Order 95-10 and the Seaside Decision. In addition, MPWMD has estimated, based on input from the jurisdictions within the District, that an additional 4,500 AFY of supplies are required to meet future water demands within the District • Water Supply Solutions CAW’s proposed Coastal Water Project Water for Monterey County Coalition’s1proposed Regional Water Project Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency’s proposed Groundwater Replenishment Project MPWMD/CAW’s Phase 1 Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) Project, in operation. MPWMD’s proposed Phase 2 ASR Project MPWMD’s proposed Seawater Desalination Project (“95-10 Project”) in the former Fort Ord area.

STATISTICS: City Population, Total Area, Operating Budget – General Fund, City Spending Per Capita & Number of Full-Time City Employees

ABSTRACT: Statistics of City Population, Total Area, Operating Budget – General Fund, City Spending Per Capita and Number of Full-Time City Employees are presented for the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea in the context of other similarly populated and tourist destination cities and Monterey Peninsula cites. A list of cities is compiled based on City Spending Per Capita (ranked highest to lowest). The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea has the highest City Per Capita Spending. Yet, basic city assets are inaccessible to the public, poorly maintained, et cetera. For example, the Public Works building, Scout House and Flanders Mansion are inaccessible to the public, street/road/avenue maintenance is not accomplished per Nichols Consulting Engineers recommendation of $660,000 per year, Mission Trail Nature Preserve is poorly maintained and Forest Theatre property continues to deteriorate from neglect. With actual FY 2006/07 expenditures of $11,539,748, actual FY 2007/08 expenditures of $13,728,162, actual FY 2008/09 expenditures of $13,991,205, actual FY 2009/10 expenditures of $12,799,862, revised budget FY 2010/11 expenditures of $13,758,037, proposed budget FY 2011/12 expenditures of $14,199,784 and reserve funds of  $9 million (source: City) or $11 million (source: Auditor), it is noteworthy that city councils have not only not accomplished the most basis of stewardship responsibilities, namely making accessible and in good condition all of the city’s assets for the benefit of the residents and visitors, but have no budget plans to fulfill these most basis of city government stewardship responsibilities. COMMENTS are made.

City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Population: 3,938
Total Area: 1.08 square miles
Operating Budget – General Fund $13.1 million
City Spending Per Capita: $3,327.
Number of Employees: 66
Local Government Compensation Reports (2009)
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA CALIFORNIA
ADOPTED BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2011/11 AND ESTIMATED THROUGH 2013/14

City of Del Mar
Population: 4,591
Total Area: 1.78 square miles
Operating Budget – General Fund $10.3 million (FY 2010/11)
City Spending Per Capita: $2,244.
Number of Full-Time Employees: 51
Local Government Compensation Reports (2009)
City of Del Mar Operating & Capital Budget Fiscal Years 2009-10 & 2010-11

Town of Yountville
Population: 2,933
Total Area: 1.53 square miles
Operating Budget – General Fund: $6.1 million (FY 2010/11)
City Spending Per Capital: $2,080.
Number of Employees: 24
Local Government Compensation Reports (2009)
Town of Yountville 2011-12 General Fund Budget in Brief

City of Monterey
Population: 27,810
Total Area: 11.7 square miles
Operating Budget – General Fund $57.4 million (FY 2010/11)
City Spending Per Capita: $2,064.
Number of Full-Time Employees: 478
Local Government Compensation Reports (2009)
CITY OF MONTEREY ADOPTED BUDGET 2010-11

City of St. Helena
Population: 5,960
Total Area: 5.03 square miles
Operating Budget – General Fund $8.1 million (FY 2010/11)
City Spending Per Capita: $1,359.
Number of Full-Time Employees: 72
Local Government Compensation Reports (2009)
City of St. Helena General Fund Fiscal Year 2010-2011 Budget

City of Calistoga
Population: 5,331
Total Area: 2.61 square miles
Operating Budget – General Fund $6.8 million (FY 2010/11)
City Spending Per Capita: $1,276
Number of Full-Time Employees: 57
Local Government Compensation Reports (2009)
City of Calistog OPERATING & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2011-11

City of Pacific Grove
Population: 15,536
Total Area: 4.00 square miles
Operating Budget – General Fund $14.8 million (FY 2010/11)
City Spending Per Capita: $952.6
Number of Full-Time Employees: 80
Local Government Compensation Reports (2009)
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2010/11

COMMENTS:
• Stewardship of our Infrastructure is one of the Main Functions of Government.
“The concept of stewardship implies the care of our assets to ensure that future generations receive them in at least as good a condition as the current generation received them. The achievement of this goal requires a commitment to planning, preventive maintenance and orderly replacement, in a cost-effective manner.”
(City of Redondo Beach, 2002)

• “Asset Management is a systematic process of maintaining, upgrading and operating physical assets cost effectively. It combines sound business practices and economic theory, and it provides tools to facilitate a more organized, logical approach to decision-making."
(City of Redondo Beach, 2002)

• The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea’s concept of stewardship does not imply the “care of our assets to ensure that future generations receive them in at least as good a condition as the current generation received them.” Moreover, Carmel’s “asset management” appears to be our streets, buildings and parks are not satisfactorily maintained unless a grant is received and the mayor or city council deems an asset to be unworthy of maintenance and pursues a divestment policy, the antithesis of the spirit of the public trust doctrine, the principle that resources are preserved for public use and that the government is required to maintain them for the public's reasonable use.

• The City has structural funding imbalances, such as police department versus fire department and Sunset Cultural Center, Inc. versus all other cultural and historic assets.

• “UNLESS someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It’s not.”
– Dr. Seuss, The LORAX, 1971