Union-Trib:
The city of Encinitas won’t be allowed to purchase the old Pacific View elementary school property at a steeply discounted rate, even though a nonprofit arts organization was once offered that option, the district’s superintendent said last week.
“That was two years ago, when we desperately needed money and (selling the land) was solving some problems,” Encinitas Union School District Superintendent Tim Baird said Tuesday.
Now, the district’s financial situation has improved, the region’s economy is in much better shape, and the real estate market is picking up, Baird said.
Speaking of finalists for the title of 'Most Despised Person in Encinitas!'
ReplyDeleteThis jerk should be run out of town.What a pompous ASS
ReplyDeleteHere's the bad news: Mayor Barth had heard the1r latest 'opening' offer of 13 million dollars and is talking about making an offer of just under 10 million. She has been meeting with them without the council's knowledge.
ReplyDeleteThe property was appraised around 2 million, 2 years ago: maybe an offer of 3 to 4 million might do: but then our Council has no background in business and may make a terribly expensive 10 mil mistake here: if the public lets them.
But hey, its only taxpayer money.
What happened with the current appraisal? Time to kick out the school board. They have also screwed up big time for hiring Baird.
ReplyDeleteBaird just took Encinitas residents for a school bond of some $20M if I am not mistaken. He also has cut services to students and raised fees.
ReplyDeleteThe council needs to invoke the Naylor act to buy the property at a disounted price.
Bairds assessment is not based on a private independent assessment of what the property is valued today as zoned semi-public.
Will the council do an independent appraisal or will they look for ways to benefit developers like Baird and Dewald?
Tony, Tony? anyone
The school bond, raising fees, and cutting services was all done with the approval of the school board. Time to get rid of the school board.
ReplyDeleteWhy does 735 Santa Fe dr. allow construction debris and old RV's to be stored there?? Community eyesore.
ReplyDeleteSuperintendent Tim Baird is greedy: "Baird said the price tag could be as high as $13.5 million — the amount that the land was appraised at after the school closed in 2003."
ReplyDeleteThat appraisal figure was NEVER publicly released before, was in none of the press releases or newspaper reports that I've read, up until now. Tim Baird tried to do this same thing, in Ojai, before coming to be Superintendent for Encinitas Union School District, when he was hired here at $200,000 per year, beginning in 2009. He put through a bond, which is on all property owners' tax bills, now, for about $45 MILLION in 2010, during the General Election, Prop P. That was after we had already agreed to pay that much, BEFORE, for Prop O. We are already paying these extra taxes, for every $100,000 of our appraised value to help support our children, through the school district.
Baird persuaded the EUSD Board of Trustees, which SHOULD be replaced, with the exception of Maureen Muir, who has stood AGAINST selling off Pacific View to developers, to give him a raise last year, so that he is now making $215,000 per year. He made about $65,000 more per year when he came to Encinitas than he had been making in Ojai. There, he tried to take away a surplus school property from the community, which had been promised it for a skatepark, with a fourteen year lease through the City. When Baird left, the skatepark was built in Ojai, instead of a strip mall styled "art center!"
According to the Naylor Act, BEFORE the playing fields at Pacific View were paved over, the school district, then under Superintendent Devoir, should have offered the City .84 acre, or 30% of the surplus property, at 25% of its appraised value, because the land was donated, originally. I find it very hard to believe that the appraised value in 2003 was $13.5 Million. But even if that could be documented, then 30% of it should have been offered to the City and County for open space at 25% of its appraised value! The City would NOT have had to purchase the entire piece. 2003 was when the City was allowed to lease the property for one dollar per year as a temporary public works yard, as well.
"Vina said the value of the land could vary considerably depending on whether the city buys it for use as a public facility, or a private developer buys it for a housing project. Any appraisal should take that into account, he said." The City, EUSD and all appraisers of the surplus school site MUST take into account passage of Prop A.
The land CANNOT now be rezoned for residential, any part of it, without a public vote. According to the "open" portion of the City's closed session meetings about Pacific View, the City was getting or has gotten an independent appraisal and the School District was going to get its own, separate appraisal. Both appraisals must be for the current public, semi-public zoning, with the property in the condition that it is presently been allowed, by the school district, to deteriorate.
If EUSD is in better shape, there is even less reason to gouge the public. If EUSD is not so desperate for money, now, then it could afford to lease out the property at $300,000 per year, as was proposed by Envision the View. The Artists' Colony could be allowed to repair and refurbish the existing buildings, and the community would support a true community art center there, at Pacific View. The "highest value" is not immediate, short term profit for a few developers and bureaucrats.
Well said Lynn. Encinitas is so much better off for having you dig in and show facts, everyone should be grateful for what you contribute to the community! For all the damage former council members have done it is nice we have good citizens balancing their misdeeds.
DeleteThank you, 1:11 :)
DeleteIf anyone is interested in posting about this on the UT Blog, where one can post through a Facebook account, here's that link:
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/jul/28/tp-encinitas-school-site-still-available-with/
One can copy and paste that into your browser's http address bar. I'm a little "low tech" on sharing links, so they can just be clicked on, but I appreciate WCV's sharing those tools with us. I'm grateful we can go back and check those instructions out more carefully, if we're motivated, and have time.
