* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Recently, at least two council members have separately used the word "conspiracy" in response to questions from the public about the process that led to the council's questionable (at best) ballot statements against Proposition A. Crying "conspiracy" is a common rhetorical technique to belittle and discredit an opposing point of view.
What is the "conspiracy?"
Here are the facts:
1. City Manager Gus Vina selected the notorious pro-development law firm Rutan & Tucker to write an "independent analysis" of Proposition A. Vina signed the contract on February 4, more than a week before the February 13 council meeting at which the council ordered the report. At the February 13 meeting, Vina and the Council avoided letting the public know that the firm had already been chosen and the contract signed. Council members have not criticized either the selection of Rutan & Tucker or the timing of the contract before the Council decision, and the Council has since unanimously reviewed Vina's overall performance as "excellent."
2. The Rutan & Tucker report was predictably biased against Proposition A and raised numerous "what-if" fears, the most significant of which have already been debunked by the Coastal Commission on bifurcation and the city's own Planning Department on residential height limits.
3. The Council wrote ballot arguments against Proposition A that included both outright falsehoods and further stretching of Rutan & Tucker's already tenuous speculative hypotheticals.
a) "THERE NEVER WERE, AND WILL NOT BE, APPROVED PLANS FOR 5-STORY BUILDINGS IN ENCINITAS..." In fact, nothing in the General Plan or any other governing document would have prevented future councils from approving 5-story buildings without a public vote. Prop A prevents that. And this is not just a hypothetical. Peder Norby proposed allowing 5-story buildings at the May 24, 2012 ERAC meeting, and got a positive reaction from the committee.4. After Proposition A passed, the Planning Department quickly resolved the residential height question exactly in accordance with the way the Prop A people said it was intended and should be read.
b) "Major land use changes HAVE ALWAYS happened with a vote of the people and the Council is committed to codifying this practice." In fact, both the Leucadia and Downtown Specific Plans increased building heights from two stories to three stories, and both were approved by the City Council without a public vote.
c) "Prop A [...] allows taller structures in existing developments. Imagine a 30-foot structure five feet from your property line." Here the council stretched Rutan & Tucker's speculative "could be interpreted," which was not adequately supported by any real argument or explanation, into an absolute certainty (which has since been falsified by the city's own Planning Department).
5. Council members now want to "move forward" from discussion of Proposition A without addressing the serious breakdown in trust that has occurred. In stark contrast to their campaign themes of open government, fair play, and transparency and trust, Mayor Barth and Council Member Shaffer are refusing to answer questions about the process that led to the Prop A debacle.
Questions and observations:
1. How did Vina know long before the vote that the Council would want to order an analysis rather than saving the taxpayers $300,000 and just adopting the initiative outright? It sure looks like everybody in City Hall was on the same page to kill Proposition A long before the discussion was held in an open, public Council meeting. Is that a "conspiracy?" If so, it's certainly not a very far-fetched one.
2. Why was no one on Council concerned that Vina had selected a law firm that was immediately recognized by the public as a notorious pro-developer firm? It looks like Council was happy to get a report that supported their position, regardless of its fairness or credibility.
3. Why couldn't the Planning Department have announced the same simple, clear interpretation of residential heights before the election that they did shortly after the election? That would have gutted one of the Council's primary fear-based arguments against Prop A.
4. Why did the Council resort to ballot arguments that seem pretty clearly dishonest by any objective reading? It looks like they were more concerned with winning than with providing voters with an honest discussion of the pros and cons. If there are true problems with Prop A, we never got to have an honest discussion about them.
5. Why did the Council fail to give us an alternative to Prop A that locked in the right to vote but removed whatever supposed flaws Prop A had? If there are flaws in Prop A, an alternative honestly discussed with the public likely would have won. It seems that Council never had any Plan B other than hoping the initiative wouldn't qualify and then hoping it wouldn't pass.
