Wednesday, December 4, 2013

Bank-robbing returns to Encinitas

It's been almost three years since frustrated home-seller John Leendert Oskam was identified as the Drywaller Bandit. Yesterday, bank robbery returned to Encinitas. Someone robbed the El Camino Citibank:
A man wearing a white baseball cap robbed a Citibank in Encinitas on Tuesday, authorities said. The robbery was reported at 12:30 p.m. at the bank on North El Camino Real near Encinitas Boulevard. The thief approached a teller and lifted his shirt, showing a handgun tucked in his waistband, FBI Special Agent Darrell Foxworth said.

209 comments:

  1. Legalized bank robbing of your bank account is coming to the world via IMF stealing of your funds. Use caution.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Probably needed money to go bar hopping tonight.

    ReplyDelete
  3. IMF proposes 60% tax rate for high earners. Plus 10-60 % confiscation of monies in your bank account.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Wow, I thought Gus would be in the first post. Still impressed at an IMF mention.

    From Wikipedia: "Conspiracy theorists generally speculate that the New World Order is being implemented gradually, citing the formation of the U.S. Federal Reserve System in 1913; the League of Nations in 1919; the International Monetary Fund in 1944; the United Nations in 1945; the World Bank in 1945; the World Health Organization in 1948; the European Union and the euro currency in 1993; the World Trade Organization in 1998; the African Union in 2002; and the Union of South American Nations in 2008 as major milestones.[6]"

    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304355104579232480552517224

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They should be robbing Gus' bank account and his spiked pension fund.

      Delete
  5. More perspective:

    http://www.theguardian.com/business/economics-blog/2013/nov/05/moral-case-wealth-tax

    ReplyDelete
  6. Lisa Shaffer is suggesting that we need to start charging for parking?? I knew this was coming.

    ReplyDelete
  7. when did shaffer suggest charging for parking? please cite sources

    ReplyDelete
  8. At Wednesday night's Part II Transit Workshop as part of the ongoing Strategic Planning process, that will likely go right up to next year's election, Lisa Shaffer "called out" Public Works Director Glenn Purim, who had praised Encinitas for having free parking, saying, "Many cities don't; we're fortunate we do."

    Shaffer, in her preliminary questions, asked, "says who?" Who says free parking is a good thing?" One of the later public speakers complained that Encinitas was still too "carcentric," and stated paid parking could help fund more bicycle lanes. His implication was to create more obstructions, for motorists, to discourage driving of motorized vehicles, and use public transit, or walk or bicycle instead. Worthy goals, but I wonder how we could have all got to the meeting, without our cars? I wonder how often Lisa et al us public transit, such as buses? I know they're not riding their bicycles in the dark!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. The streets are to car centric and you can ride your bike in the dark. You drive your car in the dark. And Lynn's mind wonders in the dark. Good Idea to pay for beach parking like the state does, lets have the tourists pay for the cost of our high price optional lifeguard service, or lets get rid of them and have state lifeguards like Carlsbad. We could save major money be entirely cutting lifeguard service. They don't really do anything or have any positive impacts. Show me where Carlsbad has higher ocean fatalities than Encinitas. Lifeguards are like Border Patrol - they both have no positive gain on anything substantial. All they real do is hand out band-aids and make un-necessary water contacts that could be done by a friend or family member.

      If the City likes their bay watch babies, implement paid beach parking; otherwise I say cut the fat.

      Delete
    2. Shaffer is a hihg density socialist who must be run out of office. She has been teh developers best friend, she supported the PRop A ballot lies, now she wants to restrict our freedom of movement by doing away with free parking while at the same time taxing residents thru paid parking to fund the public unions who worked to elect her.............see how it works.

      Shaffer must be defeated, tell your friends and neighbors. Our community character is a small town with small town amenities like free parking- Shaffer the socialists wants to tax you more by raising parking fees while reducing your personalf reedom of mvoment and your personal choice of vehicle.

      Delete
    3. Can you be a high density socialist and the developers best friend. alternately, can you be a low density socialist. And can you vote Shaffer out when she still has 3 years left. Just askin....

      Delete
    4. yes, Shaffer is for social engineer, she is on record stating that, she believes it is the government's job to provide housing.

      Shaffer is also the developers best friend. She signed her name to the Porp A ballot untruth that no upzoning happened without a vote of the people AND she actively campaigned against Prop A in support of the developers over the citizens.

      Please correct me where I am wrong- just askin....

      Delete
  9. Pruim said how terribly expensive it is to completely restructure the roads, rather than just applying a slurry seal. He said it was extremely impactful, and closed down the roads, for city workers or contractors to do major repairs.

    Think what would happen with construction of four one-lane roundabouts. Traffic would be obstructed for at least a year! We should not have a total of eight roundabouts through Leucadia, and only one anywhere else in Encinitas. That is not a balanced model for "Complete Streets."

    Shaffer also asked if the City had ways to trigger signals for bicyclists. The answer was yes, that is being investigated and implemented? Not brought up was that Oceanside has developed a way to meter the number of bicyclists using the roadways. That is somehting that our City could and should implement to avoid more expensive boondoggles.

    The tracks have been built up at El Portal. If there were ever an underpass there, that would be terribly expensive. Any roundabout would end up having a traffic lights, as well, triggered by pedestrians and bicyclists. Rather, there should be an at grade crossing at Marcheta and 101. That's where people cross daily, now. They use the crosswalk at the stop sign to cross the highway, which is more dangerous than crossing the tracks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Glenn Pruim began with a joke about the importance of infrastructure because although there were no workers present; as they had packed up for the night, there was a HUGE traffic jam on Encinitas Blvd, going east, as two lanes funneled into one, and the same logjam turning right from the Blvd. onto Balour, to get to the Community Center. It was stop and go, just as it would be with lane elimination on Highway 101, a "road diet," both northbound and southbound on a primary arterial is insane. Gated communities have speed limits of 20 MPH.

