Thanks to Tony Kranz requesting the long-simmering ERGA scandal be brought before council, the public is finally starting to learn about it. The story, as far as we can tell, goes like this:
ERGA is a public-private partnership between the city and Carltas, the Ecke family development company. In 2008 and 2009, ERGA made two payments to the city to repay loans that Carltas owed. These were apparently illegal gifts of public funds to the Ecke company. The payments were reportedly approved by the ERGA board including former city manager Phil Cotton, but no record of the vote or justification for the payments exists. The gift to Carltas came at the expense of Encinitas Ranch homeowners, whose CFD fees were raised.
Recently when an audit was requested by HOA representatives, His Excellence Gus Vina limited the scope of the audit to exclude examination of the 2008-09 shenanigans, creating the appearance of a cover-up. That's our preliminary understanding; please correct us if we're wrong about any parts.
Watch here as long-time local watchdog Gerald Sodomka explains, starting at minute 8. And check out the aggrieved homeowner at 40 minutes.
The sums of money here are not enormous -- a few hundred thousand dollars in taxpayer handouts is trivial to the fabulously wealthy Eckes. But the flippancy with which the ERGA board gives away public funds to private corporations, and the eagerness of Encinitas city staff to cover it up, smack of serious corruption.
Whitewash & coverup.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that seems to be happening is that the Mello-Roos fees for 4 or 5 neighborhoods are being raised by about $3,000 because of whatever improprieties may exist. Jerry and others did an excellent job of sharing the story, but it is very complex and difficult to understand, at least for me.
ReplyDeleteBravo Encinitas, for a small town you are almost as corrupt as the City of San Diego.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment Dr. Lorri. I thought you were going to give us your take on the Council. Did you decided not to?
ReplyDeleteThat's $3,000 per homeowner per year, times several hundred homes.
ReplyDeleteThat's correct 8:40. I didn't make it specific enough. That's a lot of money.
DeleteThe construction of the homes in The Ranch were tied to the opening of Leucadia Boulevard: Encinitas Ranch Town Center, the golf course, etc... the outraged homeowner obviously didn't read the fine print when he bought his home. As long a the golf course was profitable, the 'Mello-Roos' type payment was low for homeowners, when the economy went down, the homeowners were always in the deal to make up the difference. Just because Tony cannot understand legal financial leveraging doesn't mean that anything has changed or that there is 'corruption'. Such children.
DeleteOh, and there is no 'The Eckes': with the sale of their properties to Leichstag and the break-up of the properties and assets a decade ago, the grand kids have long ago gone on their separate ways. Blame your grandparents for your comparable lack of financial worth... or here's a radical thought: yourselves.
Ask Sadomka about the $20K fine he got from the lawsuit about he and Bonde and Audet, who also got $20K fines for continuing FPPC violations. You guys ignore your own criminal enterprisers to play the victim always.
Mikey, Mikey, that was not one outraged homeowner who didn't read the fine print, what we have is over 900 homeowners in the same situation. Guess they couldn't find and read the fine print, either.
DeleteYeah, Sodomka is a good watchdog, and raises some good points. The whole ranch golf course deal was always a little smelly from the get go.
DeleteThank God for Mr. Sodomka, he knows his facts brings to the light of day all sorts of malfeasance and chicanery. We are lucky to have him.
DeleteTo 8:53,
DeleteFrom April 27th, 2013, edition of the UT:
"Yet the success of Carltas, which today is owned by Ecke III, his sisters and the Paul Ecke Jr. estate, was by no means assured through three recessions in three decades."
The ERGA money benefited Carltas. Cartlas is Ecke. Ecke are developers, landlords, and golf course welfare recipients.
Why are lawsuits against Sodomka tied in with the Eckes? Tell us about these lawsuit and who was involved. Were the Eckes or their relatives involved somehow? Was it to scare him off the scent? Was Sodomka getting to close?
You seem to know a lot. You never said what part of what of what Sodomaka said was wrong.