6. Who is in charge here, Vina or the Council? It certainly looks like Vina took the lead with the Rutan & Tucker contract, and then steered the Council right into a political box canyon, pitting the new majority directly against their own political base. Or did the Council really want it to play out just like this?
7. If council members are unwilling to discuss and learn from their mistakes on Proposition A, how can we be assured that the next controversial issue will be handled honestly and fairly?
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Stockton's leaders, like Encinitas', dismiss criticism from citizens, prompting this quote from the president of the local taxpayers' group that may feel very familiar to Encinitans:
"If only Stockton's leaders would listen and consider that someone else might have something worth saying."
Interesting that Stockton and Sacramento were both former employers of our own CM Gus Vina.
ReplyDeleteIs this where he learned how to interact with us (not at all), or was it his decisions that lead to the economic problems in both of the cities where he used to work in the Finance Department?
My observation of him is that he does not have much to draw upon from his "toolkit" of experience - his word, not mine. He has a very limited approach no matter the situation and forces every situation fit this limit.
ReplyDeleteAs Mark Twain once said: "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail."
I'm not interested in rehashing the perceived Prop A campaign transgressions. Prop A passed with a popular vote. It is now law. It is settled. That said, W.C's point #7 is worth discussing ad nauseum! Often times management teams become so isolated that their decision making is taited by a "groupthink" mentality. In laymans term, they start believing their own bull$hit. Groupthink contributed mightly to the financial crisis of 2009. It's on the radar of all the best Board of Directors of todays public companies and pension funds - to continually challenge managements decisions and assertions to make sure they are taking into consideration all possible scenarios. So is it possible that a new city council with very little collective public experience could have circled the wagons so quickly and forcefully that they are now trapped in a defensive groupthink? If so, how do they get out of it? Due to lack of experience (or thick skin), they're probably taking criticism personally - and that's tough to take.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, there's a gorgeous sunset tonight. Hope y'all are taking it in!
- The Sculpin
I was part of the sunset last night. Watch for meteors tonight.
DeleteDoes the council believe they are insular and at risk of groupthink? I'm not sure its all a groupthink problem. Some if it is a desire to take the easy route.
What are some indicators of groupthink? Does the council have these?
Yes! They are confused and hurt because they can't understand why we are not pleased that they have stabbed their supporters in the back.
DeleteNow all that is left for them is to praise one another.
Our 2 social engineers, Barth and Shaffer, should sell their homes and move into Pacific Station since they find this such a great option for others.
Muir and Gaspar are more honest in their support of the building industry, so while they live in large homes themselves, it is all about making money for their builder supporters. Tony has made new friends with the people who attacked him in both elections.
Look, Gus took the council members all offsite to learn how to work together better as a team...he had some name for it. This amounts to corralling them to control them in the name of "teamwork," which I'm sure lines them up happily behind his strategic plan, whatever that is. All no doubt would take offense to that characterization, but then again, all are drinking from the Gus Kooler and are hardly in a position to judge.
ReplyDeleteWord from inside city hall is anyone steps out of line, they get frozen out of office communications. Stepping out of line is nothing more than questioning how things have been done/decisions are made.
Thanks TS, I did enjoy the sunset and it was gorgeous!!
Regarding "perceptions," bother clicking through WC's links and you'll see it's all there in black and white. Sculpin may not wish to "rehash," but many more of us are horrified at how Prop A played out and how our own elected officials played dirty at every opportunity, led by Kool-Aid Vina (keep the them going from the earlier post).
ReplyDeleteSigh.........if you don't understand the "why", you'll never get to the "how". Yes, you're horrified. But I have to assume the council is equally horrified. How could this all go south so fast? So you have 2 choices. One is to blame the council. That's adversarial. The other is to empathize with them. That's collaborative. It could also be Machiavellian - he was a master at understanding motivation. So what do you want to do? Pick at old scars, or build new alliances?
