Ballpark gets vote of confidence
by Jon Mendelson
Oct 17, 2012 | 4979 views | 39 39 comments | 8 8 recommendations | email to a friend | print
The Junior Bulldogs novice team lines up to run a play during practice Sept. 18 at the Tracy Ballpark. The land will remain a public park and could be designated as a park "in perpetuity" following the Tuesday, Oct. 16, meeting of the City Council.  Press file photo.
The Junior Bulldogs novice team lines up to run a play during practice Sept. 18 at the Tracy Ballpark. The land will remain a public park and could be designated as a park "in perpetuity" following the Tuesday, Oct. 16, meeting of the City Council. Press file photo.
slideshow
At least for the time being, the Tracy Ballpark will remain public sports fields.

The Tracy City Council voted unanimously Tuesday, Oct. 16, to leave the park as it is and sought options for how to protect it as parkland for years to come.

At a Sept. 17 meeting, a consultant and city staff presented ideas for redeveloping the 68-year-old park, including turning it into a housing development or apartment complex. Tracy residents have attended several meetings to oppose the idea, including an Oct. 2 City Council meeting and Oct. 4 Parks and Community Services Commission gathering.

On Tuesday, residents again hammered home their desire to keep the park — sold to the city for $10 in 1944 by C.E. and Margaret Ritter — as a park.

Among 12 speakers to address the council, Whittier Avenue resident Greg Welch presented a petition signed by 2,151 residents seeking to keep Tracy Ballpark a public greensward. Welch, who partnered with Bessie Avenue resident Phillip Treat to start the petition drive, said 523 of the signatories live within a half-mile of the park.

Treat was pleased with the outcome.

“It’s what we wanted, and what they should have done,” he said after the meeting.

Also smiling after the decision was Paul Ritter, whose grandparents deeded the property to the city.

“I think I have a very proud grandfather tonight,” Ritter said.

The council also unanimously approved a motion by Councilman Steve Abercrombie, seconded by Councilman Robert Rickman, to have city staff members look into ways the ballpark could remain a park “in perpetuity.”

Later in the evening, the council also told the staff to review how it gathers public feedback.

Abercrombie said the way staff members handled the discussion of options for developing Tracy Ballpark was in part responsible for the backlash against the proposals, though he added that council members in the past had directed them to examine economic development projects and reach out to the community before addressing the council.

“Council has told staff to look under every rock for economic development,” he said.

But Rickman said showing the public what looked like completed plans made it seem that someone was trying to make an “end run” around the City Council and the public process.

“I’m not happy on how this whole process transpired, and I do find it very troubling,” he said.

Assistant City Manager Maria Hurtado admitted that the images showing a possible arrangement of homes were a poor choice to start the conversation about the Tracy Ballpark’s future.

“Visual tools gave the community the impression that the project was already a done deal, which was not the intent,” she told the council.

She explained that the slides were meant to “create opportunity for visualizing what the neighborhood and park could look like.”

As part of the council’s Tuesday decision, renovation of Tracy Ballpark will remain up for funding via the capital improvement budget. Several council members and residents who spoke sought to improve its fields and facilities.

An estimate from the city manager’s office in early October stated that the cost of adequately repairing the athletic fields’ uneven surface and upgrading amenities such as bathrooms would be about $3.9 million.

A letter from City Manager Leon Churchill that was read at the Oct. 4 parks commission meeting stated that repairs at Tracy Ballpark had been bypassed in favor of a swim center and a new animal shelter in the most recent capital improvement priority process.

“There clearly is competition for limited dollars,” said Mayor Pro Tem Michael Maciel on Tuesday.

Maciel said the city should keep the park as public space for now but shouldn’t be too quick to handcuff itself when it comes to meeting the needs of what could be a very different city in the future.

“This situation is a pretty bad fit, but we shouldn’t fault staff for floating it as an option,” he said, regarding development of Tracy Ballpark. “I’d rather have (residents) come here and say ‘What were you thinking?’ rather than have staff lay back and not be aggressively looking for … the best utilization of (city) assets.”

At a glance

WHAT: City Council regular meeting

WHEN: 7 p.m. Tuesday, Oct. 16

WHERE: City Hall, 333 Civic Center Plaza

DETAILS: Mayor Brent Ives, Mayor Pro Tem Michael Maciel and councilmen Steve Abercrombie, Bob Elliott and Robert Rickman were present.