But I wouldn't have been able to Google the UT article without WCV's link. I was unpleasantly surprised to see that outrageous, unsubstantiated $13.5 Million appraisal figure suddenly being "tossed out" by Baird.
Lynn- why does 735 Santa Fe get to rezone their property from residential to scrap yard without a vote of the public??
DeleteGo to city hall and make a code violation complaint. The property has a residential zoning. It looks like the owner is running a business from his house.
DeleteDon't expect Lynn to do the work. Do expect yourself to push hard on the city. In the past the city has been slow to enforce these kinds of violations. Also make an appointment with the City Manager. And call the Mayor too!
Skip. that was easy
DeleteSeems like the press (UT? Coast News??) should make a public records request of both the City Council and the School Board for ANY/ALL formal appraisals made on the property since it closed.
DeleteI dont trust a word Baird says.
I'm sure he just makes up these wild numbers.
Anon 9:37 am
ReplyDeleteIf recall mayor Barth has all ways been in favor of term limits,I think this is it for
Her.I ask you what is your purposei.Are you just Barth bashing.I think for your
Next mayor your choice will be STOCKS. GASPAR SHEILA BRUCE OR THE LWORD
Good luck with that. WATCH WHAT YOU WISH FOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Baird is almost as bad as Sad Sac. I hope Sad Sac is first to go.
ReplyDeleteWith respect to a sale to a private party (presumably for development) I would have to assume that the uncertainty of voter approval for any rezoning would negatively affect the value of the property. Casting aside anything Mr. Baird says, the only real buyers of this parcel in todays market is either another public entity or a very patient investor. Patient because it will take years to understand how the voting public will wield Prop A. Either buyer will not be willing to pay full fair markety value.
ReplyDelete- The Sculpin
Their last DEAL fell through at 7 million, why would they then expect more? It sounds like the property is worth much less than that...
ReplyDeleteShame on the city if they offer any more then current appraisal!
ALERT!!!
ReplyDeleteThere is a special closed session EUSD Board of Trustees meeting set for Wednesday (July 31) at 9AM.
http://www.eusd.net/AboutUs/Agendas/July%2031,%202013%20Spec%20Mtg.pdf
Main agenda item - PROPERTY NEGOCIATIONS - Pacific View.
If ANY action is taken during closed session they better report out, otherwise someone is going to file a major Brwon Act violation complaint.
See City Council Meeting Minutes below.
ReplyDeleteThe City was to get an apprasial done 3 months ago ... so where is it?
MINUTES OF THE ENCINITAS CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 24, 2013
REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Sabine reported that ... there was unanimous consensus to direct the City’s negotiator to seek appraisals of the Pacific View Elementary School site property and to discuss inspection options with the Encinitas Union School District.
Did someone say "consensus"? We all know that means nothing to this Council.
ReplyDeleteI read this blog regularly. Comment posters disproportionally self-identify as Libertarian on this blog. Now this group is collectively complaining because someone is trying to get closer to fair market value for an asset that appreciated before a sale was complete. What am I missing?
ReplyDeleteI'm the only libertarian I know around here, and there are a couple of relevant points that make this not a pure property-rights issue.
DeleteFirst, the land was reportedly bequeathed to the schools / community in perpetuity (check me on that - it's second-hand info).
Second, asset-stripping is a terrible way to plug operating budget gaps no matter what your political persuasion. It's kind of like taking on 30-year debt to buy iPads.
WCV
Being Libertarian has nothing to do with this 9:24. Fact, Prop A passed, and now the land cannot be rezoned from Public/Semi-Public to Residential or Mixed Use, including any "new" zoning category made up by the developers, without a public vote of consent.
ReplyDeleteThe land was donated for a school "for the children." It should have been, but apparently was not "bequeathed in perpetuity." Nevertheless, the Naylor Act applies, and should toll from the time the school was originally closed down because of supposed "declining enrollment," and was subsequently leased to the City of Encinitas for a temporary public works yard, in 2003.
The Naylor Act is part of California Education Code. The lawyers for Devoir, King and now Baird, through EUSD, have tried to get around Brown Act requirements, first saying they were going to TRADE, not lease or sell the property. Now Baird tries to say it's "too late" for the Naylor Act to apply. But the fact remains, before the property was leased in 2003, and before the playing fields were paved over, the school district was required to offer 30% or the parcel, or .84 acre at 25% of the appraisal price.
Again, there was NO MENTION of any appraisal having been done at the time that the City leased the surplus school site and paved over the fields. Baird seems to have pulled that $13.5 figure "out of his hat." Baird doesn't "own" the land; the public has, and still does, currently through OUR school district.
Market value has to be set by an appraisal within the CURRENT zoning. Once that price is determined, then 30% of the property should be adjusted to 25% of that appraised value. Baird is being greedy. He has not been a longtime member of this community. He was willing to sell to a developer at a much reduced price. Art Pulse was not ever a viable fund raiser, and John DeWald was not willing to risk even $300,000 as a non-refundable deposit, to bet on Council's approving a zoning change to mixed use, commercial and residential, including 7 to 9 lots for twinhomes. DeWald got all his money back on that deal, which was only $100,000, to "temporarily" secure a $7.5 Million deal?
