Subscribe Now Mobile Site Place an Ad E-Edition Email Updates Obituaries Classifieds Find a Job Find a Car Real Estate Contact Us

Currently

55°

Cloudy

FREE ARCHIVE SEARCH

News

CLASSIFIEDS

All Classifieds
Find a Home
Find a Car
Find a Job
Work Here
Find Merchandise
Today’s Print Ads

2 Weeks Free

Free Ad

Place an ad
in print and online, 24/7 for free, select the Clean Sweep option. Unable to submit Real Estate, Services, and Business Investements at this time.

Get a Subscription

Map the Valley

Restaurant Listing
School Listing
Open Houses
Garage Sales

Subscriber/
Reader Services

Subscribe Now
Contact Customer Service

City proceeds with plans for east downtown

By Eiji Yamashita
eyamashita@HanfordSentinel.com

For Hanford city leaders who believe downtown is the heart of the city, downtown redevelopment has long been an obsession. As they shift their focus from the maturing west side commercial area, City Council members are zeroing in on east Seventh Street, where they envision a movie theater, and its surroundings.

But they are doing more than just looking.

On Tuesday, the Hanford City Council hired a consultant to shepherd the city through defining the next steps toward a redevelopment of the less vibrant part of the historic downtown business district: the east side. The council voted 3-1 to hire M.W. Steele Group, a San Diego architectural and design firm, for $75,000, with Councilman Dave Thomas opposing.

Thomas cited the possibility that the state might take away $250,000 from the city's redevelopment money.

Deputy City Manager Hilary Straus reassured that the city would have enough fund balance to invest in downtown and the money is separate from the city general fund that pays for public safety, but Thomas was still unconvinced it's a good investment.

"No matter what pot of money it's coming from, it's all tax dollars," Thomas said. "This is my belief that we have enough business people right here in the city that can get together and come up with these answers. And I think we can save $75,000."

Fellow council members disagreed with Thomas.

Councilwoman Sue Sorensen welcomed a fresh perspective that Steele Group is expected to bring to the planning process.

"We need to keep doing business. We have a responsibility to keep the city running and keep moving forward," Sorensen said. "We can't just be spinning circles on the water ... The advantage that we have in being able to go out and contract for this type of work is so that we don't have to hire everybody to be on staff to have the skills that we need. I'm looking forward to seeing what (they) can bring in from out there that I don't know about."

With the hiring now official, M.W. Steele Group is moving fast to fulfill its tasks.

Over the next four months, the company will be organizing an intensive community outreach, including stakeholder interviews and establishing a steering committee to enable the community to direct the process.

A developer panel will also be formed as part of a market analysis, said Mark Steele, principal of the firm. Steele said the process is also intended to attract potential developers into the area.

But the main culmination of the process is expected to be the "design sharette" workshop that would be open to the public, a hands-on process driven by collaboration for improving and redeveloping east downtown that would be assembled by business owners, city officials, city promoters, designers and residents.

Steele Group has previously worked with similar processes for South Mill Creek in Bakersfield, Yokohl Ranch project in east Tulare County, and most prominently the neighborhood revitalization project near Fresno State and the Tower District Revitalization Streetscape Master Plan.

Straus said the market-based planning process involving a consultant is something that would draw developers.

"By doing a plan like this, I think we'd send a message to the development community that we're open to business, we've done a lot of planning and we have consensus among businesses and property owners regarding land uses they'd like to see," Straus said. "That's the kind of environment developers are looking for, and that's what this plan helps to communicate."

The reporter can be reached at 583-2429.

(July 9, 2009)

Email this story

Print this story

POST A COMMENT

Hanfordsentinel.com encourages readers to engage in civil conversation with their neighbors. Comments that are submitted are not posted to the site immediately. They go into a queue to be moderated and may take several hours to be reviewed, particularly if they are posted after normal office hours.

We reserve the right to remove comments in total that violate our code of conduct. If you want to report a violation, please e-mail editor@HanfordSentinel.com

For more information please read our Terms of use, and Rules of the Road.

Please log in to post comments

*Member ID:
*Password:
	Forgot Your Password?

If you don't have an account you can create one for free by clicking the link below.
CREATE ACCOUNT

The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the views of the Hanford Sentinel

Big John wrote on Jul 9, 2009 5:10 PM:

" During the last Hanford City Council election season some bloggers complained that north and west received undue consideration and too large a share of the general construction effort.