Comments
(39)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Realintracy
|
October 26, 2012
Ornely, you got me. I can't apologize well enough. No matter how someone says something, about anything, there wrong. Any statement made by another party is wrong, you are awash in the sea of mindless faceless creatures and serve a the one beacon for the uneducated masses.

Look at maciels letters to the editor, watch him at the city council meetings, listen to him speak about issues and you can easily determine he is a liar.

You admittedly have had a long relationship with Maciel and Yet chose not to vote for him. Good choice. I won't either.

Wmnz save the name calling slick. Go ask uncle Mikey for another cookie.
Realintracy
|
October 26, 2012
Maciel has a proven track record of lying. He has lied about the gang problem, he lied about the city's response to the gang issues, he wrote letters to the paper and promised citizens things and lied repeatedly. He really expected us to believe there are no bad areas in town , just "pockets." give me a break. He has shot his mouth off say too often and been proven wrong. He either needs to check his facts before he opens his mouth, or writes, or he is a liar. If he made honest mistakes and admitted to them and tried to do the right thing, that would be one thing. Maciel does not do that, his ego won't let him. He lies, once caught lies some more. He needs to go we need honest leadership we can trust.
Wmnuzumt
|
October 26, 2012
You seem to have an anger issue. I think you may need to see someone about it before it takes over your life. You don't seem to be able to distinguish the truth from fiction. I hope you get better.
Realintracy
|
October 26, 2012
Ornley, I apologized to you for having been less the polite in my previous responses to your posts. I will now apologize again, I should have been more polite.

You have berated and belittled others in your posts, your assertion that someone else started it seems less than genuine.

The court decided on the Ellis project and both Serpa and the city appealed the decision. If they believed the court got it wrong then they should have waited for court of appeals to rule. Instead they have kept the appeal and then rewrote the development agreement. The revised DA give Seprpa 8 million dollars on sewer and water and nexts the city two million dollars. When the property is annexed, Serpa gives them 2 million, the city has two years to build the swim center, if not, Serpa gets the land back and pays nothing else.

The old da netted the city 10 million and 16 acres, the amended da nets the city 2 million at best and allows Serpa to retain the property if the city can not come up with the 17 million needed to build phase 1. Since the city doesn't have 17 mill, and Serpa will now pay 2 mill initially, he is almost guaranteed to retain the 16 acres and the other 8 mill.

Ornley_Gumfudgen
|
October 26, 2012
Realintracy

Ya have a strange way of apologizin. Ya apologize but seem ta always deliver it with a slap in th face. Well if it works fer ya . . .

My assertion is less than genuine. Isn't that th same thang as sayin I'm a liar but just prettied up with a little fancier language? What ever!

Also, I never once stated that I have never berated someone here. In fact I have admitted it here on more than one occasion.

"Less than polite," ta me means ta berate, don't it?

Thanks fer provin a point fer me though.

If th City had not been bogged down by th lawsuit by yer own statement it seems that they could have reached a better deal with Serpa/Ellis an thus saved a lot of money an accomplished th goal of gettin a Swim Facility, as we discuss all of this under a ball park headin.

By th way, ya don't honestly thank that Serpa is makin all th decisions about th Ellis project do ya? What da ya wanna bet that he is simply th mouthpiece fer th investors in that project that are really tellin him what they wanna do?

Th longer we dally around th more it's gonna cost in th long run an apparently history is bearin that fact out as even you are now are makin th observation consarnin th overall costs an compairin th original DA ta th new one.

Lets take come of yer assertions one by one shall we?

"Maciel has a proven track record of lying." Two questions here, who proved it an whair is that record of proof so all can examine th evidence that led up ta th conclusion.

"He has lied about the gang problem, he lied about the city's response to the gang issues."

Takin this as one lie since they both deal with th same issue. Again, when an under what circumstances was th first statement said an whair is th evidence ta support th second?

"he wrote letters to the paper and promised citizens things and lied repeatedly."

Sorry, "things" doesn't really cut it. What specific thangs did he promise an what specific thangs did he repeatedly lie about? If yer talkin about gangs, then if it is a lie, that's one lie an not repeated lies. I am of th notion yer complaint is really on th gang issue as ya seem to hover around it so much especially with th next statement.

"He really expected us to believe there are no bad areas in town , just "pockets." give me a break."

With this statement I happen ta agree with Mike that we don't have a gang problem all over town an yer statement on th face if it is contradictory.

"No bad areas in town" an "pockets" are contradictory in that pockets are areas by th definitions of th words bein used ta construct th sentence.