      Four one-lane roundabouts would funnel us down to one lane in each direction on Historic State Hwy 101, at 15 MPH. Absurd!

      Pruim also discussed Arterials, Collector Streets and residential streets. He was talking about the success of the roundabout at Santa Fe, classified as a collector street, as is Birmingham. The person sitting next to me said he almost struck someone on his way to the meeting, in the roundabout; a pedestrian wearing dark clothing. He said he didn't see him, but fortunately the walker stopped, in the nick of time, and a tragedy was averted.

      Shaffer quipped, are those road classifications city definitions or are they given to us by some outside authority? Can we change the classifications? Pruim said, "It's legal, but it involves a `process'."

      Right, like the PROCESS the City avoided and lied about re getting a mandatory LCP amendment and CDP, completing environmental and design review BEFORE a lane for motorists was eliminated, contrary to Coastal Act Law, on N101. The City thinks it can just "get together" with SD CCC staff, and thereby avoid abiding by State Law or our own General Plan.

      Piecemeal development has repeatedly been found to be illegal. Lane elimination is part of a bigger project. It seems teacher Lisa Shaffer thinks it's okay to cheat. And she's surrounded by teacher's pets that smile obsequiously and say, go ahead, Ma'am.

      I wanted to ask Brian Grover and Carris how many bicyclists are from Encinitas in the fairly new bike & ped committee, formed just before they went to the Traffic Commission last year, asking for Sharrows, which are good, but scary, going southbound on 101 through Leucadia.

      Delete
    2. Bike lanes are good. Sharrows don't really do much but help educate drivers that bicyclist have equal rights to the roads.

      Motor heads like you need to wake up and take responsibility for your health and get out and bike or something, so you don't become even more obese and more of a burden on society.

      Delete
    3. Instead of resorting to low blow comments about obesity, why don't you counter Lynn's comments? Be specific about what she says you don't agree with, and why.

      Hint: you'll have a better chance of not embarrassing yourself that way. Unless, of course, you have no cogent arguments. Then it's better not to say anything at all.

      Delete
    4. I recommend watching the video of the meeting first, not really a cogent presentation of what was discussed so far...

      Delete
    5. See?? She can learn. I told her to place post it notes on her computer screen to make sure she vilifies roundabouts in every posting, and she has. Well done.
      PS- the pedestrian in a roundabout had the right of way, your friend broke the law.

      Delete
    6. 1:19

      Two lanes do not funnel into one eastbound lane anywhere on Encinitas Blvd. Where do you get that? The Encinitas and Leucadia / ECR intersections have over twice the traffic any intersection of 101 has. That's apples and oranges. I'll bet Encinitas Blvd carries many more cars per day than 101. But I'll get back to you on that one. ECR serves easily twice as many cars as 101 (Well, maybe not easily!)

      What's scarier? A 40 mph road with no bike lanes or a 35 mph one with plenty of paint and signage? I know your argument: "It needs to be on the RR property". I agree, but that still doesn't answer the question.

      4 roundabouts are not planned to be simultaneously built in the same year on 101. Not even three. But phase 1 (or piecemeal 1 if you prefer) addresses El Portal, the removal of signs at Marcheta and the La Costa roundabout. The other two come much later.

      "Four one-lane roundabouts would funnel us down to one lane in each direction on Historic State Hwy 101, at 15 MPH. Absurd!"

      Five one lane roundabouts funnel (from previously 5 lanes) into one lane each direction in Birdrock on historic state hwy 101. Beneficial!

      Yes, pedestrians dressed in black at night are not only a problem for vision challenged drivers at roundabouts, but more so at intersections. At roundabouts pedestrians pay more attention observing traffic and need cross only one lane at a time instead of 4 lanes. Turns out, crossing one lane of traffic saves more lives than having to cross two or more times that distance.

      Our roundabouts won't need traffic lights. That's only for extremely busy ones with busy cross streets, 101 currently runs at half the capacity it's designed for.But there will always be congestion on 101 at certain times of the day and certain times of the year. But at least it moves along well compared to the messes north of us where it's stop an go for miles and robs a lot of time and gas.

      Delete
    7. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    8. Four one-lane roundabouts will force northbound and southbound traffic on 101 into one lane in each direction, and reducing speed to 15 MPH.

      I only brought up the r word (roundabouts) because they were part of the Transit discussion addressed by Director of Public Works, Glenn Pruim. I won't be debating them further, on this thread, except to say if a roundabout were ever to be constructed at El Portal and 101, and an underpass for pedestrians and bicyclists, a traffic light WOULD BE installed, just as one had to be at the underpass near Swami's.

      Delete
    9. 4:54

      Again, the hwy crosswalk at Swami's and the roundabout at El Portal are two different animals.

      Swami's:
      * 50 mph southbound traffic
      * 30 mph northbound traffic.
      * 4 widths of contiguous car lanes pedestrians must cross with no island in between.

      El Portal
      * 15 mph periodic traffic in all directions
      * 1 car lane width of asphalt to cross.

      Hundreds of people currently cross 4 lanes of hwy daily at unmarked crosswalks on N 101 going to and from 10 bus stops, or parking a vehicle on the east side of 101. The sober ones wait for breaks in traffic that's going 35 mph. Even at that speed it's not difficult. But its 4 times safer to cross one lane of periodic traffic with a limit of 15 mph.