I’m interested to see if we hear positive comments now that the eastward growth intended by the general plan and facilitated by redevelopment money is moving forward.

-Big John "

Armonian wrote on Jul 9, 2009 8:38 PM:

" Thank you Mr Thomas. Why is it politicians always think of solutions that involve money? I bet if the council hires these guys, our downtown will look just like every other town in California. Box stores and fast food joints. Lets clog up another street with over-development... "

what the wrote on Jul 9, 2009 9:18 PM:

" i dont want to point out the obvious,,but dont we have a theater on east 7th? "

Alihandero wrote on Jul 10, 2009 6:13 AM:

" Something here doesn't seem right, folks.

"City Council members are zeroing in on east Seventh Street, where they envision a movie theater, and its surroundings."

ANOTHER movie theater besides the existing one across from the rebuilt furniture store?? By the closed downtown GM dealer and its lots of empty lots and just down the block from that huge closed furniture store that went out of business? Remember the failed Dollar Movies?

Did all the members actually believe the city as a whole needed a new movie theater on the east side?

And we will now pay $75 K for a San Diego firm to hold a "design sharette" (whatever THAT is) so that there will be "a fresh perspective." But what about that movie theater idea?

A better solution would be to use some money to get all of the empty businesses I just described into actual business use instead of lying vacant and incomeless. But that's just me.

Methinks Mr. Thomas has a very good point indeed!

(Sorry if these questions err on the side of bashing, folks.) "

Big John wrote on Jul 10, 2009 11:10 AM:

" What the wrote: “i dont want to point out the obvious,,but dont we have a theater on east 7th?”

We do. But in this modern age of large multi-screen complexes, stadium seating, digital projectors and 3-D entertainment the old and small four screen venues have a difficult time competing. We’re losing a lot of revenue opportunity to Lemoore, Tulare, Visalia and Fresno.

Personally, I’d like a modern entertainment complex in Hanford.

And yes additional parking for downtown, especially with the planned redevelopment going east, would be welcomed.

-Big John "

jasper wrote on Jul 10, 2009 1:54 PM:

" To Big John:
Why are you only interested in hearing "positive comments now that the eastward growth intended by the general plan and facilitated by redevelopment money is moving forward?."
Could it be because YOU have a vested interest in eastside growth?
Since when does the city council follow the General Plan? Also BJ, isn't the Hanford city council the redevelopment agency for the
city of Hanford? If that's not the fox guarding the hens, I don't know what is. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Jul 10, 2009 4:47 PM:

" To: ALIHANDERO, DEFINITION ACCORDING TO WIKI:

:The design charette is normally a facilitated interactive process used by architects and designers to better understand the customers requirements, needs, concerns, trade-offs and unacceptable solutions so that there is a much higher chance the criteria and concept for the design is closer to what the customer wants when the initial design is done."

So what that translates to us, is another project that people from the community may comment on, but the City Council will do as it damn well pleases.

That is how I read that and between the lines of this gestapo ran electorate, which has its vote dictated by those who aren't even eligible to vote.

To -big john- do you really support a-three story parking garages like Visalia's filled with City Employees vehicles all day long? How many parking spaces do we need?

If it is that crowded down town we need to park our vehicles and use the bus. Every time I hear a complaint about parking, it seems to reverberate in a city employees mind prior to sharing it with us. "

Big John wrote on Jul 10, 2009 5:28 PM:

" I have no financial interest in anything related to downtown redevelopment; I’m simply passionate about seeing Hanford recover from its current financial difficulty.

There is no need to question my motives – they’re driven purely by community commitment. But don’t take my word for it, instead join me at one of the upcoming meetings and judge my actions for yourself.