"He has shot his mouth off say too often and been proven wrong."

Time was, once not long ago, when people complained that they couldn't get city council members ta respond ta em in a more public environment by makin statements an offerin thair views ta th press so that everyone could see em.

Against my recommendations that he not do that, because of knowin how people tend ta twist every little thang said ta suit thair own beliefs, Mike chose ta write his comments an feelins in letters an articles printed in th press. Now, because he has chosen ta do so it seems that people are upset that he has. Truly a no win situation thair. Damned if ya do an damned if ya don't.

"He either needs to check his facts before he opens his mouth, or writes, or he is a liar."

Wow, that comment could be applied ta everyone that writes here in th comment sections. Because they may be incorrect or th paramaters that caused th statement ta be made have changed, does that mean that th person is a liar? Or does it mean they were possibly mistaken at th time in thair beliefs. Liar, in this usage, indicates ta me that th person intentionally made th statement with th intent of deception so that somethang else could be done. Did he intentionally lie? I don't thank so but then I am not all upset about th thangs he allegedly did in th eyes of someone else an look at a bigger picture. We all can be wrong in our beliefs on somethang, that don't make us liars does it? Well, I don't thank so at any rate.

Look, I didn't vote fer Mike th last time around an I have known him fer a long time an know him ta be a good person based on my dealins with him over th years. Th reason I didn't vote fer him th last time around was that I thought another candidate would be a better fit on th Council an that's really what made th decision fer me.

Has Mike never made a mistake? Perhaps th question is best answered with another question. Has anyone never made a mistake? I have known Mike fer quite some time an I have never seen him dressed in blue tights with a red cape an a big S on his chest. Never seen him walk on water either. No, he's a human just like th rest of us an fer certain humans make mistakes all th time; mine is probably sittin here writin this at this time cus I know it's gonna upset some people because I disagree with many if not most of thair accusations but that's politics ain't it?

Wmnuzumt, while somewhat scattered in his comment consarnin th guts fer people ta comment usin thair real names or thair a coward, while doin it under an anonymous handle himself, does make a valid statement that perhaps more people should take advantage of.

If ya missed it here it is again. ". . . his name (Mike Maciel) is in the phone book and you can call him anytime. He will personally talk to you and answer any of your questions. Try to do that with any of the other people running for the council.

Seems ta be a valid an rational suggestion ta me, whadda ya thank?

An while th question as ta luck would need ta be formalized th rest of th statement, "We are lucky to have someone that spend so much time for so little," also brings up an important issue an not just fer Mike but fer all members of council.

Are ya aware of what a councilman's pay is an what other benefits they get?

Not interested if he or she is drawin a pension or is employed full time doin somethang else. A workman deserves his wages an all that. Th point is, would ya or anyone else wanna do th job an do it fer such a small amount of remuneration? Don't see a lot of people flockin ta get thair names on th ballot so they can do this sorta work. Why is that?

Then, of course, thairs th unspoken allegation of money under th table an payoffs. Ta that I say provide th evidence an tagether we shall examine em an if proved factual remove th offender an put em in jail. In short on this, allegations don't make it true an I don't convict people based on th allegations of others.

Lastly is th question of ego. That one is difficult ta really ascertain unless ya have a real close relationship with a person an have a much better understandin of that person's psyche. It's somewhat difficult ta determine based on brief encounters particularly if ya didn't like what was said an didn't like th person when ya encountered em.

If ya believe Mike lied that's fine. Ya got a right ta yer beliefs an even a right ta express em. But what you believe an what I believe may or may not be truthfully factual. After all, like Mike, we are humans, prone to error an very prone ta be misunderstood by others who don't really know us deep at a personal level.

I am not a close friend of Mike but have associated with him many times over many years an honestly I don't see th predispositioned lies that many are claimin that he makes. I do see a lot of misunderstandins an places whair more information caused him ta change his feelins about somethang an for me I believe that's a good trait for I really would like ta have a politician that feels strongly about somethang suddenly change his mind about it when he receives more information that causes him ta change his beliefs.

Now ta wrap this all up so I can get on ta other thangs taday.

Ya offer th complaint that th city should have waited ta have th results of th appeals court before rewritin th da an gettin ready ta proceed.

Considerin how long it takes ta get thangs through court an how long th city has been attemptin ta give it's citizens a badly needed swimmin facility, it make sense ta me that they would revise thair initial DA ta somethang that was less questionable in th eyes of th court so that they would be better able ta proceed quickly once th court issued its decision.