Sodomka said the city staff gave the Eckes a $100,000 gift of public funds.
That's bad. What did you say Sodomka did? I missed that.
Anon:8:28- I sent my take on the current Council to Wc, as it was too long for a post. I gave him, (or is it a her?) permission to publish it on the blog. What he or she does with it now is out of my hands, as I don't have a blog. It was my impression of the Council, plus Vina and Sabine.
ReplyDeleteDr Lorri's post here.
DeleteSeems like a lot of common sentiment there.
Thanks, Dr. Lorri!
DeleteMark (Fat Cat) Muir is the epitome of an ideal councilman? Some credibility loss here. He was Jerome Stocks night rider.
DeleteI want to see a forensic accountant do all of the books for the City right now! Gus Vina is untrustworthy and seems to be acting out of desperation.
ReplyDeleteI am tired of hearing about how great things are at the City when he is trying to cover up as much information as possible and has encourage staff to change records and rewrite history.
Banana Republic, here we come!
But the city doesn't use the word "forensic," warned Vina....
ReplyDeleteTony bizarrely went off on a monologue about marketing opportunities in an attempt to deflect questions on the financials. He also turned beet red when Lisa, who was starting to ask the hard questions, nominated herself to the investigative sub-committee. He seemed happy enough when he thought Mark was going to be on the committee with him.
Mark Muir is the clam. He seldom talks.
DeleteYes, that interaction was a bit strange. IMHO. I cannot tell you how many times I have asked the City for an independent audit of the City's books, only to be told we didn't need one.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't expect the city to want to jump up and agree to an audit. The Ecke/Carltas golf course deal was a sham from the start. I remember Sheila Cameron speaking on the subject awhile ago.
ReplyDeleteHow is it that Sheila Cameron missed out on being the subject of the 5150 discussion on this blog a few days ago?
DeleteDoes SC still keep children toys in her bath tub??
DeleteWe need an AUDIT!
ReplyDeleteTeresa Barth talked in glowin terms about Vina's strong financial background. Little did we know that he would be using it to seemingly steal from the taxpayer to hire more minions to carry out his plan to bankrupt the city for his own benefit.
ReplyDeleteHe is putting everything in place to assure that the $200,000 a year that we are on the hook to pay him is secure when he retires.
This is only the tip of the iceburg. There is so much more that we don't know about that it will make us sick when it is eventually unearthed. What happened to Lisa's campaign promises? The budget would be the perfect thing for a former professor of business ethics to delve into. The way it looks is that the Council is also part of the cover ups since they are taking their marching orders from Gustavo.
ReplyDeleteAcademics are notorious for inefficiency in the real world.
DeleteThere is no debate Gus and Sabine run the show. Council swallow their marching orders.
ReplyDeleteEveryone, write your council! Put together a suggested letter and ask interested neighbors to send, too. Heavy pressure will be the best way to get past Gus' claims to the council that only a tiny number of people are watching and care. His stranglehold has got to be broken.
ReplyDeleteOn next weeks Council agenda is a comparison of Glenn Sabine's pay and other City attorneys. If interested you may want to look at the staff report and perhaps show up. Hopefully, I can find all the information I compiled a long time ago and make a presentation. Too late for me to do an FOI request since I just read the report yesterday.
ReplyDeleteWhy should it matter what other city attorneys make when OUR city attorney is performing at a questionable standard? The City has a terrible record of losing in court, and then they take the cases back on appeal and lose again. Wouldn't it be better for our city to have an attorney who would advise against going to court so often with the record of losses that is on the books?
ReplyDeleteIt seems like the wrong set of rewards for taxpayers who always lose since we have to pay regardless whether a case should even go to court or not. Our City Attorney gets to charge us--no matter what the outcome.
Why did Lisa have to go back in the record and correct that he DID NOT get an excellent review from the council? Who is pushing this agenda item?