-Big John "

Carl.Spackler wrote on Jul 11, 2009 10:36 AM:

" I'm kind of torn on this one. I like the idea of the creation of a unified plan of development but I don't like the use of an outside consultant. Maybe the money would be better spend on acquisition of the properties in question through redevelopment to be resold to a developer at an affordable cost. Example, the largest area of blight on 7th is the former Robert's/Keller lots. This area disconnects the east from west, both areas where good things are happening, leaving a dead zone in the middle. If the city where to acquire the property (last time I checked for sale at $15/SF) and sell it to a developer for a discounted price, making a project potentially more feasible. Taxpayer dollars may be better spent this way. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Jul 11, 2009 8:52 PM:

" To: Alihandero,

I am in agreement with you. As you drive through beautiful down town there is car-lot, after car-lot on all corners, many left vacant, growing weeds up through the blacktop. Guess when the car salesmen were pacing back and forth it kept the weeds at bay.

People are worried how downtown Armona looks like. Were those just leased properties and now are no longer being maintained by their owner?

Does anyone know, who owns the properties? It might be nice to see some for sale signs on the buildings and allow someone to grow a business or open a coffee shop.

One that sells good coffee for $2 a cup. Instead of frothy milk and whipping cream that sells for $5 a cup, creations containing much too much flavored ingredients for my taste.

But not to worry the title states it all: “City proceeds with plans for east downtown.” Key word, in this statement is, “plans,” which makes it not on schedule or track simply that it is a plan. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Jul 11, 2009 9:05 PM:

" To: -big john-

But don’t take my word for it, instead join me at one of the upcoming meetings and judge my actions for yourself.

-Big John "

Not to call the kettle black, but I don't see your identity shining on the blogs.
But don't fret I do not ask you to take your mask off and expose yourself, that might get you arrested.

You can mock our words deny our statements about you having anything to do with the politics or job with the city/county government. But your statements in the blogs tell a very different story about you.

If you have so much inside information yet you claim no involvement and you are not a member of the clique then feel free to comment further and enlighten us all on upcoming projects and plans.

You seem to be well informed and up to date and I can tell by the City Council Minutes it didn't happen there. Your information must come from a direct contact.
Perhaps it is a case of mistaken identity? "

ValleyVoter wrote on Jul 11, 2009 10:20 PM:

" I think that the City employees need a downtown parking garage to park their private vehicles when they use City vehicles to commute from home to work.

Drive around neighborhoods on Saturday and Sunday. Look at the City pick up trucks, the Police cars, the Sheriff's cars, the Highway Patrol cars parked in the driveways of private residences.

You know how you can tell that the vehicle in front of you is a City/County vehicle? It is driving about 20 mph below the speed limit and has two people talking and laughing. "

vld82 wrote on Jul 16, 2009 3:12 PM:

" Due to the current state of the economy, this is probably an ideal time to put together a redevelopment plan for the eastside. When business begins to eventually rebound, the plan should facilitate cohesive and sensible future land use that embraces the local history and identity be it with a multi screen theater or whatever.
I believe the City's upcoming projects and plans are listed in the Budget report which is available through the Finance Department. Those are monetary placeholders because the details don't happen until work gets done in this case by MW Steele. Debate/comments are a good thing but then an informed decision has to be made. "

vld82 wrote on Jul 16, 2009 3:36 PM:

" The neglected eastside is in need of redevelopment. The current economy is an ideal time to put forth a plan too that preserves the City's history and identity.
I believe the upcoming projects and plans are monetarily listed in the Finance Department's FY Budget for the City. The details become available as the work gets done as in this case by MW Steele so get your input in through the Council and/or the workshop. "

what the wrote on Jul 16, 2009 8:33 PM:

" vallyvoter i am confused by your posts. in a prior they were always speeding, now they are driving slow ......and happy? a good way to spot them is by the e plates or plates without letters. most deputies have a take home cars it saves money and quickens response times. chp and hpd have very few take home cars. go ahead and count, if you get past 6 your not being honest "

Scott Tucker wrote on Jul 17, 2009 9:18 AM:

" "(Sorry if these questions err on the side of bashing, folks.)"

Ali, apologizing for bashing! Will wonders never cease?! Have you turned over a new leaf? Glad to see that you are making progress. Greetings from the Midwest!

******************

And now to the story itself...

Ali, I agree with you on this rare occasion. It would be nice to get some businesses in those empty downtown locations. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Jul 17, 2009 9:58 AM:

" To: Concilman Dave Thomas, thank you for demonstrating that you can stand up to your counterparts and in a couple of years time they will see you were correct in doing so.