That don't seem ta be dishonest but simply a good business decision in order ta provide what is wanted in th shortest period of time.

Well thair ya have it. My opinions on th topic of Mike Maciel an th Swim Facility proposed fer th Ellis project. An ya got a perfect right ta disagree with any an or all of if ya choose.



Wmnuzumt
|
October 25, 2012
I do not understand why people don,t have the the guts to use their own names. If you believe in what you say at least have the guts to use your own name. Don't be a coward.

backinblack
|
October 25, 2012
I don't have a dog in this fight but after reading your comment I just have to ask, is Wmnuzumt your real name?
Ornley_Gumfudgen
|
October 26, 2012
Wmnuzumt

While I like yer other comments an thank thair valid, I will state that if ya feel so strongly about it, ". . . have the guts to use your own name. Don't be a coward." Not a very intelligent recommendation ya made now is it?

I did like yer endorsement based on your personal experience with Mike though. My personal experience comes through a different avenue an along th lines of his profession as a police officer in town fer many years.

No, I'm not a cop or criminal but that didn't prevent me from gettin directly involved ta collect first hand information regardin Mike an th rest of th officers that made up th Tracy Police Department when I was directly involved with em.

I am not an employee or elected official in th city either, even though I have put in a lot of personal time supportin th community an workin with th city ta achieve th best possible result.

Did I make mistakes? Yep. Did I lie? Not intentionally. Did everythang I did work out as planned? Nope. Did th anger an personal attacks along with th mistakes I made prevent me from continuin ta serve my city an its citizens? Nope, it didn't. Did I have successes. Yep.

An if I, with my personal experiences, can or could do all of those thangs what would make me thank that someone else doin th same thang wouldn't have somewhat th same experiences over time?

Show me a man, other than God an Jesus Christ, who claims ta be perfect in all his ways and I shall show you a perfect liar because such perfection in humanity simply don't exist. We all have our shortcomins an that is really a human condition.



Wmnuzumt
|
October 25, 2012
Sorry I forgot to inform you that his name is in the phone book and you can call him anytime. He will personally talk to you and answer any of your questions. Try to do that with any of the other people running for the council.
Wmnuzumt
|
October 25, 2012
Most of you people have no idea what you are talking about. I know Mr. Maciel very well and he is one of the most honest people I have ever met. He and his family played ball in that park when they were kids. His father sponsored teams that played in that park. The whole question about that park was hypothetical. That is the job of the elected officials. What happens in five or ten years when the sports complex is built out? He is the only one that has the guts to answer those questions. There are some people in this City that have an agenda to get rid of him. I know for a fact that some of Mr Maciel's supporters are spending more time and money on a former businessman in this city because he will be more accommodating to the builders than he is and have let them know. If some of you people would take the time to find out who gains the most from derogatory remarks about Mike. We are lucky to have someone that spend so much time for so little.
Realintracy
|
October 24, 2012
Should read eer.
Realintracy
|
October 24, 2012
Rhcp if the city accepted the courts decision they would not have appealed it. The city would have admitted the Ellis agreement was flawed, paid Connely 300k, wrote another agreement using the courts decision a a guide, and the matter would have been settled.

Instead, Serpa and the city appealed the decision, and then wrote a modification to the agreement to attempt have it both ways.

Winners- no-one. No homes, no pool, nothing but more litigation and a waste of time and money.

RedHotChilliPeppers
|
October 24, 2012
Realintracy,

I really doubt the matter would have been settled. Several years ago, a candidate made a campaign promise that she would "go to the people". Instead they took it to court.

If you tell me this would have been over I would believe you less, for second guessing a liar. I believe the best approach has already been selected. You can believe what you want.
Realintracy
|
October 24, 2012
I do not think Ornley is a liar. I think he may have fallen off his high horse and bumped his head, which may account for his writing style and need to berate everyone who dares to speak their mind about the perpetual nonsense the city pulls. Ornley has a right to comment, defend his/the city's position and be a defacto spokesman.

It is healthy to have reasonable discourse and look at things from different angles. We should, however, remain respectful. Ornely and I do not agree on much (I researched several previous posts). I must admit, I should have done a better

job at remaining polite. For that, I apologize to Ornely.

Regarding Maciel, he was wrong...he should simply own it along with his other mistakes which has effected his credibility and ability to represent the people he swore an oath to serve.