Delete- The Sculpin
Have you tried communicating with them in a non-adversarial way? Good luck...I have: Lisa makes excuses about how misunderstood she is, Teresa gives short, often rather nasty responses about what's wrong with residents, Gaspar responds with "thank you, that was interesting, Muir might give you a "thank you for contacting me" - more often no response at all - and Tony comes back with oddly aggressive remarks. Like I said: good luck. I for one am done with them. Not one has admitted any part in the feelings of betrayal felt by one-time supporters.
DeleteHoly Crap!!!!!! It's therapy time! Where's Dr. Lori??? OK - I'm going off the deep end here but stay with me. Gaspar and Muir are stll in the logical mode, but the other three, based on your descriptions, are reacting like jilted lovers! Misunderstood? Short and nasty responses? Aggressive remarks? These are deeply emotional reactions! I don't know these people, but maybe you do. Clearly what you're doing is not working, but if you think the relationships are worth saving maybe you're the one who needs to think about a different strategy. Face it - you're the rational partner in this relationship!! That's scary, eh? Look, I voted for some of them. I gave $$. But I don't know these people. I do know that they had a whole $hitload of support from all sorts of people, and then something went wrong. Maybe your looking for an admission of betrayal is too premature. You may need to take a few steps back and then work towards an admission. Believe me, there's not a whole lot of difference between politics and love.................
Delete- The Sculpin
I gave money, too - the max allowed to all three. I actually don't know them all that well, and have approached carefully. However, my experience is far from unusual. All you have to do is read Teresa and Lisa's newsletters to catch the defensiveness, and those emails are going out to plenty of people, many of whom don't have contact with either.
DeleteYes, "something went wrong," and don't you think they'd be the least curious to know what? I'm disappointed that I've not heard yet of anyone having an interaction with any of them that didn't end in Teresa-Lisa-Tony blaming residents. Agree their reactions are emotional, but so are those of stunned supporters. Council members are the ones who came to us, sold us on them - not the other way around. I'm no longer interested in trying to get through, it's more rewarding to bang my head on the wall. :)
Sorry, keep the THEME going from earlier post.
ReplyDeleteSculpin- retreats are bullshit at best. At worst... A lame excuse for a vacation at taxpayer expense.
ReplyDeleteGUS OR Sad Sac is bullshit. The biggest mistake to date that Council and especially Teresa Barth did was to say that Sad Sac is going a good job.
ReplyDeleteThe citizens all know hes a tool. The longer you hold that herd, the smeller your future looks.
Dump the turd and lets get this City back on a positive track. We dumped Stocks. Now its time to rid his hit man- Sad Sac Gus.
Lets get it done. No more wasted time "strategic Planning" ....Lets move on, so we can move on and start improving the quality of life in this town.
Save Encinitas, and Dump Sad Sac. Any Council Member not supporting to dump Sad Sac is going to get full barrels of my fury in the next election. Make your choice.
10:21, what makes you think the council will choose better the next time? Remember Barth was on the watch when Gus snaked in....ssssssss.
ReplyDeleteI hope we get smarter City Council. Pick a good City Manager- not a lifer in city government with only failure cities in your past.
ReplyDeleteTell me- what good has Sad Sac don't for Encinitas since he has been CM?
I can give you a list of two pages the harm he has done Encinitas.
He has done plenty of good for himself and for his employees at the expense of taxpayers. Remember that we will be on the hook paying him over $200,000 for the rest of his life!
DeleteI think the entire Strategic Plan exercise has been a disgrace. Gus did not need a Strategic Plan in order to respond to residents' emails or to fire people when they were caught in untruths and poor performance.
It appears to me that he is trying to come up with a reason to derail our current General Plan and will likely claim that the General Plan needs to change to match his Strategic Plan. In reading newspapers from his time in Sacramento, he is quite experienced at offering abundant excuses for poor results and blaming troublemakers who interfere in his performance.
Is this really a good approach to leadership?