From what I understand, Lisa is the person who suggested going back to look at Sabine. And, I agree 10:56. There is no mention in the staff report as to how many cases he has won or lost for us. I am having difficulty locating all of the info. I had on him in 2002, but I am going to search for it this weekend. I will still speak at Weds. meeting, even if I don't have it. I remember in one year in 2002 he cost us 1 million dollars. At that time, Jim Bond, told me he was doing a great job. I'll keep searching, although with one arm, (I dislocated my shoulder while in Nw Orleans with my daughter) it is a bit harder to go thru everything i keep, which is a lot.
DeleteJust remember, this isn't the only city Sabine works for. I think we'd be better off without the guy, don't get me wrong. Just saying the topic isn't new. Hopefully we can dump the guy, but does anyone know, what will it realistically take to make that happen? Is there a process?
DeleteTeresa once said he'd be the first to go if Lisa and Tony got elected.
DeleteGood questions 10:56. The staff report only reports on who other cities use. It does not say how many cases Sabine has won, or how he turfs so many things to his own firm. I will attempt to gather all the records this weekend to present my own findings when I asked fore records in the early 2000's. He lost about half the cases. He once threatened me with a lawsuit, but I will take my chances if I can find the information. I don't know who is pushing the agenda item, but if anyone wants to constructively complain about him, now is the time to do it, as there as not been an open evaluation of Sabine in over 10 years, if not longer.
ReplyDeleteWow Dr. Lori. Have you come back to the light side?I think your comments on the Council were pretty good. And, now you are trying to take on Sabine. Someone must have really pissed you off.
ReplyDeleteWhy would anyone think Sabine is a good lawyer? His track record speaks for itself. Why does this never go out to bid for better representation?
ReplyDeleteThere is rarely competition at city hall for contracts. Tony was going to change that. Tony Kranz rolled over for his old buddies when he got elected.
DeleteWhich old buddies on which contracts?
DeleteLawyers are not baseball players or quarterbacks - they don't get evaluated on their win/loss record. That's for TV. Especially in civil matters, an attorney will take a case knowing they will lose, and their job is to minimize the damage. Or sometimes it's just to settle the case and not go to trial, where the risk of a higher damages award could be greater. Anon's 1 through infinity have all done a great job exposing all the transgressions of past and current council. Given all that, do you really expect legal council to win anything?!?!? I have no opinion of Sabine, don't know the man, have never interacted with him - all I know is what I read here - but come on, can we get off the win/loss stat? Any attorneys out there in Anon land that could provide more of a peer review? Maybe Dr. Lorri could ask her attorney to opine (anonymously, of course....)
ReplyDelete- The Sculpin
Sculpin: The trouble is no one at the City, at least since 2000, has given Glen a review that was not favorable. In one year he cost us one million dollars in legal fees. He never bills for a paralegal, something which most attorneys do to save money. He jobs out a lot of the City's attorney work to his own firm Morrison and Sabine. I doubt if the City will do a peer review even if we ask. However, I will certainly ask when I I speak to the issue at this Weds. City Council meeting. FYI- Several of my friends are attorneys and they have all said negative things about Glen. His La Mesa debacle was on the attorney "hit parade" for a while.
Deletedr. lorri has a personal grudge against Glen. Vendetta.
DeleteMy grudge with Glenn is not personal. It is the fact that he told me if I presented something to the City Council he would sue me. On the phone was also Patrick Murphy. That was intimidating, since at that time I had no idea if he could really do it. That was over 10 years ago, and do I want him out-yes. Is it personal-no. If chose to believe otherwise, listen to my presentation at the next Council meeting. He has robbed our City, IMHO, and has cost us a lot of money by is actions or inactions. That's what I am protesting. I could care then about him. I was upset when he started dating our ex-finance manager and ended up marrying her. They now have a child together. I always wondered if that relationship could have hurt our city regarding finances and Glen. But, those who have known me a long time know that I have been collecting things on Glen for years. I have just never had the opportunity for the public to hear. The Council already knows it. This is why I have never published the material. Now, I seem to find that I cannot find it. So, I guess it is housekeeping time this weekend, as I doubt I could get an FOI request done in 3 days and I am on a mission:)
DeleteSo it sounds like the start of the process is an unfavorable review? Just trying to get some background so we can make some inroads. I've known Sabine wasn't great for years, but with the 3-2 advantage, you weren't getting rid of him. Now is the time to make the case, there's at least a chance now. I never thought it would be easy to make a switch there at attorney, so there will have to be some legwork, as it's not as easy as win/loss as the commenter above pointed out.