With regard to believing everyone an attorney says..nope. When the city's own attorney says the city was wrong, and the Assistant City Manger said they were wrong, and the Mayor and 3 other City Council members said the matter was

mishandled, along with 2000 signators. Let's air on the side common sense on this one, and admit Sodegren may have actually got this right.
RedHotChilliPeppers
|
October 24, 2012
I didn't ask you if you believe Ornley is a liar.

And I didn't ask what the city attorney thinks.

It's a moot point what he or anyone else thinks.

The city was right to look into it on the grounds of safety issues.

The city attorney can address the consultant's concerns as a separate issue.
Ornley_Gumfudgen
|
October 24, 2012
RIT

Apology accepted. An if I insulted ya please accept mine. It's easy fer our passions ta get in th way of our better judgement.

That bein said, why is anyone discussin Ellis or anythang else that happens in th city under an article that's addressin th ball park when th only mention of a swim center, which is encompassed presently in th Ellis project is, "A letter from City Manager Leon Churchill that was read at the Oct. 4 parks commission meeting stated that repairs at Tracy Ballpark had been bypassed in favor of a swim center and a new animal shelter in the most recent capital improvement priority process" an “There clearly is competition for limited dollars,” said Mayor Pro Tem Michael Maciel on Tuesday."

Until an if th Ellis project proceeds th location of th proposed Swim Center is still not concrete.

It seems obvious ta me th City is doin it's best ta accommodate th needs of its citizenry an would probably be more successful if we didn't have all of th selfish politically motivated bickerin that's been goin on fer almost 20 years now.

People blame those who are tryin ta accomplish somethang an blame em when they don't accomplish it. It's a no win situation.

Ornley_Gumfudgen
|
October 24, 2012
RIT

But I do have a little trouble with th sincerity of yer apology when ya start out with, "I think he may have fallen off his high horse and bumped his head, which may account for his writing style. . ."

What do you think, or as my Ornley persona would say, whatta ya thank?

Oh BTW, award Connoley "massive damages." I though it was ta pay his fees. Didn't know they were damage awards. Can ya please provide me th evidence that indicates they were actually damages an who those damages were paid ta? Don't wanna be sayin thangs that aren't true so that would really help me out if ya can supply that information.

Raderfan

Ya comment, "Now all of a sudden you can't take that same City Attorney's word as enought evidence to agree that the law exists?"

Are ya askin me if th City's Attorney's have never made a mistake an have always made th right decision? It would seem frum th historical evidence that even th City's Attorney's can be wrong along with any other attorney.

It seems that if ya agree with th attorney then yer expected ta agree with everythang that attorney says as gospel truth.

Or, on th flip side of the coin, if ya disagree with th attorney then yer expected ta disagree with everythang that attorney says an reject it as a lie.

Does real life really work that way?

Ever find yerself in a situation where ya feel strongly about somethang an then later change yer mind about it?

Da ya really want yer local government ta be 100% united in thair decisions? It seems that is what many are complain about. Personally I like ta see it ta be closer ta 50/50 in thair agreement with th majority takin th prize if ya wanna call it that. Makes fer better government.

As fer as renegotiatin th deal with Ellis, I thank that's a good thang. IF thangs were initially negotiated were wrong in th eyes of law does that mean they can't be changed ta be in conformance with th law?

Got a better deal we can look at? Or are ya just against havin a swim center?

I don't particularly care who builds it as long as it gets built an starts providin some much needed services ta our citizens.

"Then why is it that the City fails to accept the courts decision on the Ellis project?"

Actually I was under th impression they did accept th courts decision. Should they completely abandon th idea completely? Or should they correct th mistakes made an try it again?

Or is it just Serpa an Ellis that ya don't like fer some reason? Really tryin ta get a handle on how ya thank th city should proceed with a Swim Center project. Is it that ya don't feel a need fer a Swim Center? Hey, that's cool, many don't feel th need. But on th flip side many do an I am of th notion that more people want a Swim Center than don't. Perhaps someone ought ta circulate a legal petition an find out.

Why do I stress "legal petition?" Because if ya have read th news taday ya will see how a computerized votin booth back east was busted fer takin Romney votes an recordin em as Obama votes, provin that even under th most ardent circumstances even thangs done under th scrutiny of law can be done incorrectly. When ya don't even try ta do it under th scrutiny of law it's even easier ta skew th results th way ya want it ta go.