His first stab at this great outreach he has promised residents was an unadvertised meeting in Olivenhain. Attendees found out when Lisa mentioned the meeting in her newsletter. Vina has remarked in the past that Encinitas residents hardly turned out for prior input exercises. So let's get this straight: he makes sure as few people as possible are informed, then blames the ignorant for their apathy. That's his strategy and that's the kind of shoddy treatment of an entire town that the council find fit to support.
ReplyDeleteWhat should they do instead?
DeleteDoes the city send out mail to everyone in the city? If so, the schedule and a very clear indication of what the benefit of participation will be should be included. How will participation matter?
What do YOU think, Kevin? Would be interested to hear your responses to your own questions.
DeleteCouncil better wake up and fire this clown that is killing Encinitas.
ReplyDeleteBarth is to deep in the support/love of this tool. Unless I see some new actions to remove the tool, Barth's time is over.
Its time for citizens who have a smarter head on their shoulders to run Encinitas.
I think both Sculpin and others who disagree ,are both partly right. Vina does have an agenda. Personally, I don't like it, and it extends to the City Commissioners, which, with the exception of the Planning Commission, are all unpaid. He appears to be a short man with a short mans syndrome (no offense to short men out there), but I think you know the what I mean. Teresa has always responded kindly to my emails, but I don't act as judge and jury when I ask a question. That seems to be more KC's, or Lynn's style, or perhaps I am wrong.? Shaffer is another matter. When she isn't telling me what's wrong with an idea, she is stating why she thinks it is not practical, not fundable, not, not , not, never let me look in to that. At the Moonlight Beach opening, I said Hi Lisa, side saw me, and moved away without a word. I would expect a little better civility from a councilwoman. However I didn't vote for her, so I didn't expect much. I never expect much from Kaspar and am never disappointed. I like Muir. At least he talks to me and gives me the information I ask for. And, Tony could use a little polish. I see lots of potential, but I am not sure he really likes the job too much. His need to try to make everyone happy is limiting his ability to be good City Council member. But as much as we complain, wouldn't it be better to take what we do want and take put our collective energies there? I think that is what the Sculpin is saying. Correct me if I am wrong Sculpin. I have signed up for all the city notices, including planning, so I do know when there is a meeting. If meetings are not posted, then we need to let Council know that. But we must be proactive as well. Keep track on what they are doing. And, we better do it pretty fast, before one more layer of bureaucracy is added, namely the PR guy who is coming in. God only knows if we will be able to get anything correct when this person boards the bus.
ReplyDeleteWhat's your suggestion for putting the collective energies together?
DeleteSounds like you've made a judgement on Vina (and Sabine?) and the council's decision to hire a "PR guy".
What sorts of questions do you ask the Mayor and why are you asking them? Sometimes I ask questions to get to the bottom of something, other times to give the party a chance to address what looks like a bad situation. I may have made a preliminary judgement. In the case of Prop A ballot statements there were things that were on face value false and misleading others were very difficult to see how they could be supported, and finally some that could have and should have been resolved before the election.
I met with Tony and talked with Lisa about this, but did not cover the statements comprehensively with Lisa. Teresa long in combat mode.
Here is my first email to Teresa:
__________________________
I have been very busy lately, but trying to catch up.
That is great that you [have] taken action to get a other voter approved initiative together. This is good because there are not 3 council members who consistently subscribe to the idea of letting the voters decide on general plan updates. Is there a timetable for steps involved with this? If not, when will a timetable be created, even if only tentative?
Do you have a list of negative consequences of Prop A?
KMC
_______________________
This email resulted in a long string of emails as the Mayor avoided answering and even resorting to implying that it would be against the law for her to discuss Prop A.
Here is my email to Lisa, right after the FAQs came out:
___________________
Lisa,
Who made the decision on the residential height determination that is in the FAQs about Prop A? What was that process leading up to that decision? My followup question will be, why couldn't/didn't that process take place prior to the election? Including, what specific parts of that process needed to be carried out only after the election?
Kevin
_________________________
Lisa indicated that she won't be answering these questions.