Baird originally put out a Request for Proposals for projected plans WITHIN the public/semi-public zoning. He has been completely disingenuous throughout this process, and was indeed trying to negotiate the deal by "putting a shotgun to our heads," to quote Jerome Stocks.
WCV is exactly correct about stripping assets from the public domain. True value cannot be measured in terms of short term profit for Baird to put on his resume, so his next raise will make it so that he makes even more than our overpaid City Manager.
Parking lots would not count as open space, according to the Naylor Act. Playing fields, a pocket park, or a community garden, would. This is a cherished, historical site. It should remain in the public domain, because it was donated for PUBLIC use, not for profit.
EUSD, after having passed two school bonds, and having received $533,000 from the Jois Foundation for Yoga instruction, is in better shape, now, as Baird has admitted. The Board of Trustees of the school district could afford to "lease to sell" to the City, or lease the property out to those who formed Envision the View, before DeWald, (is he still President of DEMA?) got involved, and usurped that wonderful vision for a TRUE community art center, with open space, for children and adults, alike.
I don't agree with any of your "could/should" statements, or with the assertion that this is somehow "stripping assets" from Encinitas. Quite the contrary, selling the land to an "arts" group who also happen to have an interest in putting up yet another neighborhood of McMansions seems like a greater concern to me.
DeleteIt's obvious from your rather extensive blog comments that you are quite bitter about Dr. Baird's EUSD salary. I'd like to suggest that this and other ad hominem lines of attack do nothing to strengthen your arguments. To the contrary, calling people liars and questioning their motivations (as you have done repeatedly here and on other local interest blogs) reflects poorly on you, and in my mind calls into question your objectivity and veracity.
Nevertheless, I applaud your engagement in local governance, and thank you for expressing your opinions.
I didn't make ad hominem attacks against Tim Baird. I stated how much Baird was being paid in Ojai and how much he was making upon being hired by the Encinitas Union School District, and then how much he is making, now, after being given a $15,000 per year raise: $215,000.
DeleteWith one Trustee absent, his raise didn't initially go through. But when the remaining Trustee was able to attend, another closed session was held, and one of the remaining trustees, "switched" back to voting YES for the raise. Only Maureen Muir, bless her, voted no, with good reason, I feel, on Baird's current salary of $215,000 per year, plus benefits.
Most people question that figure, particularly when Baird had been crying "poor," on behalf of the school district, and when teachers were being given pink slips, even AFTER we passed Prop P, the most recent school bond to benefit EUSD. Also Baird, in the UT article incorrectly asserts "it's been two years!" It has only been ONE YEAR, not two, since Baird came to City Hall and was incensed when Council would not allow EUSD to submit an application for rezoning, including creating the new zoning designation, BEFORE Baird dropped his pre-existing lawsuit against the City, for Council, at the public's request, before refusing to privatize the land.
Lyn - you should run for City Council. There are few citizens with the desire to know or with the knowledge of the facts that pertain to the history of governance of this city. The monied minority that feel as though it is their domain to rule loathe citizens with such an extensive base of knowledge. Democracy would work if there were more like you!
ReplyDeleteThank you, but I have no political ambition to run for any elected office. I don't see that as my role, but thank you for your support.
ReplyDeleteThat whole previous Pacific View development scheme, which Baird and DeWald were pushing, the escrow, "secured" by a refundable (through October 31, 2012) $100,000 deposit, but which fell through, was conditioned on the much lower purchase price of $7.5 Million. Baird now want to charge the City almost twice as much for the land?
Why was that $13.5 million figure never released before? Why was it in NONE of the press releases before submitted, by the School District, which press releases, until October of 2011 were STILL maintaining through EUSD lawyers, that the Naylor Act didn't apply because the land was to be TRADED, not leased or sold?
How was it NOT disingenuous for Baird to put out a RFP (request for proposals), only giving interested parties twenty working days to respond, by submitting proposals, but requesting plans WITHIN the current public/semi-public zoning, then CHANGE that, in closed session negotiations, to INSTEAD accepting a proposal which included requesting the City to create an entirely NEW mixed use zoning category, not already existing within our city?
The main benefit of this "behind the scenes" escrow that included a change in zoning would have been more money for Baird, to enhance his resume, and more money for developers, at the general public's expense, by privatizing the surplus school site, TAKING IT OUT OF THE PUBLIC DOMAIN. The fact that Baird spent monies from 30 YEAR BONDS on IPads that will be obsolete within five years, is another matter of public controversy, that others have questioned on blogs. Does their questioning Baird's decisions also reflect poorly on their veracity and objectivity to you?
Questioning what many feel to be the excessive salary of a public officer is NOT an ad hominem attack. Anon 6:17, you don't seem to understand the meaning of that phrase? On the contrary, your characterizing me as "bitter," constitutes much more of an ad hominem attack, against me, as do your other negative opinions of me.
I do not generally call people liars, including Superintendent Tim Baird. I do point out untruths, and yes, prevarication. When people repeatedly make false statements, when they consistently twist or hide the truth, then, by definition, this pattern of untruth results in their being determined to be liars, by those paying attention, those of us aware of what's going on. Messengers are blamed by those aligned with misdirected authority, for realizing falsehoods and calling out lies. But when presented with the FACTS, not prejudiced/slanted opinions, people can and will draw their own conclusions.