Use ta believe, never trust anyone over 40. Taday I have reluctantly have had ta change that belief ta say, "Never give your full trust to any person until yer absolutely certain they are 100% trustworthy."

People are just that, people. They make mistakes an many of them mistakes are really honest mistakes. Doesn't make it right but it don't make em ta be th villians that many say they are.

Fer one, many say Maciel is a liar. They say he said one thang an did another. Really? Could he have said one thang based on th information he had at th time an then say another based on more information he had received? No one can change thair minds over time? What a ridiculous notion.

If we operated on that principal we would never get anythang accomplished would we? Some ta thank of it, frum historical observation on th topic of Ellis, which ain't th topic of th article leadin this comment, we're not gettin much done.

Well, it's time ta get busy. Gotta long day ahead of me. Have fun.

Ornley_Gumfudgen
|
October 24, 2012
RIT

Also, I do take some exception on yer "berate" comment. If ya look closely I don't berate people until they have berated me first.

Stick ta th topic of discussion an allow people ta have thair ideas about it without resortin ta personal attacks is th best way ta proceed.

Unfortunately, as a flawed human bein, I tend ta respond in kind instead of tarnin th other cheek, strangely enough just like th majority of th people livin on th planet taday.

An that don't make it right either, just makes me human. Where I go wrong is when someone either berates me personally or berates someone else with thair personal attacks.

Example and only an example because I honestly don't feel this way and it's an example for illustration purposes.

"You must be some sort of uneducated idiot if you feel that way.'

Granted, you may not have said that or anything like that but should be able to see that is an attack on the person and not addressing the topic of discussion. Note also, to be clear to you, the Ornley persona has been temporarily suspended.

Discussion and beliefs are OK, it's unsubstantiated personal attacks I can't and never will abide with.

Is Maciel a liar? I don't believe so. Has he lied some time during his life, who among us has never lied?

Sometimes we lie because we simply don't have all the information. Is that really a lie or is it more of mistake because of the omission of additional information?

Even you, well intentioned recognize this with yer comment, "Let's air on the side common sense on this one, and admit Sodegren may have actually got this right."

I note that you inject th word "may" as a disclaimer in yer comment and that is a good thang because it gives ya room ta reconsider at a later date. Th fact is that while he "may have actually got this right," he very well may have gotten it wrong.

Well I really gotta go now cus now I am late. Have a good day.

Realintracy
|
October 20, 2012
Ornely- English....Try English

Facts are just that....facts. Maciel voiced his support to sell the ball park. Two thousand citizens signed a petition in opposition. The city attorney admitted laws would have prevented the sale of the park with a referendum on the ballot because of the nature of the acquisition when the city first took ownership nearly 70 years ago. The city attorney stated that laws restricting the sale of the park were in place.

Maciel wanted to sell the park, along with Churchill which would have benefitted the developers and violated existing laws. Gee, what a surprise, Ellis ring any bells! Everyone gripes about Connely, except the courts, who agree with him, and award massive damages to him because they keep tryin g to skate around the laws and lie to benefit Serpa and the like.

If measure A is flawed, change it. Until then, the law is the law.
Ornley_Gumfudgen
|
October 21, 2012
Realintracy Thinking, try thinking.

Let me ask ya a simple question since th complex ones seem ta escape ya.

Do you know all of th laws on th books? Every one of em?

Perhaps those laws would have prevented th sale. But would they have prevented it frum bein reorganized inta usage as a park instead of a ball park?

An just cus ya have an attorney that says "this is th law" is it? How many attorneys in th land have lost thair cases in court because th laws they though existed didn't cover thair case?

Maciel may have wanted ta sell th park initially. I myself thought it a good idea. But if th law forbids it, and honestly I would like ta read that law fer myself instead of takin some attorney or politicians word fer it ta confirm it; if faced with that fact then logically one should expect that Maciel an I would change that stance. Are ya th type of person that would continue ta support somethang wrong if ya larned it might be or was in fact wrong? Perhaps ya would if people can't change thair minds.

Yer all hyped up on "benefitting the developers." What about benefittin th kids an th rest of th citizens of Tracy.

But I do like yer idea on changin measure A as right at this present moment I am sure it would to down in flames of defeat.

As ta yer "petition", it's good it got th notice of council an spurred em inta action but it would have been a waste of time if ya wanted ta take it an use it ta bring it ta a public vote.

Look, if yer gonna do somethang don't waste yer time when ya can just as easily do it correctly so if needed ya can act immediately instead of havin ta do it all over again.