So, I wonder if your questions were important questions and about important things for the public to know about Prop A. What did you learn from the Mayor?
Kevin-If I thought you truly wanted an answer, I would tell you what the mayor says in her emails when I ask questions. I will tell you how I think we could put our collective minds together once I think more on it. Even your missives on this page suggest anger and being contrary to every idea that isn't yours. Is there really a need yo rehash who, what , why, how, and when, on A? It passed, so what is the problem? The problem is a new PR hire with all the benefits the City pays, instead of perhaps another sheriff if it is that bad downtown at night after a certain time. I don't know, as I am usually home by then. A spin doctor will be so sharp, that the public may never even have a clue what the truth is. That's what they are hired to do. Why does Vina need one? What is going on in our 63,000 person community that requires a spin doctor?
DeleteNote: I only know one person who has ever used the term "missive".
DeleteIs there really a need yo rehash who, what , why, how, and when, on A? It passed, so what is the problem?
This will not be the last initiative.
You seem to think that the city won't be trustworthy, even using a derogatory term describe the new staff member before they get started. How much should we blindly trust the new city hall? Asking the who, what, why, and when of Prop A is a particularly good place to evaluate the council, or those responsible. Why? Because the council cannot deny giving their full attention to this issue and the process. Why should we expect better than what happened during Prop A?
I don't think we will. That issue was about the things they said they stood for, supported by their campaign teams, and was in the spotlight.
Can you be explicit about which missive you think are problematic.
Don't mistake probing ideas as dismissing them. When on the SANDAG board I probed ideas that were mine the most. Much of my questioning is probing my own ideas and giving an opportunity for others to respond, just in case I've made a mistake they can address that. Barth and Shaffer have instead chosen silence.
Yes, I'm utterly disappointed (but not really surprised as many can attest too). Maybe because I wasn't surprised I'm not angry, others are angry. On the other hand, anger is not really something that I'm personally familiar with. Some of my friends who I cherish the most are people I questioned openly when we first met (on the other hand they got angry and I responded but not out of anger or ill will toward them.) They personalized it at first. A few people said something about me not holding grudges. That wasn't correct because I didn't have a grudge with the person to begin with. The behavior was unethical and it stopped.
If we have an initiative on term-limits, elected city attorneys, pensions, or open government... we need to figure out a better way to ensure that city hall will stick to fair-play. That ain't going to happen if the council doesn't do a postmortem and hold people accountable.
... Are you happy that the council voted to hire a "spin doctor"? Who's responsible for hiring the "spin doctor"?
The council reappointed Sabine. Let's move on.
Deletekmc please be so kind as to share with us who used the word 'missive'? thank you
DeleteOr, just use the process of elimination. I didn't do it.
DeleteNor I, so that leaves...?
DeleteThe remaining bloggers who identify themselves.
DeleteTrue. It's still not me, though.
DeleteThis blog has more of a chance proving Santa Claus exists than it does documenting that Peder Norby promoted 5 story buildings at the ERAC meetings: this blog post is about the voting public's growing awareness that the 'conspiracy' was actually Bruce Ehlers totally fabricated lie about the 5 stories. The Coastal Commission tampering he and Pam performed will not stand and the coming lawsuits against the City will further the truth being presented to the public. Bruce will be outed. Read his PR statement from Jan/Feb 2013 about Prop A. You can fool some of the people some of the time, Bruce, but not all of the time.
ReplyDeleteAnd, while we are at it: the City Manager has an annual discretionary fund for times like when the new Mayor Barth foolishly decides it's more important to take her friends to Sacramento for a weekend with the League of Cities than agendize an important hearing about Prop A. Vina used that fund to pay Rutan and Tucker. Get over it.
Instead of getting over it, get rid of him. He is poisonous. There's this thing called history as teacher. Getting over it changes nothing.
DeleteWith your threats of lawsuits, you sound like a city insider...lawsuits are Tony's favorite threat, fed to him by his new developer contacts and buddies.