      Largely at fault for why so many pedestrians are killed at intersections each year, is the fact that they rely on a green light meaning it's safe to cross the street. That's not always the case. At roundabouts, both drivers and pedestrians pay more attention to their surroundings. The slower speed limit naturally helps do that. And thats probably why no pedestrians died last year in any of our thousands of U.S. roundabouts. I like that number.

      It's to be expected some will fear innovative infrastructural change in a community and will grasp at straws for reasons not to incorporate it. Even the U.S. Dept. of Transportation says on their website that communities that hated the idea before roundabouts were installed ended up prefering them after they were built.

      Only if the hwy at El Portal remained 4 lanes would it require a light if an RR underpass were installed.

      Delete
    10. There has been lane elimination on 101 near Swamis as well. So contrary to your incorrect assertions, there are NOT "4 widths of contiguous car lanes." Also, the speed limit may have been reduced, or will be, as the average MPH goes down, due to the traffic signal now installed, there. And state law allows public agencies to ROUND DOWN, now, hence the speed limit has been reduced to 35 MPH, already, on N101.

      When was the last time a pedestrian was killed at an intersection on N101? That is what we should be looking at here, NOT irrelevant nationwide statistics. As I keep reminding you, the traffic studies that were on the Agenda Report for the 7/18/12 CC Meeting, showed that all of the intersections where r****s are proposed, had LESS than average number of collisions of ANY type compared to similar intersections, statewide, for the three preceding years, as measured, analyzed and reported through the State and the City.

      Wherever there are more underpasses, and likely if there are at grade crossings over the RR tracks, at those intersections, traffic lights will be installed. You are merely speculating when you suggest that only if 101 at El Portal were to remain four lanes would a traffic light be installed. WRONG, and you base that only on your own wishful thinking. 101 near Swami's adjacent to the underpass is ONLY THREE LANES, NOW, AND IT HAS A TRAFFIC SIGNAL.

      Delete
    11. "There has been lane elimination on 101 near Swamis as well."

      Lane elimination and speed reduction on an historic hwy in downtown Encinitas? Are they crazy?

      If anyone's wishing, it's you to convice people roundabouts here on 101 will require signals. Just who told you that?

      Delete
    12. The southern lane elimination is in Cardiff, not downtown Encinitas.

      Please don't twist my words. I said that if there is an underpass built at El Portal, or even an at grade crossing, there would almost certainly be a traffic signal there, with or without a roundabout, to allow for safe pedestrian and bicyclist crossing, as on 101 near Swami's. Since you are so fond of looking at national statistics, you can easily see that traffic signals are added to many roundabouts when traffic has failed to be "calmed" by roundabouts without lights. A good example, fairly nearby, is in Tijuana.

      The problem remains, when the "main throughfare" has much more traffic than the cross street (thee way intersections, which four of the proposed roundabouts would have, due to the tracks, have NO cross streets) are problematic because drivers on the heavily trafficked main roadway too often FAIL TO YIELD. Drivers from west of 101 would be foolish to just blithely enter the intersection, without waiting to see if the through traffic would stop, and yield. Think about it!

      Your "best case scenario" of drivers not being required to stop does not hold true when traffic is backed up, stop and go, during peak periods, as it was backed up Wednesday night on Encinitas Blvd., as two lanes eastbound filtered down to one.

      I also said an at grade crossing would be less expensive, and more practical, at Marcheta and 101, where pedestrians could use the crosswalk, which is already there, as they already do, when crossing the tracks, then the highway.

      The underpass near Swami's, although it has a traffic signal, isn't in downtown Encinitas, nor has 101 in downtown Encinitas been officially designated as Historic State Highway 101, as 101 through Leucadia has been, with the help of Sheila :)

      Ok, that's it for this thread. No more debating with someone who has his mind closed to the facts of OUR SPECIFIC SCENARIO, HERE, ON 101 THROUGH LEUCADIA.

      Delete
    13. I meant three-way intersections ;)

      Delete
    14. "The southern lane elimination is in Cardiff, not downtown Encinitas."

      The southern lane elimination begins north of Swami's which is the south end of downtown Encinitas. Besides, when 101 narrows to only 2 lanes through Cardiff, it doesn't change being our designated historic hwy 101,

      "...nor has 101 in downtown Encinitas been officially designated as Historic State Highway 101, as 101 through Leucadia has been, with the help of Sheila :)"

      That's not so. The entire length of 101 throughout California was designated the historic 101 route in September of 1998, and signage for such appears in downtown Encinitas, Leucadia and Cardiff as well. (Hence the similar names for our mainstreet associations).

      And to be a little more accurate. Sheila is mainly responsible for the new name of First St. (and the rest of 101 here) being called "Coast Hwy 101" (North and South ascending from Encinitas Blvd, extending to the borders of Carlsbad and Solana Beach). Surveys were taken: options for a new name unifying our entire 6 mile stretch of hwy were presented to the public, but none of those were chosen. Instead Sheila at a council meeting suggested "Coast Hwy 101" which was her own idea, It was voted on by the council and approved. It was a great choice. I was responsible for the resurrection of the classic 101 shield in 1997; Solana Beach liked the idea, and when Jack Quick of Rhino Art had his store there, he helped make their version of the 101 sheild and put them up on light standards. John Daley (owner of the 101 Cafe in O'side) then was responsible for taking his 101 shield design to the state when they adopted 101 as an historic route throughout everywhere else it still exists in all California; John and I received the "Crusing the Coast Award" from the Save Our Heritage Association in San Diego in 1997. Sheila, Peder Norby and Logan Jenkins were strong supporters / promoters all along as well. Thanks again, btw!

      "A good example (of roundabouts needing stop lights) fairly nearby, is in Tijuana."