6:17, why don't you look at yourself? Are you on the Board of Trustees for EUSD? I feel your post calls into question your own objectivity and veracity. Nevertheless, I also thank you for sharing your perspective. I hope you can open your mind to reconsider other perspectives.
What's important to me, is not your opinion of me or Baird, but that we, the people of this community, can save Pacific View for the highest use, for the public's benefit, and that .84 acre will be dedicated to open space according to the constraints of the Naylor Act, and the original intention of the generous soul(s) who donated the land "for the children."
I know exactly what an ad hominem attack is, it looks like this:
ReplyDelete"True value cannot be measured in terms of short term profit for Baird to put on his resume, so his next raise will make it so that he makes even more than our overpaid City Manager"
and
"The main benefit of this "behind the scenes" escrow that included a change in zoning would have been more money for Baird, to enhance his resume..."
My statement that you seem bitter about Dr. Baird's salary was derived from observation of your posting behaviour, which is well-documented and in the public domain. It is a falsifiable position I challenge you to refute. By contrast, your repeated insinuations that Dr. Baird is pursuing a particular course of action out of avarice is apparently unfounded. I would welcome any objective evidence to the contrary.
Your reliance on inductive formal fallacies makes it very difficult to determine where you actually stand on this particular issue. For example, above you attempt to discredit me using guilt by association ("Are you on the Board of Trustees for EUSD?"), echoing a similar approach you used last year "Are you affiliated with Art Pulse or DeWald?" (http://tinyurl.com/ndsjew7). Furthermore, your final paragraph at 3:31 above is a phenomenal example of the "No true Scotsman" fallacy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_scotsman). I have copied it to my PC for educational purposes.
Lastly, I'll let "Baird sucks because iPads" go without comment except to point out that most educational materials (books, maps, calculators, etc.) are obsolete far sooner than 5 years after their acquisition. Resistance to obsolescence is hardly a robust criterion for educational spending.
Thanks for playing,
P.J. (a proud parent of two iPad-wielding EUSD elementary school students.)
Legitimate Uses of Ad Hominem Arguments
Delete"[T]here may be cases in which an ad hominem argument is a legitimate rhetorical tool. When the special interests or associations of an individual or group appear to have a direct impact on their position on an issue, it is fair to raise questions about their lack of objectivity on that basis. For example, the organizer of a petition to build a state-supported recycling center may seem reasonably suspect if it is revealed that he owns the land on which the proposed recycling center would be built. While the property owner may be motivated by sincere environmental concerns, the direct relationship between his position and his personal life makes this fair game for a challenge."
(Gary Goshgarian, et al., An Argument Rhetoric and Reader. Addison-Wesley, 2003)
Oops, I meant inductive INformal fallacies. My bad. How embarassing.
ReplyDeleteP.J.
I didn't say anything about "discrediting" you. Your fear of being discredited or of Baird's being discredited brought that into the conversation. I am not assuming any "guilt by association." That, also, is on you.
ReplyDeleteYour disclosing whether or not you are affiliated with Art Pulse, developer John DeWald, and/or Baird, on behalf of EUSD, which parties were all part of the Escrow Agreement that fell through, re Pacific View, are standard questions that should be disclosed by anyone participating in discussion or informal or formal "argument."
These kinds of questions are prompted because you post anonymously, without revealing your identity, other than you now reveal you are a parent of elementary EUSD students, who apparently benefit from all Encinitas property owners' paying significant property tax increases, so the public could pick up the expense of your children's school use IPads?
Now that is not an ad hominem attack. I am not attacking you personally, I am asking questions, so that I can be factual, and also, so that I can understand if and why you are being so defensive, on behalf of yourself, Baird, or our City Manager?
Baird got a raise of $65,000 when he came to EUSD, from Ojai, to $200,000. Last year he got another raise to $215,000. That is a fact, not an "attack." The general public, or any readers here, can draw their own conclusions over whether that is excessive.
Also we can draw our own conclusions about whether it is prudent to secure 30 year General Obligation Bonds to pay for computer equipment that will be obsolete in five years. From my perspective, children, including some of my grandsons, spend far too much time before either the computer screen, playing games, or in front of the TV. I don't think adding more "gimmicks" in an elementary school classroom, is necessarily going to improve the level of instruction. However, the point is that we should not take on long term debt to pay for the "instant gratification" of " iPad-wielding EUSD elementary school students." Perhaps more of the bond money could have gone to playground equipment, which is more of a permanent asset? It would surely last more than five years!
With respect to our City Manager, the fact that he is paid about 20% more than "average" was documented by the UT Watchdog: http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/Nov/03/city-manager-pay-averages-204000/
"The biggest percentage hike came in Encinitas, which hired a new city manager and boosted base pay by 20.2 percent from what it was in 2010, raising it from $180,000 a year to $216,399. . . Gus Vina could not be reached for comment."
If you look at the link provided, you'll see that San Marcos, which has a similar number of employees, 237, compared to 236 for Encinitas, but an overall budget for 2011-2012 of $260.1 Million, compared to Encinitas with an overall budget of $89.2 Million, paid it's predecessor, 2010 City Manager $242,652, but this amount was reduced when a new City Manager was brought in for 2011-2012, who was paid only $189,000. Conversely, Phil Cotton made $180,000 as base pay in 2010, and Gus Vina is shown as making $216,300, for 2011-2012, which I understand is now raised to $226,000? Why the disconnect between the number of employees, the compensation of a newly hired, untried City Manager, Gus Vina, who left Sacramento with a vote of No Confidence from City Council there, and the extreme difference between the overall budgets of San Marcos and Encinitas?