7:09: it's recommended you watch the ERAC video with the sound ON and not muted. You'll find it's easier to get your facts straighter that way.
Delete7:09, Your use of Atwater/Rove/Orr techniques don't play in this age of information. Most everyone on this blog has seen the fricken video of Peder promoting 5 stories at an ERAC meeting.Look in the mirror and keep lying.I think you believe your own b.s.
Deletethe Cabezon
Conspiracy?
ReplyDeleteSounds like a judgement has been made about the action of CCC staff. This should be easy to identify. Which part of the coast act did staff not follow correctly? What should happen to those staff? What is in the PR statement?
5 stories? What part of what Bruce said was incorrect? Norby was an agent of the city.
The first two minutes of the linked video look to me like the city's paid facilitator went outside of what a facilitator should do (his own admittance) to get a recommendation for 4-5 stories. Did I get that wrong? Does the next 18 minutes undo that?
I continue to be opposed to the powers given to the CM to spend so much money at will without enough oversight. Here's my suggestion. His fund should be rolled back to its previous level, the ledger for that account is online linked to the CM page on the website, the CM must justify in writing the use of this account and explain how its use complies with standard government procurement rules, and most importantly the purchases have be consistent with previous council direction that was made during a public meeting. This was my recommendation long before Prop A. The previous council upped the amount allowing the city to make purchases without meaningful public disclosure and debate.
I'd like to see the the
Excellent suggestion re: the CM spending authority. Clearly he is not trustworthy with our money and clearly the council thinks he is.
DeleteWhat the hell?? I'm looking at the signatures of the council members on the new Recreation guide and Mark Muir has the signature of a 13 year old girl . From now on all council candidates must submit a writing sample for analysis .....
ReplyDeleteWhat is the strategic plan? What makes it any different from what other Councils called their budget and 5 year plan? Why does Vina tell this Council that it will take a year or more to decide where to spend the city money when other councils did it within the budget time of 3 months?
ReplyDeleteAny one who was at the ERAC meeting or viewed the entire video know that Norby DID NOT PROPOSE 5 stories. The consensus of the hand picked ERAC committee was to consider 5 stories. This all goes back to our previous mayor who created ERAC.
ReplyDeleteWC or anyone else saying Norby "proposed" 5 stories does not make it true because it is not.
Keep dreaming/lying D-bag. Look at the video.Besides, Norby is gone and the libertarian leaches who wanted the freedom to harvest our property values lost.Enjoy your day back under the rock sir. THE CABEZON
DeleteI don't care whether city-selected facilitator Norby first proposed it or city-selected, developer-heavy ERAC members did. The point is, 5 stories were being seriously discussed and the Council had no basis to claim that 5 stories would never be approved.
DeleteDude- look at the video, Norby says "I just made a recommendation" you can't rewrite history. Norby recommended 5 stories in Encinitas and he will push for greater densities in Carlsbad where he will be reunited with ex-Encinitas planner Dave Decordova. In Cardiff Decordova was videotaped telling Norby and the Public that the citizens committee decided to limit mixed use, then Norby told the Planning Commission the committee did not reach a consensus- so who was right? Norby or Decordova? C-Bad folks better invest in some video camera's.
DeleteGood point 9:41-Can we move forward and not rehash who did or who didn't do what? Norby is gone. We have the opportunity ,once again, to create a City that we want, not what some developer wants. Let's make it a positive venture between committed people from all sides of the fence.
ReplyDelete10:17 unfortunately we can not leave Norby in the past for he is today's reality. Norby, Vina, Muir, Gaspar and Barth worked hand in hand to defeat A. As a member of Leightag and the Preservation group, the dreaded 5 horseman of the high density apocalypse continue to ride roughshod over the current property rights of Encinitas residents. Norby, Vina, Stocks, Dirty Dan, Barth, Muir, Gaspar- they are all one in the same
DeleteWe don't actually have that opportunity when the committed people on the city hall side are actively trying to figure out how to make an end run around Prop A.