      The traffic generated at roundabouts in Tijuana is the last place to draw a comparison to either Leucadia's traffic or tourism. Their roundabouts that require lights have FOUR lanes. They also intersect with very long cross streets. Tijuana's roundabouts are only a good example of showing why you're wrong about the need for light signals at Leucadia's roundabouts.

      Don't know how I was twisting your words. All I said was that lights are not needed at roundabouts with the amount of traffic 101 is designed for. And that includes any ped crossings because peds only have to cross one lane of 15 mph traffic. Swami's couldn't do without a light because peds would have to cross 3 contiguous lanes of traffic with no islands in between. Maybe you can't understand the difference? That's ok.

      Delete
  10. as always, lynn's thoughts and comments are clueless. If the man in the roundabout almost ran over someone in the roundabout, maybe he should wake up and pay attention before driving before he kills someone. What a danger to society. If you can not safety drive through a roundabout, you should not be driving.

    The rest of lynn's garbage is not worth commenting on. I support Lisa Shaffer even more, now that I know Lynn doesn't agree with her.

    Boo Lynn….Yeah Lisa! Keep up the good work teacher!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. you mean the unethical Lisa Shaffer who has failed to stand up for residents and instead has been the developers and public unions best friend? Shaffer will be run out of office on a rail in 2016 and if she runs for mayor she will lose in a landslide. No body, no body, will work to get Shaffer elected. She is known to me me as a self seeking selfish fraud.

      Delete
    2. I think the special interests, public unions, faux environmentalists, pro-density attorney's, faux environmental attorney's, developers, and DNC will all work to get Shaffer re-elected as she will likley do their bidding by increasing density, increasing city employee wages and increasing city employee pensions. If it means isntalling parking meters to take more of our money to pay the pension so be it.

      I suspect that average citizen who stood in front of stores and walked neighborhoods and held open houses for her will not support her. Interesting that she apparently has turned her back on the very people she claimed she wanted to represent.

      Delete
    3. 5:07 is one of the obsequious teacher's pets. The pedestrian in the cross-walk was wearing dark clothing, and was not visible in the dark. It was not the driver's fault that he could not see him.

      The narrow diameter one-lane roundabouts have LESS safety features. The grading at Santa Fe causes additional visibility issues for many motorists, decreasing the safety, there.

      Delete
    4. So goths beware. If they're injured or die in an Encinitas roundabout it's their fault? No. Pedestrians in CA have the right of way. And trust me. When one is hit (barring suicide) it's the drivers fault, no matter how impaired his vision is. But the good news is not one pedestrian died in any of the thousands of U.S. Roundabouts last year, and topping that off, studies show suicidal people refuse to kill themselves with vehicles going only 15 mph. Well, my studies anyway.

      It's a lot safer for walkers to cross Santa Fe now with only one lane to cross at a slower speed, than it was to cross two lanes of traffic at a higher speed. The slight grading at Santa Fe does not inhibit safety at all.

      Delete
  11. City worker up early posting.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Not a city worker, someone who works.

    Someone who doesn't have time to write garbage at 1am

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guess 5:07 is your preferred garbage hour.

      Delete
  13. Word has it that Shaffer is a secret member of the IMF Board of Directors. Her great grandfather was a founding member of the New World Order, and her allegiance to worldwide domination is steeped in blood. You know it's true because they're not denying it! Beware your bank accounts - she's after them!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I knew it, why? She arrived in town in a Nato helicopter...

      Delete
    2. Yea and it had wings and everything. And, I think it was a Black Hawk!

      Delete
  14. Shaffer supported the anarchist globalist movement called Occupy. The Occupy movement destroyed private property, shut down private business and intimitated citizens. In the Occupy New York tent city there were rapes of women- (talk about a war on woman) (The movie Occupy unmasked is interesting)

    Shaffer supported this globalist occupy movement- you can google her last name and Occupy San Diego.

    The Ocupy movement has it's roots in part based in Chicago and one of it's biggest supporters is the American Terrorist Bill Ayers who as part of the communist movment called the weather underground in the 60's blew up buildings. You can fact check this by googling Bill Ayers Occupy movement.
    The Occupy movement is about a one world government run by Government elites and organizations like the UN and the IMF. You can see the pro's and con's of the UN Agenda 21 and it's hoped for impact on destroying our local community characther and our local control of governance by googling it.

    At a local level it seems to me the seemingly unethical Lisa Shaffer put her name to a ballot statement falsheood on Prop A because possibly telling an untruth fit her high density objective- like saying "If you like your health plan you can keep your health plan" while all the time knowing the plans would be cancelled.

    Supporting Shaffer in the Prop A falsehood to promote high density was a group out of Chicago. Bill Ayers is from Chicago, the Occupy movement has it's roots in Chicago. Chicago is a failed bankrupt state today. Again facts not in disupute. Why is Chicago involved with Encinitas politics?

    I don't know if Shaffer is after our bank accounts but it looks to me like she is after our quality of life and our money while promoting a less transparent government. By opposing A she promotes high density that reduces quality of life and local control and suggesting imposing paid parking on citizens most liklely as a way to fund bloated pensions of public employees. To this end I uunderstand that Shaffer gets 4 publicly funded pensions paid for on the backs of taxpayers, like Muir's 170,000 a year and Barth's pension. Given the taking of private citizens income to pay pensions is it any wonder "Phony Tony" Kranz has sided with developers and against residents? It looks to me like 'Phony Tony' wants the backing of the high density crowd of special interests to endorse him in the next election because 'Phony Tony' would then qualify for a pension. 'Deep local roots'....to developers that is.