Another way to compare is to look at the City of San Diego. There, the City manager of a city with 10,108 employees, and an overall budget of $2.75 BILLION, paid its City Manager $250,001 for 2010 and 2011-2012.
Please, review the chart and check out the facts for yourself. As I said, I like to share facts and my perspective, so people can form their own conclusions.
PS: General Obligation Bonds have traditionally been used to build or maintain schools, including roof repair, maintenance of the grounds, playground equipment, etc. They are NOT sought to buy more "transitory" items, to my knowledge, such as books and supplies.
ReplyDeleteBecause homeowners, all property owners in the school district are required to pay off these bonds, at $25 per $100,000 of accessed value, over a 30 YEAR PERIOD, it is not prudent, or wise, to spend these monies on short term "investments" in equipment or supplies. That should come out of the day to day operating expenses already incurred and budgeted for by any school district.
If i remember correctly, the public voting material on this bond clearly stated it would be used for this kind of technology. The not so clear part was the Encinitas Ranch school site and the farm project. The bond passed.
DeleteYou talk about me and my family as though we are parasites feeding on you and all the other oh-so-deserving taxpayers of Encinitas. The fact is, grandma, that you're simply one of the lucky ducks who happens to have been born in a land grab generation. You got there first, and you now don't want to share. Yes, I send my children to Encinitas schools, and yes, oldsters like you have to suck it up and share in the cost of educating the next generation. It's called a community, Lynn.
ReplyDeleteYou also apparently don't grasp the value of new technologies, or understand how they can be implemented. Those iPADs are COMPUTERS, and today every child needs to be computer literate. Someone like Tim Baird sees this, which is one of the reasons he is able to draw the salary he does. Would you want a school superintendent who DIDN'T warrant a raise when he/she was recruited? Talent recruitment and retention can be expensive. Unless of course you're satisfied with average talent like that detailed in your UT link.
As an aside, if you want to be taken seriously when talking about local development planning, it might not be the best practice to link to media sources that proudly proclaim their fealty to big business and aggressive real estate development. The U-T and the North County Times are now officially cheerleaders for corporations (really, they callled themselves cheerleaders) , and they care not a whit about you, me, or anyone else in Encinitas.
As to my anonymous status, we live in a world of search engines and employer snooping into the private lives of job candidates and current employees. There are also bad people in the world who can put two and two together from one's online presence. Even the little information I've put in this thread would allow anyone with half a brain to narrow me down to one of a few hundred people in the school district. I also never allow my children's pictures to be posted online. I personally don't want to expose myself or my family to that kind of risk, so I usually post anonymously. Welcome to the real world.
I feel that EUSD should do a comparison, similar to the chart through the Watchdog. How many employees work for EUSD? How many students are enrolled. What is the overall operating budget? We now are informed through the Coast News that the Yoga foundation, formerly known as the Jois Foundation will be paying EUSD an additional $1.4 Million to continue Yoga instruction in school, not just limited to physical exercise.
DeleteHow many private grants does the School District receive from public and private sources? These questions are of interest to me. It seems to me that Baird could allow the Pacific View surplus school site to be leased through "Envision the View," a proposal submitted last year for $300,000 per year.
Perhaps the Yoga instruction, which the foundation sponsors, could take place, partially, at Pacific View. Students could enjoy a wonderful community Arts Center, see artists "in process," with the help of the Artists' Colony, which would like to VOLUNTEER to refurbish the former classrooms. The City of Encinitas should be allowed to purchase 30% of the surplus school site for 25% of the appraised value, of the donated land, appraised at its value as OPEN SPACE, in the current public/semi-public zoning.
Read the EUSD school board minutes. The information is there.
DeleteWow, only my gransons call be Grandma. I was being honest that I am a grandmother, but I don't care for your patronizing tone. We didn't grab land; we paid very dearly for the small home we have. We don't want to stop others from having that privilege, but voters in Encinitas have determined we cannot and will not allow unchecked growth. Thank Goodness Prop A passed, because the new ordinance it creates will put a check on uncontrolled growth.
ReplyDeleteI realize the UT is known to be owned by Papa Doug Manchester, a developer, but the Watchdog (two separate reporters, I believe) has done some excellent investigative reporting. I'm grateful for that comparison of City Managers salaries. Again, you attack the messenger, me, and the media, and don't discuss the facts raised by the comparison between Encinitas' City Manager and other Cities throughout San Diego County.
You wouldn't need to be afraid of reprisals if you kept your posts on point and did not blast people just because they are older, or because you feel that someone is trying to exclude you. And you accuse me of the fallacy of "guilt by association?" Your dismissive post sounds like ageism on your part, to me.
I didn't talk about your family as parasites. Again, you are bringing that projection of your own, perhaps subconscious, fears into the conversation. My criticism was of some of the decisions of Superintendent Tim Baird.