Putting another theater on East 7th Street is like adding another pew in the chapel. Although it may seem to serve a need first you must have the parishioners to fill that seating. Otherwise, it is wasted money on wasted dreams of building something better. You can install all the stadium seating in the world and it won't fill a second theater in East 7th Street.

Like Alihandero, very aptly pointed out you couldn't even fill the $1 seats at the Theater in the Strip Mall at the other end of town.

What makes you think you'll charge $10 per seat at the other end of town and sell two large sodas and a barrel of popcorn for $17.50 like Lemoore does.

(Continued) "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Jul 17, 2009 10:01 AM:

" To: Concilman Dave Thomas

That makes a lot of sense lets put a theater on East 7th Street where all other businesses have failed and moved away.

Yes that seems like a prime location for an entertainment venue, oh but don’t people usually rent DVD’s and watch them at home these days?

Where they can pop their own popcorn for $2 a barrel and buy a 2-liter bottle of soda on sale for $1.25 and they’re fixed for the night

Including the movie rental you've just spent $5 for what would be $27.50 at this new theater with stadium seats.

Instead of sitting in your own recliner quite comfortably at home and be better entertained. "

ValleyVoter wrote on Jul 17, 2009 10:03 AM:

" To what the:

Please show me where I posted that they go slow then fast.

I stand by what I said. If you have counted the government cars and have inside knowledge as you imply you do, please identify which of these agencies you work for. Not all these vehicles have to do with response time, if any at all. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Jul 17, 2009 10:16 AM:

" To: Concilman Dave Thomas

Oh and that doesn't even factor in the $75K you spent to be told this hair brained, idea.

Will the public be allowed to speak to this issue prior to the expenditure of $75K out of our redevelopment fund, of course not?

The City Council again by popular vote and as expressed by Councilwoman Sorensen, is doing what they feel is best for us, rather than give us an opportunity to decide for ourselves.

Because if you will remember from the other councilwoman's critique "they know better what is good for us than we do ourselves." What a bunch of B_ _ L Cr_ _!

Don't let them bully you into signing off on anything Dave, keep up the good work. "

ValleyVoter wrote on Jul 17, 2009 9:02 PM:

" Re Watchdog Fred:

I agree with your comments. I recall the article on the front page of the Sentinel when the re-entry facility was proposed for the east side of town. We no longer have the Member of the Board of Supervisors who represented that area any longer, because of what that group tried to do without citizen input.

Also at that time, Board Member Tony Olivera proposed that re-entry facility go on the East Side, and voted for that, with his reason being: "It is in the Common Good."

Now I want to know who in this City or County decides what is in the "Common Good"? No one on the East side of town was consulted about the re-entry facility being put in their neighborhood, so were they not part of deciding the "Common Good"?

There is a definite pattern of those elected officials who serve in this County, and City of Hanford, that behind closed doors they decide what the "Common Good" is and implement their wishes.

That is not government for and by the people. "

Alihandero wrote on Jul 18, 2009 4:24 PM:

" Did you all read that Keller now wants to move Valley Ford to his other GM location on Cadillac Lane – you know, on the little-traveled dead-end street complex where the bulldozed Fort Roosevelt used to exist?

Imagine what all the parking lot spaces and vacant unlit buildings on the north corner of Lacey and 11th will look like! And what will happen to the former Chrysler dealer complex should it not be able to stay in business selling used cars? We already have the empty formerly leased Serpa Auto Sales building and lot just east of Valley Ford… and the continuing empty defunct Roberts lots on downtown 7th …

We will now have a further depressed city with huge gaping holes strategically placed.
What are we going to replace them with, folks?

Or is the excuse going to be we are all victims of the national automobile industry crisis and the tanking economy? "

Bobb wrote on Jul 18, 2009 8:57 PM:

" Obviously some think that east 7/th Street is ready to thrive. Granted I retired i Hanford only a few years ago but I believe that about a year ago the City Attorney bought a large store in that area. Someone correct me but I believe it was the furniture store and it was going to be converted to offices. The guy had some foresight that that area was going to grow and got in on the ground floor. "

Alihandero wrote on Jul 19, 2009 3:24 AM:

" I was doing some research and found this rather telling prediction of what I believe has been taking root in Hanford:

URBAN DECAY

"Urban decay is a process by which a city, or a part of a city, falls into a state of disrepair. It is characterized by depopulation, economic restructuring, property abandonment, high unemployment, fragmented families, political disenfranchisement, crime, and desolate and unfriendly urban landscapes."