A ball park that is ta remain a ball park until th end of all time, which is what words like perpetuity mean. What a novel idea. Wonder what it will look like 50 ta 100 years frum now or if baseball will even be a sport then?

An before ya start ta lecture people on English an it's proper usage, don't ya thank that ya ought ta master it yerself before castin stones?

First sentence - "Facts are just that....facts."

Properly written it's, "Facts are just that, facts."

Ya got yer style of writin an I got mine.

Will give ya credit fer one thang though. At least ya intermix some information pertainin ta th articles as ya continue ta launch yer personal attacks against me cus I have a different point of view an don't suggest that I refrain frum commentin.

An since yer really fixated on th subject, lets address it. Yer problem is ya don't like Maciel an wanna replace him with someone ya do like.

It ain't got anythang ta do with th ball park an everythang ta do with Maciel who is up fer re-election.

Apparently yer shallow thankin don't comprehend that thair are four other people on City Council an they don't always agree with each other.

Let me explain it ta ya. It's called checks an balances in that no one individual of em can make a decision that affects everyone else in town. That takes a majority vote.

Th way it works is an idea is floated by, they all get ta look at it, all get ta form thair opinions, all get ta investigate an determine what can an what cannot be done an then act. Would ya us rather limit it all down ta one person makin all th decisions without th benefit of anyone else lookin at th same problem?

If th rest of council had decided ta sell, what would ya have said then?

Tell ya what, since ya don't like Maciel why didn't ya run against him an get yerself elected so that ya could show everyone else how it should be done an everyone can pick on ya when they don't like ya fer what ever reason they can come up with.

Hey, fair is fair ain't it an ain't that exactly what ya are doin here? Be honest.

RedHotChilliPeppers
|
October 21, 2012
Realintracy,

Do you believe he is a pathological liar?

rayderfan
|
October 21, 2012
What a funny comment Ornley.

You are speaking of the same City Attorney, whose recommendations you supported, regarding the decision to renogtiate the Ellis Deal, correct?

Now all of a sudden you can't take that same City Attorney's word as enought evidence to agree that the law exists?

I think you are very fickle Ornley. You seem to sway back and forth regarding the truth, just like Churchill, Ives, Maciel and the rest of the City Council.

Things need to change in Tracy and that's why I recommend people vote the incumbents out and get some new faces on the City Council.
rayderfan
|
October 21, 2012
And by the way Ornley;

If what you say is true about the courts telling us something different than what the attorneys say; and if what the courts say is the final determining factor, as you elude to in your previous comment;.

Then why is it that the City fails to accept the courts decision on the Ellis project?

You should spend less time worrying about people's grammar and more time checking your arguments for validity.
RedHotChilliPeppers
|
October 21, 2012
I honestly do not see a solid argument, because the city did "accept" the judge's decision.

However, that decision is now in an appeals court where a new decision will be made.

And it probably won't matter anyway, because the decision will be based on an ammended plan for the swim center.

Perhaps the opposition to the swim center was flawed from the begenning, or the pre-ammended plan was.

Best to let the appeals court decide.

The only thing anyone really has to "accept" are the delays, until the appeals court gives the final say.

People may get anxious, but that is how the judicial system works. They have to listen to all the sides and make a final verdict.

In fact, I am personally glad it's done that way, because that way a local special interest group should be told to take their effirts to the state level instead of hammering on local communitie's Tracy Area Quality of life.

That stuff probably belongs in Sacramento, and would have certainly been more appropriate if it had been purpretrated elsewhere.
RedHotChilliPeppers
|
October 21, 2012
There is another ballpark right across the street and people are able to park on the street to go to that other ballpark.

But this particular ballpark doesnt have parking available on Tracy Boulevard, so folks have taken to parking across the street at the other ballpark or in the grocery store's parking lot.

Kind of a bad fit, when you consider Tracy Boulevard is a very different than what it used to be.

Starting to look like a freeway with kids dressed up in sports uniforms crossing four lanes and standing in the middle of the median waiting for someone to slow down.

Very dangerous. Sometimes one car slows down because it scares the "hell" outta you to see a kid doing that on a freeway. And then another car behind you wants to whiz past, not knowing there is someone walking in the middle of the freeway.