You are the one who described your children as "iPad-wielding EUSD elementary school students." That was unnecessary, if you are so concerned about "reprisals," to bring them into the discussion. Moreover, I brought up two daughters in EUSD, and I am all in favor of school maintenance and rehabilitation, INCLUDING more playground equipment, which through our Community Grant program, the City of Encinitas is now subsidizing. My opinion is that playground equipment, and maintenance and repair of the playing fields, and existing school buildings, is a MUCH better long term investment than IPads, and ADDITIONAL property taxes levied should not go for "short term gratification," and what can appear to be attempts at earning "Brownie points" on the part of bureaucrats acting as "power brokers."
Again, I feel that students get exposed to a great deal of computer time and TV time, and elementary school is not necessarily needed as another venue for this type of interaction. Also, I would rather Baird and other administrators making over $100,000 per year, were compensated at LEAST 20% less, so that more teachers could be hired. Administrators make disproportionately more than the teachers, from my perspective. I do honor and respect our school teachers.
How much does the Superintendent of Cardiff School District make? Baird makes a tremendous amount, considering that EUSD is not the only elementary school district in this city, and considering he was making so much less for the High School District, OUSD, for which he was a Superintendent in Ojai, before being hired to work here, for EUSD, in 2009. My sources, from Ojai, say he made $65,000 more here, at $200,000, so at $215,000 per year, Baird is now making $80,000 more than he was making in Ojai, where a great deal of community members had big issues with him because he was trying to prevent the installation of a promised skatepark, there, at a surplus school site. After Baird came to the Encinitas, the Ojai Community Skate Park was built, to the delight of the public, many of whom volunteered countless hours to accomplish that goal.
This is becoming repetitive. We get it. You don't want anyone else to have a shot at the life you have in Encinitas, and you expect the rest of us to accept that crapholes like San Marcos are fantastic examples of how to run a town. Tim Baird is a Carpetbagging skater hater, and a kickball field is a better investment than networked computers that make put cumulative knowledge of mankind at students fingertips. Yadda, yadda, yadda. Anyone with Google can see that this is your position. At least you're consistent.
ReplyDeleteAlso, let's not forget the details of the community who would benefit from the "Arts center" you find so deserving of a deep real estate discount. Were any homes perhaps proposed in these "Community Arts Center" plans? What kind of median price might those home have fetched? What is the demographic most likely to occupy those homes? How many low income units would there have been?
Finally, what's in this for you? We know I want my kids to get the best education, and I'd like to be able to buy a house in Encinitas one day. What's your motivation for clinging to this topic like a lamprey? Business interests? An overpowering sense of fair play? Boredom? I suspect that, like so much of the bleating we hear from the AARP crowd, it's just another case of socio-economic fear.
Count yourself lucky you were able to pay so "dearly" for your home. In my lifetime, thanks in large part to the "race to the bottom" attitude you and your generation have shown towards things like good governance and education, the chance of my owning a home is vanishingly slim compared to the opportunities you had. Please pardon me if I don't sympathize with your NIMBY attitude.
12:52 PM
ReplyDeleteYadda yadda yadda? Are you a Lenny Bruce fan? Didn't Bruce use the words before the Seinfeld show?
Bleating from the AARP crowd? Do you mean retirees on fixed income?
May you never have to bleat.
Before Lenny Bruce, Lyricist Johnny Burke wrote the song "Yah-ta-ta, Yah-ta-ta, (Talk, Talk, Talk)" which was sung by Bing Crosby and Judy Garland. Bruce probably called it Yadada after a few drinks.
DeleteBurke wrote great lyrics to songs like "Misty", "Pennies From Heaven" and the more locally recognizable "Where The Turf Meets The Surf" He is in the songwriter's hall of fame. I can't imagine him not crossing paths with our own late Hollywood songwriter Hugh Martin.
I was fortunate enough to cross paths with and befriend one of Burke's daughters named Reagan a few years back. She calls herself a "Beverly Hills Brat". Great lady and let me in on tons of behind the scenes trivia. And what a father she had.
Where Johnny Burke arrived at using the term Yah-ta-ta, Yah ta ta I'll have to ask Reagan next time she stops in if/when I see her again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Axl31XNoEtM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uT9MITGrcFk
Given developers choose to buy their way out of or trade away affordable housing units to locate on less deirable properties, the answer to the yadda person as to how many would have been built on the Pacific View is: zero. They'd take the density bonus allowance and build zero there. Thank heaven for Prop A, whuch will firce acitywude vite if a rezone is pursued there. No more "good governance" backroom deals for you, "yadda."
ReplyDeleteZero is the correct answer. Bonus points for including the slum euphemism. See me point, matey?
ReplyDelete"Do you mean retirees on fixed income?"
ReplyDeleteHow many "fixed income retirees" live to the West of the 5 in Encinitas? My guess is that the number is probably similar to or only slightly above the number of brown-skinned people living in the same area.
That's ultimately is the point of these Baird-bashing discussions, no? Spanish immmersion programs? Providing iPADs to elementary school kids who can't afford them? Opening the field to real estate developers who might allow development of "higher density" (read: more affordable) housing?
To get back to the original issue: despite all the roadblocks the old, NIMBY crowd throws in his way, Dr. Baird is increasing educational opportunities for poorer, browner students in EUSD, and the scared old white electorate here just can't stand it.