    These are the facts 9:15. You may support the desrtuction of private property and the intimidation of citizens that the Occupy movment brings but the rest of us don't have to. You might support telling untruths on ballot statements but the rest of us don't have to.

    By the way, any facts to share 9:15 or only 'phony' posts to distract from what's really going on?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The only "fact" I have is it's really easy to get you riled up. As for the latter, both your and my posts are phony - very phony! The only difference is I'm admitting it..........

      Delete
    2. 10:37

      Fact- Shaffer supported occupy san diego
      Fact- Occupy movement resulted in violence towards woman and destruction of private property- see Occupy Unmasked.
      Fact- Shaffer signed her name to a ballot statement that incldued falshoods such as no upzoning has happened without a vote of the people.
      Fact- Groups from Chicago donated money to support the ballot statement.
      Fact-UN Agenda 21 is a globalist agenda that promotes hihg density and reduces local control of governance.
      Fact- Shaffer, Muir, Barth get publicly funded pensions
      Fact-'Phony Tony' supported developers on Prop A and Desert Rose over the residents who helped elect him.

      Thanks for admitting your posts are 'phony' mine are factual.

      Delete
    3. It's great that Alex Jones has joined the conversation. I think that 10:02 could use a session with Dr. Lorri.
      The Cabezon

      Delete
    4. Don't forget to buy Gold!

      Delete
    5. Question: Where is Shaffer's pension from? Which groups from Chicago, Children for Bozo the clown?

      Delete
    6. Fact, Lisa Shaffer worked at noted anarchist organization SAIC (sarcasm)

      Fact, Lisa Shaffer worked at noted anarcho/socialist/enviro whack job Scripps Institute (more sarcasm)

      Fact, Lisa Shaffer won the most votes in the election

      Fact, UN Agenda 21 is written on Shaffer's palm, and the outerspace ships beam it's directives straight to her brain (Sarcasm)

      Fact, Lisa Shaffer can be voted out in 3 years, it's called a democracy.

      Fact, the occupy hippies are no longer in the park, and guess what, there are bad people who do bad things every day, in business, finance, garbage collection, you name it.

      Fact, Bill Ayers is not coming to town any time soon. A lot of former 60's radicals, including some right wing talk show hosts are former 60's radicals, get over it (Even Lyndon "Secret Racist" Larouche started as a 60's radical.

      Fact, there will be more discussion about roundabouts, pensions, the IMF, Agenda 21 and more on this blog.

      Shop locally everyone!

      Delete
    7. I don't think Shaffer ever worked for Bozo the Clown, at least not until she started working for Vina.

      Delete
    8. And it's unlikely that Ayers or anyone of his group will be in Encinitas anytime soon. As a 60's radical, who knew some of these people, I think you all may be overreacting just a bit. Just my perspective, as even though my dear brother said to post anonymously, I just can't seem to do it:) But, I will offer psych. evaluations for anyone that really thinks most of this is true, except the Bozo part.

      Delete
    9. Thanks Dr. Lorri, I'm glad someone gets it. Let's concentrate on our town, we've got plenty of issues to cover locally.

      Delete
    10. Hi Dr. Lori there is news out today that President Obama bsed his common core education takeover on the model he used in chicagiw tih Bill Ayers while they were on the anneberg foundation which gave $1vmillion to fund commore core backing candidate. Od course we all know chicago schools today not only are failing to educate children but the city is so taken over by crime that students need to be escorted to school by cops. common core is today being taught in encinitas and president obama's education secretary recently blamec criticism of common core on "white soccer moms", you know that old divide by race chicago style thing. guess Ayers is coming to encinitas after all.

      Delete
  15. Do you have any facts Cabezon? Cabezon can mock, can attack, can name call, but can't argue the facts. UN Agenda 21 is real, it may or may not be important depending on your perspetive, if you are for reduced freedom, liberty and local control then you migt support it, but it is not made up.

    Shaffer did support the Occupy Movement, the Occupy Movement did rape woman in NYC and did destory private property in San Diego- any comment Cabezon- crickets? Shaffer did put her name to the ballot falsehood that upzoning has never happened without a vote of the people...........any factual rebuttal to disprove these truths Cabezon or do you offer on innuendo's?

    Shaffer is who is she is, for the most part I see her as a self rightous arrogant sanctimonius elitist, Barth also has turned out to be a failure as pensions go unchecked and more debt and obligations have been heaped on Encinitas taxpayers via Vina's cabinet and the the PR spin propagandist he hired.

    "Phony Tony" and his deep local roots does look like a 'phony' after all he signed his name to the ballot statement untruth. Muir is a pension hog getting $170,000 a year. Do you have any facts Cabezon?

    Lastly, Bill Ayers is from Chicago and did try to blow up buildings, he is a supporter of Occupy and all that goes with it, he did study under Saul Alinksy- again, any rebuttal facts Cabezon-

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, Agenda 21 is real, but some of us would say your misrepresenting its intent and the degree to which local politicians embrace said intent..

      See, you would want to draw that direct line of causality between Agenda 21 and local actions and policies, that would prove your point.

      Otherwise, you're just whistling past the graveyard. In plain English, prove it....;


      http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf

      http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/onearth/2013/03/agenda_21_no_the_government_isn_t_going_to_confiscate_your_property.html

      Delete
    2. Thank you for posting the propaganda of the globalist. The truth is Encinitas currently uses taxpayer money to pay a group called ICLIE which is globalist group who's charter is to control local governments, which takes power out of the hands of local residents. Their website is www.ICLEI.org Why are we givign them money when we can't afford to fix our roads or maintain our parks? You might support this, I don't.

      This might explain why a group from Chicago was one of the largest spenders to defeat PROP A. They opposed laws that would gives Encinitas residents local control.

