On February 5, 2010, Bryant Moynihan, Coordinator, Petalumans for Fair Utility Rates (PFUR) sent an e-mail expanding on his comment to We’re in Deep Doo Doo–City may miss August debt payment…

On January 28, 2010 the City Manager advised the two banks holding the loans that the City may not be able to make its August 10 payments.

On the rainy morning of January 18, I arrived at Valley Vista to find 30 volunteers. They were primarily employees, including friends and family members, from Kaiser Permanente facilities in Santa Rosa, San Rafael & Petaluma.

It was a dark and stormy night…the rain fell, except at occasional intervals, (for it is in Petaluma that our scene lies) as people assembled at Petaluma’s City Hall.* Citizens, lawyers and , representatives from Regency and Target assembled to see what the Council would decide…

To be absolutely clear, I am agnostic on the underlying development of this area except for lingering doubts about how traffic flow is going to be managed. What motivates me to comment now about the project–as opposed to publishing public records concerning the lawsuit– is the fear that the Regency/City dispute is spinning out of control in terms of its impact on the City Budget.

I am beginning to wonder if the new watchword at City Hall these days is –”Letters, We Get Letters! Lawsuits, We Get Lawsuits.”

Coordinating the logistics and schedules for the garden is a full-time job. Fortunately, Lois Pearson (I call her the “Dedicated Dynamo”) and the other members of the St. James Community Garden Committee have been more than up to the challenge.

NEW! REGENCY (Target) LAWSUIT BREAKING NEWS!–Target Letters To Petaluma

Those who have followed my past efforts on this site know that I used to be able to spot a tag a mile away or to identify an abaondoned shopping cart within 50 yards. Readers also know that I evolved from such urban topics to covering the positive community aspects of low water landscaping and community gardens.

All went well until the second month when the bank statement listed a $25 monthly fee on the savings account. To be fair, the statement did show that the bank paid us interest of 11 cents…thus reducing our “loss” to $24.89.