To 6:11 AM
ReplyDeleteYou're into baiting. Not going to work. The issue was the asking price of Pacific View.
The IPads are not just provided to children whose parents can't afford them. I wasn't aware that they were distributed according on a needs, according to income, basis.
ReplyDeleteYou are polarizing this conversation by attempting to pit people who care about development in our neighborhoods, in our community, by using the developer term, "Nimby." No one who loves our community wants OVERDEVELOPMENT in our back yards, front yards, or side yards. Overdevelopment is that which cannot support our infrastructure, denser development than our community character and our desires to maintain a laid back beach town quality of life can accommodate. Thank God for the initiative process and the initiative and wisdom of Prop A proponents.
Baird has been pro-development in Ojai and in Encinitas, and has NOT been generous or creative in helping to set up a true COMMUNITY art center, where low income artists could have studios, with major or minor use permits, where art classes could be held, which would be a true point for people of all ages and income brackets to enjoy and learn more about art. Baird may have been hired to come to EUSD because he was promoting development of that surplus school site in Ojai, as previous EUSD Superintendents Devoir and King had been, for Pacific View, in Encinitas, which to them, was a "cash cow." They didn't care that it was donated land, which the public wants to remain in the public domain.
Higher density does not automatically equal more affordable housing. The City should count potential accessory units towards affordable housing, and should encourage individual homeowners by subsidizing accessory unit permits, instead of falsely claiming the affordable housing permit policy no longer exists, while at the same time, raising the permit fee to COUNT an affordable housing accessory unit from $200, to $500 in 2005, to $900 in 2009, so a raise of 850%, when developers of multiple units were given a 40% DECREASE in permitting fees in 2005, according to a settlement with Barratt American, after the City was sued for Planning and Building using "unfettered discretion" in increasing housing fees.
Yes, the point of the original post is that Baird is being greedy on his astronomical figure for the PV price tag. He doesn't share what firm gave the alleged appraisal, or for what zoning that appraisal was done. According to the Coast News, Baird says EUSD is in better shape, now. Also, the paper reports that the foundation formerly known as the Jois Foundation, has changed its name, and will now be paying $1.4 Million, in addition to the previous $533,000 for Yoga in schools, not limited to physical education. That' additional funding is great, but it's another reason why Baird should work with the City and with the Artist's Colony to help provide a true community art center through local artists and art lovers.
You talk about the UT in a negative light, and I agree, that paper's pro-development in its editorial policy. NIMBY is one of its favorite phrases, when the real goal is to push profits for the few, at the expense of the many.
I see. It's not baiting when the title of a blog post and a bevy of commenters to that post pile on and repeatedly impugn the character of a specific person by name, but commenting on the baby boom zeitgeist is offensive?
ReplyDeleteAll this kvetching about Tim Baird and iPADs seems very adolescent any petty to me. There are real problems in the world that don't involve home appraisals and old people's fear of a brown planet. Encinitas would be a stronger place with more diversity and less cowering greed. Baiting? Sure, I'll cop to that...
"Community character?" In the South they call it their "Heritage." Same concept.
ReplyDelete"Arts Colony." Please. Arts colony in the midst of 30,000 new square feet of rich person retreat. Quite the aspiration.
This discussion is fundamentally about people who happened to be there to exploit stolen lands before the rest of us clinging to their homogenous, affluent existence. I spoke up because I suspect that spiritual slander is just the tip of the iceberg with for in Encinitas.
7:31 PM
DeleteYadda, yadda, yadda.
The Superintendent of EUSD, Tim Baird is a public figure, supported by taxpayer monies. We should check out what his actions are, analyze them, and criticize them when called for by his poor choices. He deserves to have his past actions looked at, as well.
ReplyDeleteYou are no one to say what this conversation is "fundamentally about." I'm not rich, and I haven't slandered anyone. The Pacific View site was donated land, and should remain in the public domain. I feel an important part of our culture, across the board, for all income levels, includes artistic creations, artistic endeavor. Through the impassioned support of activists, volunteers and artists, we could make Pacific View a jewel in our community, as it once was, and as the land remains, although EUSD allowed the buildings on the site to become run down.
Are you speaking about land "stolen" from Native Americans? Yes, that was a tragedy, but you are attempting to guilt trip those of us who are trying to accomplish something positive, to save the land for its highest value. And I'm not talking about what I consider to be the bogus "mixed use" art center before proposed, which would have been an out-of-place monolith, and would not have GUARANTEED that the so-called classrooms, could not have later been converted to Condo units. What I believe our local artists and activists could accomplish is refurbishing and maintaining the classrooms for a real community art center, where art could be taught. Also guaranteed should be that 30% of the surplus school site, or .84 acre would be designated for open space, in perpetuity, open to the public for a community garden. The old schoolhouse of course should remain on the site.
And EVERYONE who is retired, and lives off of his or her pension, is on a fixed income. There are many people living on fixed incomes in this City who are not rich, including west of Highway 101. But being wealthy is not a sin. Making a profit is not a sin. The majority simply don't feel that a profit needs to be made off of donated land, which we would like to be a true asset to our community, not an opportunity for short term profit for anyone.