      The interested might also google Corte Madera that exited the unelected regional governing body called ABAG in the San Francisco Bay Area because ABAG was attempting to force high density housing on local residents. Unlike Encinitas the elected representatives in Corte Madera stood up for taxpayers...........In Encinitas Shaffer, Barth, and 'Phony Tony' Muir/Gaspar all stood with the group from Chicago. We might not like these facts but we should not ignore them.

      Interested parties might also google and research regionalism and "Building One America" BOA is founded by prominent Chicago community organizers wearing fancy suits and earning millions like Michael Kruglick-they have infiltrated Washington DC and ahve a lobbying arm as well. They are promoting regionalism and mega-cities I call them slums) taht takes away local control. They also seek to use the leverage of federal funds to take away local control for city councils- like SANDAG forcing density on Encinitas, Shaffer is a SANDAG member I believe. Yet again another tie to Chicago Buiding One America and Encinitas, Chicago and Prop A.

      Thank you for providing me the opportunity to prove my point. Do you have any comment on Shaffer supporting the Occupy Movement? Do you support Occupy raping woman in NYC and destroying private property?- I don't.

      Delete
    3. Totally amazing group of ridiculous conspiracy nonsense. What are you all smoking, inhaling, or eating, and can I have some?

      Delete
    4. 1:11 facts, do you have any? The facts posted by 12:42 are all true, I gooogled them. Perhaps you should as well.

      Delete
    5. So Googling makes it true. That's just sad.

      Delete
    6. 12:12, Therefore, by your impecable logic, Lisa Shaffer is now a rape supporter? The occuppy movement was about exposing the bankster culture as the thieves they are. Perhaps you should go back to your ALEC sponsers for some better training on how to change peoples minds with ideas instead of fear.
      The Cabezon

      Delete
    7. What makes it treu is there is a www.ICLEI.org website and it global. There also is a UN Agenda 21 that promotes the ideology of ICLEI. Encinitas taxpayer money is paid to ICLEI. There is a Building One America out of Chicago. There is a group from Chicago that paid lots of money to defeat the local control of Prop A. Corte Madera did pull out of ABAG. ABAG is also an ICLEI member. The occupy movement did destroy private property and woman were raped in the occupy park in NYC. Because you choose to ignore the facts does not mean the ret of us should.

      Delete
    8. Cabezon- it is you who apparently fears the truth. Shaffer supported the Occupy movement. The Occupy movement destroyed private property and woman were raped during Occupy NYC. These are facts. Each of us can make of the facts what we will. I don't support the destruction of private property or rape. I don't support Occupy. According to online information Shaffer does support Occupy. It is what it is.

      The Occupy movement is about global dominance and the destruction of the American Consitution and culture through the use of power, fear and intimidation. Occupy does not care about liberty, freedom or family- it cares about Power and fear. In Oakland Occupy burned, looted and destroyed private property , shutting down roads, looting stores and in some instances physically intimidating residents who simply wanted to go to work and live their lives............ because you might support this behavior does not mean the rest of us should.

      In NYC residents who simply wanted to go to work were prevented from working by thugs who shut down their stores and destroyed their business-. It is ok if you want to stand with these intolerant thugs, I don't.

      It is interesting Cabezon that just yesterday you mocked citizens you called 'teabaggers' while today you are apparently stand on the side of rapists and anarchists who steal, loot and pillage.

      It is interesting that no one has been raped at a teaparty rally but they were during occupy. Interesting that no private property has been destroyed during a tea party rally but there was destruction during occupy. In fact if memory serves me right at Teaparty rallies those 'teabaggers' pick up after themselves leaving the parks cleaner then when they arrived, yet during occupy human feces were all about our parks and in some cases bio-hazard teams were sent into place like Zucati park to clean up the mess left by the Occupy thugs.

      It is ok if you want to stand with those Occupy people Cabezon, but don't expect the rest of us to stand there with you.

      Delete
    9. How is the taxpayer money paid to ICLEI from our town? Post the facts, or shut the hell up. Trying to equate Shaffer with Rape is bush league, fear mongering garbage, the lowest form of dialogue. Have people either directly or indirectly associate with Occupy done some bad things, yes. The same goes for the Democratic party, the REpublican party, The Tea Party, the Catholic Church, the Lutheran Church, The Red Cross. Do I make my point? Bad people do bad things in organizations, and tarnish everyone else. We get it.

      Stick to Lisa's actions that affect our city, Prop A. will do nicely.

      Her supporting or not supporting Occupy doesn't affect Encinitas. Let's have what party, movement, line of thought you subscribe to, so the rest of us can pick it apart and accuse you of some related crimes.

      Otherwise, quit trolling and go take a nap.

      Delete
    10. 2:21. I prefer the term "Anarcho/Socialist/Oneworldgovernmentalist". Again, leave the rape out of it, that's not something to trivialize or use in this instance. We have a real issue with men in our society thinking that rape is ok. Trying to paint a movement as you as rapists is really irresponsible...

      Delete
    11. 3:44 Sharing with the public that rapes occured at occupy camps is responsible, ignoring them is irresponsible. Are you ignoring the rapes at the Occupy camps by making the statement 'men in our society?" I am not referring to men in our society but rapists in Occupy Camps. Are you not guilty of the broad generalization you claim to oppose by claiming that 'men in our society' while ignoring the millions and millions of men who don't think it a ok?

      It seems irrresponsible not to inform citizens that rapes were reported at Occupy camps, yet many news outlest failed to report them. Why? Is it worth reporting that there have been no reported rapes at Tea Party rallies?

      These are simply facts, we should not be afraid of them or seek to hide them. It seems to me you are the one trivializing the Occupy rapes, not I. I don't support Occupy, I don't support the destruction of private property and I don't support rape.