(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_decay)

I wonder what we - individually and collectively - can do about it? "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Jul 19, 2009 2:16 PM:

" ValleyVoter wrote on Jul 17, 2009 9:02 PM
If I were to point fingers, it would be in the direction of the newly appointed and the old time gang of City Council Members who seem to collectively work to go from parking garage point A. To offices point B. In a conspiracy to direct the rent and cash flow to bank account point C. If I were a betting man, my dad who was, always told me to follow the money for the answers to find out who controlled what in any given situation.

He said he/she that controls the purse strings/wallet, controls the spending. He who controls the city spending, controls the profits to be made and to whom they shall flow. Pretty intermediate kind of thinking can give you all the answers you might seek, Bobb has already filled in some of the blanks for you "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Jul 19, 2009 2:18 PM:

" To: ValleyVoter wrote on Jul 17, 2009 9:02 PM
Sorry the above blog should have had a To: in front also.

As for the car dealerships, it had to be a given that John Keller had enough property to expand into two dealerships with one management team pretty easily. That was the purpose for the first expansion, now he can sell GMC, Chevrolet with the buy out in Lemoore, Ford and Lord knows what other brands with his central location. The competition on 12th Avenue actually adds to his ability to bring even more customers to his location.

As for East 7th street the more depressed it becomes the cheaper property will be and certainly the same can be said for the East Lacey Blvd. Property wherein lies the skate park and the plunge, now they can purchase the surrounding properties and let "Retail Freedom Ring" from 11th Avenue all the way to Douty Street. Including Lacey, 7th, 6th and now we know why 5th street wasn't a part of the original plan. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Jul 19, 2009 4:27 PM:

" You think this isn't a significant issue for the city to push through, then why is there two blogs on the same subject at the exact same time in the Hanford Sentinel. Coniky dink, I don't think so sports fans! "

SuziQ wrote on Jul 22, 2009 1:20 PM:

" Bobb, are you saying Bob Dowd, our city attorney, will benefit by moving his office ONE block south of where he is? I think that's stretching it a whole lot. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Jul 22, 2009 7:39 PM:

" To: SuziQ wrote on Jul 22, 2009 1:20 PM:

Stretching it! Come on SuziQ you usually see the trees for the forest? This isn't about moving a single office one block, this is about providing the retail to support the twenty/thirty offices that will be available to outside interest that put money in one account belonging to someone who is too closely enter twined with city officials and city council members, Specifically. That is a two-story building with a two-story renovation taking place, with no telling how much potential for profit of a, Prominent figure/subcontract service provider owning and developing it.

But like I stated in another blog follow the money. The money and where it goes will make this situation blatantly obvious to anyone who cares to look into it. This is not to say a sub-contracted member is not allowed to make money in this town. It’s just we shouldn’t be required to spend city funds to make it possible. Those who own property or hope to operate business in any areas, should abstain from voting on any related issues concerning its development. "

transplant wrote on Jul 23, 2009 1:56 PM:

" Fred,

The City did not buy the furniture store for Bob Dowd's offices. The law firm bought the building, and not from the city. Why should they not be entitled to do so? You are insinuating, not so subtlely, that there is some kind of illegal activity occurring because they are moving their offices. How? Provide proof. It's my understanding that they have outgrown their current offices and needed a larger space. As long as they pay for it, why should we care? I realize that some of Dowd's income is city funds since he is paid as the City Attorney (and it doesn't matter if you or I think that's a good thing or not). But that is not all that his law firm does. And once he receives his money from the city, he's entitled to spend it the way he wants. If he makes a profit on the building, good for him - he made a good investment. Do you want the city telling you how you can spend your money? Other than the fact you hate the city council and the attorney, what's the issue? "

Bobb wrote on Jul 23, 2009 2:16 PM:

" SuziQ; I never said it was going to be HIS offices. At the time I remember that it was mentioned the property could be converted to offices and small businesses, boutiques?, and leased. Fred is right that someone on the inside has the vision to see where the growth will be planned before the general public knows about it. I agree that someone with inside knowledge should not be part of the process. Councils and Supervisors steer the direction of future growth through tax incentives, cutting of "red tape" and various other methods which can affect the property values in that area. I really don't know if Dowd had inside information or was just making an investment that was in the right place. Even this new development is no guarantee of success. "