I also noticed that boulevard looks a lot different than it did 20 years ago.

walkingtall
|
October 17, 2012
Well we know one thing for sure, old Mike Maciel is a true politician, yes he is a liar!!! You got caught Mike. Apparently these city politicians, and no, not city leaders because there not leaders, think us citizens are not paying attention. As mentioned by another poster, he had a different story on KCBS 13. Yes Mike, there are people in this world that are smarter than you are. Typical of the dishonesty of this city council!! Good job Mike Maciel!
code20
|
October 19, 2012
FYI:

It's KOVR 13; KCBS is a news talk radio station.
Ornley_Gumfudgen
|
October 20, 2012
Spoken like a true anonymous coward who has never told any whoppers in his life. Tell ya what tall man, walk proud an go over an tell it ta Mike ta his face.

Ya might counter I write anonymously but I don't call people liars unless I got th factual proof ta back it up.

In this yer just another discontented anonymous Internet bully that enjoys entertainin himself bye flappin his yap by denegratin people ya don't like instead of stickin ta th topic of discussion.

Realintracy
|
October 17, 2012
Translation: Let's see how far we can abuse our power before some-one notices.
Realintracy
|
October 17, 2012
I'd rather have (residents) come here and say 'What were you thinking?" rather than have the staff lay back and not be aggressively looking for... The best ultilization of assets.
behonestguys
|
October 17, 2012
The reason Maciel was talking so much is that he tried to distance himself from his comments that were telecast on Channel 13 on September 25, 2012 where he jumped on the bandwagon to have the park sold "as an option". Just go on KCBS 13's website, type "Maciel" in the search engine, and his interview will come up. But rather than admitting that he got it wrong, he is too pig headed to realize he missed the boat on the ballpark issue. Just admit you screwed up Mike and move one. People will respect you more than engaging in a 10 minute monologue to cover your rear in an election year and trying to patronize us. Is this the kind of guy we want on council?
rosa62
|
October 17, 2012
Obviously, Maciel doesn't believe in being honest with the public.

He claims he does not need to speak with the public before he makes up his mind on how he will vote. He claims the people elected him to make those decisions and he represents their opinion without asking them.

Maybe he "should" start asking people what they think before he votes. He clearly didn't have the people's best interest in mind when he did the interview, and he obviously does not know what the people want.

He needs to go and we need to elect someone who represents the citizens, and not the special interests, on the issues.
Citizensheep
|
October 17, 2012
hmmmm. Ornley is uncharacteristically quiet. hmmmm.
Ornley_Gumfudgen
|
October 18, 2012
Citizensheep

Just passin though cus I've been rather busy. I thank th council did pretty much as I expected em ta do even though I might have done differently but I do agree th whole thang could have brought ta th public better. I still stand by one of my first statements that people were gettin themselves all worked up in a frenzy over somethang that was just a suggestion.

Well that's all I got time fer cus I've been rather busy as of late doin other thangs more important than writin comments here.
me-here
|
October 19, 2012
Ornley, please keep yourself so busy campaigning that you don't have time to clutter up all the different comments on the Press items.
dcose
|
October 19, 2012
you-there

Physician, heal thyself

me-here
|
October 20, 2012
Hey, Dale. I used to respect you....are you on the Maciel favored builder list? You and your dad have done some great things in Tracy.
Ornley_Gumfudgen
|
October 20, 2012
You there

Use ta respect you until ya got on yer conspiracy theory kick in believin everyone that has a different point of view than yers is on th take an doin somethang bad when clearly all evidence indicates just th opposite. When ya gonna start marketin them tinfoil hats of paranoia?

Ya call yerself a free person but when it comes ta th freedom ta speak, or in this case write, brings along somethang ya, in yer narrow minded view of thangs, that ya don't like ya want ta silence those thangs an thereby take that freedom away frum those ya don't agree with.

Congratulation, give yerself on th back, ya reject th freedoms offered by a democratically run republic an have replaced them with th censorship of Communism. Da party would be proud of ya comrade.
dcose
|
October 24, 2012
Janet,

I respected your husband before he passed. Enjoyed working with him.

I would have liked to have extended that to you but your campaign for a seat on the Council along with your cohorts Mr. Fell and Mr. Anderly left me less than impressed. Much less.


We encourage readers to share online comments in this forum, but please keep them respectful and constructive. This is not a space for personal attacks, libelous statements, profanity or racist slurs. Comments that stray from the topic of the story or are found to contain abusive language are subject to removal at the Press’ discretion, and the writer responsible will be subject to being blocked from making further comments and have their past comments deleted. Readers may report inappropriate comments by e-mailing the editor at tpnews@tracypress.com.