      Delete
    12. Dump Cabezon.

      Delete
    13. Horse pucky, conspiratarialist. Rapes happen everywhere, not just Occupy camps. You're trying to imply tacit acceptance of rapes within the occupy movement, and by connection, Lisa Shaffer.

      It's totally wrong. You're pulling out cards that shouldn't be in play in this discussion. Rape is bad, always, end of discussion. Can you prove that the Occupy Movement endorses or allows rape? I would find that highly unlikely.

      Go somewhere else with that kind of unfounded commentary. It's just dead wrong. Lisa Shaffer is for neither destruction of property nor rape. Any attempt to bring that in to this discussion of city politics is ignorant, disgusting, and deplorable...

      Delete
    14. 'deplorable' what is deplorable is supporting occupy, a movement that promotes violence and the destruction of private and public property.The post was not that rape happens everywhere but that it happened at the occupy camp. I don't know all of the things Shaffer may or may not support. I do know she supports the occupy movement.

      That occupy destroyed private and public property and there reported rapes at the NYC occupy camp is not unfounded commentart they are facts. Woman were raped in occupy camps and occupy prevented police from entering the camps. Occupy destroyed private and public property. In Oakland occupy destroyed millions of dollars of public and private property. In NYC occupy caused millions of dollars of damge..........if occupy caused it then occupy must endorse it.

      Shaffer is free to support whatever she would like. She supported Occupy.

      Delete
    15. Garbage, it's a movement that can happen because of the freedom we have in our country. Same goes for the Tea Party. Prosecute all lawbreakers in connection with the movement, whether property, rape or other. You can't lay the crimes of the individual onto a whole movement. If that was the case, I'd have to accuse you of being guilty of being a plagiarizer, just because Rand Paul is.

      The info that Lisa supported Occupy was out there before the election, get over it. The tit for tat Fox News style commentary gets old. Judge her on what she has or hasn't done in office.. JEeez....

      Delete
    16. I should say, if people break the law, prosecute them if found guilty, whether occupy, tea party, or party out of bounds.

      Delete
    17. ah, 9:14 what exactly is garbage? the post was Shaffer is free to support what she wants and she supports Occupy. Jeez

      Delete
  16. 12:14-

    As a Shaffer supporter please help me understand why Shaffer signed her name to the Prop A ballot statement untruth that no upzoning has happened without a vote of the people? I see this as a lie, I don't understand why Shaffer put her name to it?. I don't think I can support a person who doesn't tell the truth or doesn't do their homework to understand the issues, can you explain?

    Also, why did Shaffer agree to hire Vina's 4 cabinet memebrs at more than $150,000 a year and the communiations director for about $100,000. That is about $800,000 dollars plus more pension debt. I voted for Shaffer because I thought she was going to reduce pension and cut fat at city hall, instead she has increased the fat and increased our debt.

    I also thought Shaffer was for protecting out community characther but now she wants to push all this high density housing by rezoning the town and now adding parking meters?

    Please help me understand where I am wrong, I get that you support Shaffer and she seems nice enough, but haven't her policies led to increased debt, failing roads and bad leadership?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I didn't vote fort Shaffer but I am curious about all of the vitriolic comments about her. I thought most of the people on this blog supported her and voted for her. I agree about the Prop. A situation. I also wonder if someone could enlighten me as to who the 4 new Cabinet members are? I know we have a Communications Director, whatever that is, but I am unaware of 3 others. Parking meters, NO! And I am also getting a wee bit tired of the sustainable community ideas, as well as some of the other agenda items, when the big stuff is not getting done. Has anyone heard anymore about the Rossini Creek deal? I would really love to know more about that, as I am going to ask Staff next week and would like to be prepared before I go into a meeting. Thanks for any help all of you. As Encinitas is getting to have an older population of people, of which I am one, I am puzzled by the bike riding and walking agenda. I live in Cardiff, and there is no way I could ride a bike up and down our hills at my rip old age of 65. I can fortunately still walk, but I mostly drive my little Beetle around town. In fact, if it doesn't rain Saturday, you can see it in the Holiday Parade dressed as Rudolff the Red Nosed Beetle. We are the 6th entry, but please no egg throwing, as my husband is driving and he isn't as political as I, so it wouldn't be fair to him. Besides we might crash into a child or two. Happy Holidays.

      Delete
    2. Should have said "for" Lisa, not fort". Makes a good case for editing.

      Delete
    3. Dr. Lorri, I'm sure as a therapist, you would agree that the reaction of vitriol against Shaffer from former supporters would be considered called "normal." She pulled a real bait and switch on voters. Add to that her cloak of "ethics" and she becomes unbearable.

      Many former supporters not only won't vote for her again, they plan to actively campaign against her. Nothing to be confused about here.

      Delete
    4. 2:37: I totally agree if that is all that people are saying. I, too, am disappointed with her. However, some of the other stuff is a little over the top to me. If she has connections with Bill Ayres I think I would know, and I know she hasn't, or I think I know she hasn't. Been fooled before. Hopefully won't get fooled again (yes I'm quoting The WHO)

      Delete
    5. The Communications Director is not getting $100k a year, probably about $75k.

      I would urge you to watch video of all the related city meetings, and/or talk to Lisa if you have these questions.

      She has office hours, she's a public official, and believe it or not, I think she would answer your questions...

      Delete
    6. Dr. Lorri, I'm not a mental health professional (not sure what the correct term is), but I can tell you as someone who has worked as a moderator for online forums, people will say just about anything behind the perceived cloak of anonymity, even if they have to log in with the alleged real identity (like Facebook)

      Secondly, there is a real hatred of public officials right now. Some of it is more than justified. I think a lot of people were asleep at the switch for years, and the recession woke them up to had bad some things are. We certainly are not without issues in our town, but by the same token, it's not the City of Bell.