SuziQ wrote on Jul 24, 2009 9:14 AM:

" The attorney's office where Dowd is a partner has been in that location for decades. They expanded once into the old Morris Plan office and have been trying to buy the building on the corner(The Old Hanford Cantina) for several years. Buying the Hanford Furniture building was a wise investment and great for the City of Hanford. Knowing the city plans to start moving east has nothing to do with moving south. Knowledge is a wonderful thing. "

Bobb wrote on Jul 24, 2009 4:28 PM:

" SuziQ; Yes knowledge is wonderful, especially if you can get information before everyone else. Inside information to a stock split, bad earnings report, good earnings report of where a new highway project will be located is a real advantage to "getting in on the ground floor" investment wise. I am sure most persons would like to know what the future plans are before they are even debated in public meetings so they can get some of the action. You sound as if you are personally connected to this in some way. Or maybe you are just one of those on the inside and feel superior to the peons who foot the tax bill for these infrastructure improvements. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Jul 25, 2009 9:47 PM:

" To: transplant wrote on Jul 23, 2009 1:56 PM:

You don't see a problem when the City Attorney has the inside information from Dan Chin and the planning commission using small letters for emphasis, on where to buy and build? You don't see that as a conflict of interest? This is Hanford, California not Mayberry, South Carolina.

Who appeared last year at the Hanford Sentinel with Dan Chin? Who advises the City Council on their counseling? You don't see a matter of malfeasance taking place.

Perhaps you should visit the City of Los Banos where there are currently three city council members up for recall and the petitions must be handed in by Aug. 8 to make the election in November.

Funny, thing they had people embezzle money just like our former Manager of the City Visitor Bureau did. They voted a little conspiratorial on some decisions bettering one close to their own and they find themselves subject to recall? You think voting to pay someone to arrange your paid transportation to Washington, D.C. isn’t a little back handed? "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Jul 25, 2009 9:51 PM:

" To: transplant wrote on Jul 23, 2009 1:56 PM:

I don’t know what you would call it.

I have no personal axe to grind with the City Attorney, it is some of his actions I disagree with, it is his greed, and personal gain he always seems to achieve in this city.

Which brings to mind his commitment as a former Officer and Gentlemen in the Marine Corps, to be a shining example to the community at large? But other than that, I have no problem with Bob Dowd. I am sure I am not alone in this because several complaints other than just my own are entered in these blogs from time to time.

In monopoly the game, all the players start out with the same amount of money and same opportunities, it is not the case in the game the City Attorney plays.

He already owns the major hotel to be bought and you might say it exists at Boardwalk & Park Place.

An itemized list of expenses charged to the city by the City Attorney and made available for public view! "

transplant wrote on Jul 27, 2009 2:50 PM:

" Fred,

I don't see where there was any "inside information" that Bob Dowd received. The building he was in is zoned the same as the building he's moving into. The "new" building isn't in the area where the East Side Planning is going on. Other than his law firm buying a building that was no longer being used for retail, there's no change. Offices were always allowed there. So what "conflict of interest" occurred? It's my understanding that Bob Dowd was raised in Hanford. He probably knows the family that owned the building and started talking to them when they announced they were closing. Do you even know if he got a good deal? I don't. All I know is that he went through the building permit process to remodel the building. The city didn't pay for it, other than what he receives as wages for being City Attorney (and I'll say again it doesn't matter if we think he should be the city attorney--he is). I just don't understand why you feel the need to make it seem like he did something illegal. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Jul 28, 2009 5:04 PM:

" To: transplant wrote on Jul 27, 2009 2:50 PM:

Do you honestly think this purchase wouldn't have been more difficult if the City Attorney had not billed the city of Hanford an esculated bill for his services.

He stood before God and everyone and said the expenses should he be awarded the contract would never exceed $250,000 annually.

That Transplant is an out and out lie, because he billed the city in excess of half a million dollars last year.

You still don't think he got a good deal from the City Council. Oh you want to buy Park Place and Boardwalk, just change your billing and you'll have the down payment. Is that with or without a hotel, welcome to Hanford the original town monopoly was named?