ReplyDeleteWho are these committed people in city hall who want to make a positive move forward in support of residents who voted for Prop A? Gaspar/Muir = NO, they're beholden to the developers who manage them and their campaigns. Barth = NO, she's a "millenials and seniors" want to live dense and high proponent. Shaffer = supports the sustainability movement, which again says live dense and high. Kranz = doesn't know if he's coming or going.
At the bottom of the controversy are the unfunded pension liabilities and the greater pickle the city knows we'll be in if we don't bow down to the almighty Building Industry Association.
I wish I had an answer, but to believe we can move forward and have the council/city hall support what the voters want won't happen.
I think that Shaffer and her husband live in a 5 bedroom home that backs up to an open space. Why does she feel qualified to suggest high density living for others, when she chooses to rattle around in a big house.
DeleteWe need to see people at City Hall lead through example.
Public records show Shaffer living in a 4 BR, 3 BA home worth $1.1 million in the Quail Gardens area that does not back up directly to open space.
DeleteHowever, it is more house and more land than she seems to believe other people should live in.
They do. Their example is what NOT to do.
DeleteWord is that Shaffer and her husband already get three government pensions between them? Council members don't get a pension though the City of Encinitas unless they have served a minimum of five years, or unless they've served in another capacity, like Mark Muir. So to get a pension based on being on Council, they have to be re-elected at least once. I have a feeling Lisa Shaffer and Tony Kranz won't be reelected.
DeleteElections or initiatives seem to be the only way we can hold Council, and ultimately staff, accountable.
10:56- I wasn't referencing this City Council when I made my comments. You are right. Do you have any suggestions on how we could move forward without them on board?
ReplyDeleteYou could take over city hall. Barricade the doors and windows. Pull an American Indian movement a la Alcatraz....
DeleteWe can't move forward without them. That was the motivation for Prop. A. A way was needed to go around them.
Delete10:56 here: no, I don't, and it's really frustrating. Lots of residents would love to volunteer and make a difference in partnership with city hall, but when we find them attempting to thwart us at nearly every turn, what is the point? I am struggling with this for sure.
DeleteHow about doing what the private sector has been doing since 2008 and cut staff and make those remaining work harder? Then less future bloated pensions and a balanced functioning city.
DeleteAfter following this blog, I've recently came to the conclusion that about a dozen people repeat their complains, conspiracies and belittlement of other without offering constructive dialogue.
ReplyDeleteI will no longer follow this blog (same old negative stuff) and ask that those dozen or so people come out from behind the curtain and run for office (or at least sign your name when you blog), unless you don't have the backbone or are worried that the same bloggers with will soon be calling you names and making the same comments about YOU!
Sincerely,
Anonymous - I don't want you to attack me for just making a truthful observation and I don't have the backbone or tolerance to run for office.
11:32 thank you for your comments, can you please share a few of your constructive thoughts? For instance what do you propose we should do with the growing unfunded pensions liabilities taxpayers are on the hold for? Do you have any ideas where Encinitas residents can get the $7 million dollars Gus Vina and Barth and Gaspar stole from 15 fully funded capital projects to start the Hall Park? Do you have any ideas on how to fix the now dry Rossini Creek that a faulty toxic dirt clean up plan from the city has clearly caused, as one day the creek was teeming with life and water, the bull dozers showed up, and now ecological disaster. Do you have any ideas on how to protect the residents quality of life along the 101 where drunken people are causing problems? Do you know where we can find money to fix our roads, we are $43M behind.
DeleteYou make much noise and demean others asking tough questions, for sure there are comments that are negative, but do you, yourself, offer any constructive solutions or is it possibly you that are doing the complaining?
"...fully funded..."
DeleteNot true. The projects were de funded, but not fully funded.
The powers that were behind this are not in power now.
And how do the powers that be differ from the powers that was?