Timothy Baird, along with the Board of Trustees for EUSD and in cooperation with Encinitas City Council could come up with generous, creative solutions, to benefit the entire community, not just the "well-connected," who hope to gain short term profits. The zoning is highly unlikely to be changed, now, and any such change would require a public vote, thanks to passage of Prop A. Hooray!
Save Pacific View!
Cry me a river. Anyone with equity in an appreciating property is not on a fixed income, they have an expanding safety net in home equity loans and the inherent value of their property.
ReplyDeleteThose "generous, creative solutions" may help your community, Lynn, but they won't do squat for anyone but the wealthy and mostly white, baby boomer homeowners. You seem to be proposing a trade of short term "profits" for EUSD (getting fair market value for the property)for long term profits for yourself and the other homeowners in the immediate area in the form of redlining.
ReplyDeleteEUSD getting more money is quite frankly in my interest, and I'm willing to admit that is my motivation. I support Dr. Baird in this debate. You still haven't made clear what your own conflict of interest might be (despite your insistance that it is required for fair debate) Stomping your feet and crying about iPADs is simply pathetic NIMBY behavior.
Fair Market Value according to the slanted opinion of a recent transferee School Superintendent for EUSD is NOT the highest and best value.
ReplyDeleteI don't have a conflict of interest. I simply desire, like a majority of people in this community, that the suprlus school site, which property was DONATED for public use, should remain in the public domain. Ideally, it will be used for a true community art center, with 30% of it open space, according to the Naylor Act.
All demographics, all income levels would benefit from this creative solution. The land belongs to the people. EUSD may be on title, but the land was donated over 100 years ago.
Currently, the surplus school site can't be rezoned without a public vote, thanks to the public's passing Prop A. Hooray! Any appraisal of "fair market value" has to take that into account. The appraisals must be for the current zoning, and would be nowhere near the $13.5 figure that Baird only recently "produced." That figure was NEVER before released.
You are the one doing feet stomping and name calling, behind your cover of anonymity. Glad you admit your primary interest is to support Baird, not the public's best interests. Baird has made bad choices, including the IPads, buying quickly depreciating assets with 30 year bonds is not wise. Baird is overpaid, according to what he was making, and according to his performance, in my opinion.
What is it that you are insinuating that I don't want in my backyard? I'm not worried about the before proposed monolithic mixed use structures, thanks to Prop A. I and many other members of this community, including the 101 Artists Colony would like a community art center to be built in our backyard! So call us YIMBY's, lol.
Thanks for making my case that we need to improve the classroom experience before we worry about the playground experience.
ReplyDelete"Glad you admit your primary interest is to support Baird, not the public's best interests."
This is not what I said.
"What is it that you are insinuating that I don't want in my backyard?"
Brown people and poor people, most likely, but also anyone who might inconvenience you by moving anywhere near you.
"behind your cover of anonymity."
As to my anonymity, this is the 21st century. I haven't really been anonymous in this discussion. I've provided enough information for anyone with half a brain and a free hour or so to figure out who I am.
I'm not going to spell it out any further for you, except to say that you're either reckless, or a social media naif. Try this: Google your name, then find the piece of information that is not widely known about you. Google that in combination with your name. Now find more information and Google the two most recent insights in combination with your name. See how much you can find in 15 minutes? Scary, huh? It doesn't take a warrantless wiretaps when someone volunteers too much about themselves online.
To be clear, I have no interest in you personally, and I wish you no harm, despite your whacky opinions. You appear to be a nice person with very strongly held views, and I want Encinitas to be a safe and vibrant place for us both to live and nurture our families. In my opinion, it would behoove you to do some reading about how to protect your privacy online.
To be clear, I have no desire to prevent brown people or poor people from living in Encinitas. I do have a desire for the surplus school site, Pacific View, donated to Encinitas residents, FOR THE COMMUNITY, to have a true community art and learning center, in the public domain.
ReplyDeleteEUSD includes more than just Encinitas, but EUSD was donated to RESIDENTS ADJACENT TO WHAT IS NOW THE SURPLUS SCHOOL SITE. The land was on title THROUGH THE COUNTY, prior to Encinitas' incorporation. For some strange reason, EUSD then became owner of title, when EUSD does NOT only include our small community, but also includes Carlsbad schools.
That transfer of ownership happened LONG before Superintendent Tim Baird came to town, which was not until 2009. He does not have a long term appreciation of the true value of the land as a precious, irreplaceable asset, for our community. He and the current majority of the Board of Trustees do not seem to understand that the locals do not want any government entity to strip our community assets for short term profit of a school district to whom the land was NOT originally donated.
We DO want a community art and learning center in our backyard. You are twisting the conversation to meet your own prejudiced opinions about me and my personal preferences. You have no proof whatsoever about any of your false conclusions and are just acting as an anonymous troll, to attack me, instead of answering my questions.
I'm not going to spell it out for you further.
Not answering your questions? Nice one. Re-read the thread and count how many of my questions you answered.
ReplyDeleteLeave a void, and people will fill it. My impression of you (which you call "prejudices") only arose after reviewing your many, many comments on local interest blogs. A little self awareness goes a long way, Lynn.
"was donated to RESIDENTS ADJACENT TO WHAT IS NOW THE SURPLUS SCHOOL SITE."
Now it's just the ADJACENT residents? Nice revision of history.
You're the troll, Lynn. The evidence is all over the net.