Those words were not exchanged but I bet any third grader could see how it happened.

That still doesn't factor in the money stolen by the former Visitor Bureau Manager, the overpaid and under qualified City Manager, among others in management positions beneath him.

How can you sit back and not see who's rolling the dice? "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Jul 28, 2009 5:15 PM:

" To: transplant wrote on Jul 27, 2009 2:50 PM:

You don't even address the fact he is a former Marine Judge Advocate Lawyer receiving a federal retirement on top of his fees for the city of Hanford, and his other clients through the firm.

I wouldn't mind it so much perhaps if he stepped up and paid for a part for the merry go round, or gave a couple hundred thousand dollars to a charitable cause in the city. After all that is all tax deductible and he would gain in the long run. I would be willing to wager, I give more to the USO, DVA, American Legion and the Republican Party than the former Marine Officer does to the city he represents.

But I guess when you are in some high stakes game and you’re still countin' chips you don't have time to remember the little people.

Can't wait for the next contract negotiations, I'd give anything to be a fly on the wall on that one. "

transplant wrote on Jul 30, 2009 1:31 PM:

" Fred,

I didn't say anything about Dowd being a marine because I don't think it's pertinent to his law firm buying a building. If all he did was be the city attorney and derived all his income from the city, I might feel differently. I just don't think that moving the law firm into another building is a conflict of interest in any way. I'm also very sure that no such conversation as you imagined took place. NO ONE in their right mind would discuss such a thing or make such a suggestion, knowing that it's illegal.

I don't think the contract deal with Dowd is good for the city because the firm isn't familiar enough with the way cities operate and they charge too much. But that still doesn't mean that Dowd got any special favors in buying a building. Your criticisms would mean more if they were focused on real issues instead of what might have been. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Jul 30, 2009 6:24 PM:

" To: transplant wrote on Jul 30, 2009 1:31 PM:

What you don't understand and it could be from your lack of knowledge of the military. An Officer is not a Gentlemen, by law until Congress makes him so under the policies of the United States Government.

These candidates who are sworn officers, swear a moral and ehtics code for life. They agree to not do anything to bring dishonor or even the appearance of a dishnorable fact levied at them or the United States Marine Corps, United States Navy et al.

The mere fact that he swore before the City Council his services would never exceed 250K annually and then once awarded the contract bills them an additional 250K in that very same year. In my book is a dishonorable action on his part.

The honorable course of action would have been to have gone back before the City Council and had them declare a town meeting to announce he could not meet his original contract promise. At that time not after the work was already performed, not after the money was already owed to him & the law firm. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Jul 30, 2009 6:36 PM:

" To: transplant wrote on Jul 30, 2009 1:31 PM:

That is the only question of moral and ethical sworn actions an officer or retired officer has taken.
You don't perform the work and then go to your employer and ask for more?

You are asked what an agreeable wage for your services would cost, once it is agreed unless the employer raises your contracted wage, it isn't raised by the contractee.

I think the Council if they did approve this double down wage, did so without putting it to the public and the public should have had input into the decision. None of which happened as I understand it. I certainly was not sent a notice to appear for this discussion, were any of you?

We already had an established list of more experienced law firms who would have done it for less money.

But that is then this is now, the best I can recommend for a solution. Is that in 2010 there will be three City Council Seats open, dump the yes men. Three out vote two in any council decisions. "

HOT TOPICS

MORE LOCAL NEWS

Lemoore:

Selma:

Kingsburg:

PHOTO GALLERIES

More Photos

Sentinel Photos (120) Albums

: Hanford High vs. Lemoore High Water Polo; Friday, November, 6 2009; (14) Photos

: Tigers vs. Bullpups Volleyball; Friday, November, 6 2009; (22) Photos

: Hanford West vs. Redwood High Football; Friday, November, 6 2009; (13) Photos

Reader Submitted (7) Albums

: Vintage Hanford; Monday, December, 15 2008; (1) Photos

: Vacation Photos; Thursday, November, 20 2008; (35) Photos

: Events; Thursday, November, 20 2008; (38) Photos

EMAIL UPDATES

Sign up today to get all your local headlines delivered to your home or work e-mail address, so you don't miss the latest in breaking and local news.

E-Mail:
Daily News Updates
Breaking News Alerts