DeleteWCv
12:56 thou protests too much- yes, the projects Vina, Barth, Muir and Gaspar raided were fully funded capital improvement projects- so, can you answer where the city is going to get $7M to replace the funds they raided, and some say stole?
DeleteSeveral who post on here will be running for office, so your "truthful observation" lacks some back story.
ReplyDeleteThe so-called conspiracies and belittlings don't come out of thin air; residents have suffered for years at the hands of back-room deals and hidden agendas from the folks who we elected in good faith to represent us.
You can call us complainers, but my truth is this: we deserve a helluva lot better.
Prop A passed. Turn the page and move on. You won't get the council to endorse it after the fact, that will make them look silly.
ReplyDeleteYOU look silly Kevin because you don't have the ability to move to the next topic. That is a shame because you can be a valuable resource.
If you don't want to be equated with conspiracies then don't post on a blog run by WC VARONES, a man who wears his tin foil hat proudly.
What I look like is not a priority for me.
DeleteOh, we are moving on. The question is, will the council be on board and can they be a trusted blindly to be a partner.
1:37 The council and Sacramento Vina are moving on to position and end run around Prop A- Social Engineer Shaffer along with Barth and for profit Gaspar and Muir are actively working to put an overlay upzoning initiative on the ballot for 2014 where they will give residents only the option to vote for increased densities. This is the same as the stupid dot exercise where Norby didn't allow people to vote no. Will Barth and Gaspar allow people to vote no, or only give high density options? Watch for it.
DeleteI'm for peace, liberty, and non-intervention.
DeleteHow is that tinfoil hat?
Tinfoil hat..... It's perfect for this wienie little town. Just think, you will fit right in at the KLCC meetings.
DeleteWatch for Gaspar bringing out of town family members into the next dots exercise like last time to place dots and "vote" like a local.
DeleteThe lack of integrity all around is astounding. Not a single council member is innocent of working against citizens.
I think the initiating post by WCV is excellent. As usual, people are going to attack him and Kevin, or me, because of their hidden agendas. Attacking the messengers, those who do make ourselves "visible," by anonymous rumor, hearsay and innuendo, is their modus operandi. What easier way to start a rumor than on a blog where you don't provide your name or any facts to support "conclusions?"
DeleteAt tonight's Pacific View meeting at the LIbrary, people were really excited about coming together to offer suggestions and ask questions. But Dody Crawford, of DEMA said John DeWald was never president of DEMA? I thought he was, at one time? Also, Dody is under the mistaken impression that EUSD has the "final say" on the zoning issue. With the passage of Prop A, that is no longer true.
The reason we, after less than two months are still looking back to the events that led up to and followed Prop A's passage, is so that we can all, as a community understand, "what went down,' and learn lessons that can guide our future efforts, including the General Plan Update.
What was said at the Olivenhain Town Council Meeting last Wednesday, by the public is that where the "rubber hits the road," is how Council eventually codifies any housing element or other changes to our General Plan. What's also paramount is goal setting and establishing a realistic short term and long term budget.
Operating expenses are out of control, compared to our population, and the number of Capital Improvements citizens hope to have funded through the city. A good start would be an overall pay cut for executive officers, which could help the bottom line, and set a good example, "across the board."
This comment has been removed by the author.
Deletedon't ask it a question, please. No one cares what it has to say.
DeleteWow 8:39 and 8:40 (probably one and the same), rude.
DeleteThey've always kept nano particle waves away from me.
ReplyDeleteRightly so.
DeleteVina is a con man. He likes to say that he is showing a piece of his strategic plan to whet our appetites. He is a master bifurcator! Talk to one community at a time and show only pieces of the plan! By doing this, he does not have to admit that the meetings were a waste and the end result is a simplified version of the tabled General Plan Update.
ReplyDeleteEncinitas is ruled by con-(wo)men and inept council members/civil servants. Pensions will bankrupt the city and infrastructural priorities will have to be idled as a result. Incorporation was the road to riches for the controlling elite - the future isn't so bright, so I'll remove my shades....
ReplyDelete