Delete4:20 The city is notorious for bad legal moves for many years on all fronts.
ReplyDeleteThe city looks bad as well due to input from city attorney, tail wags the dog most of the time.
ReplyDeleteScandal,an odd word I think prejudicial at best..
ReplyDeleteSabine has a stock "I'll have to go look that up" response to everything. When he's not using that excuse, he's busy watching the audience and taking cues from other attorneys, specifically those in cahoots with developers and monied interests. Who can forget his "I see Marco [Gonzales] nodding his head" opinion? A shameful sham, enabled by the council.
ReplyDeleteWell, prior councils for sure. This council, we'll see. Does anyone know what the procedure is for getting rid of the city attorney? Does he have an employment contract, is it up for review periodically?
DeleteHe's a contract employee who could be terminated immediately. But the council just unanimously gave him their support, as astounding as that position is given his long history of horrible legal advice costing the city hundreds of thousands of dollars.
DeleteWCV
That's what I thought, that he was contract. As always to me you have ask, if he's gone, who replaces him? I'm not saying keep the guy. To me, it's no surprise they kept him. Incumbency, for right or wrong, carries weight in political circles. Worth following closely the next 3 years.
DeleteLike keeping poison on the dinner table.
DeleteI think that the way our City Attorney is set up, the worse he does, the more money he can charge. Some of the cases, like the Cummins case, should never have gone to court. All they had to do is to turn over the records that Kevin Cummins requested. That would have been FREE!
ReplyDeleteInstead, Sabine suggested that they take it to court and they lost. Then they appealed at his suggestion, and the Court of Appeals refused to entertain the case. Citizens lost many times over since Sabine got paid for the case that was lost, and he charged us again for an appeal that was not even considered. In the end the case cost of over $100,000, and the City had to release the records anyway.
How can an attorney be so repeatedly off base, and how can citizens continue to be charged for these terrible decisions? The only answer is that most citizens don't know. However, more and more are taking notice.
Fire this clown.
ReplyDeleteYep. Bet most residents don't realize every time we go to court, Sabine makes extra money.
ReplyDeleteSo obvious he plays one council member off another, then snarkily chuckles behind their backs. Really slick to not to show obvious disdain and let on how dumb he thinks they are. I think Barth is on to him, surprised he is still employed.
ReplyDeleteSabine needs to go. His poor track record, his condescending attitude and back room antics show that he is not efficient or professional. He is typical of the blood suckers that are only concerned about lining their own pockets at the public expense.
ReplyDeleteI expect for Gus to go to Teresa and tell her that he needs Glenn in order for Gus to do his job-- just like he needed a communication expert to do his job.
DeleteWhy does Gus need more staff to do his job? When he says this, I take it that he is unable to work within his budget or use the hundreds of staff members already on the payroll.
Instead of hiring more people, why doesn't he go out into the parking lot and grab some of his employees who are in their vehicles drinking Starbucks and talking on the phone? I have seen this at many different times of the day.
Depends. Depends. Someone better be wearing them come wednesday night.
DeleteGus is a product of Sacramento - the where's Waldo syndrome. The more "high" officials around him that can take the calls while insulating him from any public contact helps insure his continued employment.
DeleteBring your thoughts to this weeks City Council meeting (Oct.23). Item 8 is regarding Glenn Sabine. If you have something to say, this is the time, as it has never been an agenda item before. I will be saying my 2 cents.
ReplyDelete