      Thirdly, people are angry because in the back of their minds, they realize they're not going to get a pension in private industry, they won't get to retire from their good job, and they may have to work until they're 75.

      Fourthly, property is worth a ton of money in this town, so any perceived legislation or initiative or movement affecting said property will be noticed. People don't want poor people or poor people housing near them. They don't want things affecting their big asset. I get this, it's important. I have a new development going up right near me, they've been at it for months. It's not a great thing.

      Fifth, the Prop A thing was no win for politicians running for office. If you didn't at least sign the ballot initiative, you would have lost votes. If you opposed it, Jerome gets back in. Sorry, but I still take Lisa and Tony. Let's be honest, those were the stakes. It was going to be Muir, Stocks and Gaspar calling the shots, or what we have now. Personally, I'll take the change. I understand why others are justifiably angry they didn't get what they wanted.

      Finally, people to me like conspiracy theories because it helps them bridge the gap between what they thought the reality would be and what it is. How did Obama get elected, fill in the birther stuff here. Why is my big asset/only asset of my home under attack? ICLEI, Agenda 21 or fill in the blank.

      Things are changing rapidly now, just like the beginning of the 20th century, there's more diversity, more people, more taxes, fewer resources, fewer jobs, you don't get to keep your job 30 years, you have to get new medical coverage. A lot of sucks.

      Still to me, I'd rather try and work together with what I've got. I may not vote for Lisa or Tony next time, and I actively campaigned for both of them. As a voter, I have that right. But until Nov. 6, 2016, I'm coming to them with my city issues and trying to work with them. to get problems solved. Hey, I even went to Christy Guerin back in the day and she helped our neighborhood with graffiti.

      I guess I would say try and stow the polarizing talk for a few months, see what happens. At the same time, keep the eyes open, we do deserve answers on Rossini Creek..

      Personally, I see the complicated way a candidate has to take stands on a wide array of positions, but to a lot of people, it's Prop A all the time.

      Delete
    7. excuses, excuses. It is not conspiracy to say UN Agenda 21 promotes high density housing and controlling freedom of movement- it does. It is not conspiracy to say Shaffer supported Occupy-she does. It is not conspiracy to say Encinitas gives money to the international globlists group called ICLEI- it does. It is not polarizig to say Shaffer, Kranz, Barth, Muir and Gaspar support high density overlays zoning in town-they do. It is not conspiracy to say Shaffer, Barth, Kranz, Muir and Gaspar signed their names to an untrue ballot statement- they did.

      City issues, you mean like why is there no money to fix our roads but there is money to hire a cabinet and a spin doctor? City issues like why did Vina linke Moonlight and teh Hall park to get funding only to later inform us they were not linked and he is not held accountable? City issues like why the gang of 5 allowed Vina to sign a 50K contract with Rutan and Tucker that misrepresented facts like the coastal commission?

      It's not Prop A- it is quality of life, community character, responsible spending- these guys have done none of that.

      Delete
    8. 3:20 the all in comp for the spin doctor is over $100K, not including pension liabilities. Any private business person knows putting someone on the payroll adds a minium 35-40% of salary in additional overhead expenses.

      Delete
    9. Fair enough, I agree with this "Muir and Gaspar support high density overlays zoning in town-they do." I'm ok with that statement. Implying that ICLEI and Agenda 21 are directly behind it is unnecessary and unfounded. It's fair to say you're against them for that reason, to me the rest is at best unconnected, at worst pandering to conspiracy theorists.

      Delete
    10. Ok fine 4:08, state it this way. The comm director is making $75k + 25k in additional compensation if you can benefits and incidentals, not counting potential pension liabilities. But as we all know, when you say you make $75k, you're not saying you make $50k + benefits. Let's drop the spin. We get it, people are saying we don't need the Comm director and that person is overpaid. Message received.

      Delete
    11. Shaffer has stated "we may have to do a high density overlay," too. "May have to"? I guess if you let the development community bend your ear long and hard enough, you come up with anti-resident statements like that.

      Delete
    12. 3:39, it's not that "others are justifiably angry they didn't get what they wanted." Her supporters didn't get what she promised, not just what they "wanted.".

      If Stocks supporters are gloating over her voting record and weekly commentary, you know something's seriously wrong with this picture.

      Delete
    13. 12:14

      Vina's cabinet are the department directors. There have been no extra hires except the communication position. All of the previous department directors have retired or moved on and have been replaced with new hires at the new pension tier.

      Delete
    14. Vina hired 4 new department heads at salaries above $150K each. The city could have had a hiring freeze and internal promotions could have been made, instead our operating costs increased by close to $1million a year with labor and benefit costs.

      Delete
    15. Not quite. He replaced the old with new hires at the same salary or less in some instances and they are all on the new pension tier 2%@60 so how is that a million dollar increase?

      Delete
    16. More fuzzy math 9:12. Some of these replaced people retired like Patrick Murphy! I have not seen the figures for how much he, and Scott Henry, who replaced Mark Muir as Fire Chieg and spiked his pension up will be getting, but it is not just a rotating door. When someone retires we are paying almost double to fill the slot when we pay a pension and an employee for the the same job.

      Delete
  17. Dump Gaspar ,the developers friend 85 percent of her campaign money came from out of the city.They say follow the MONEY

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of Gaspar's 2010 campaign funds, 66.4% came from addresses outside Encinitas.

      Delete
  18. I agree Dump Gaspar, AND dump Shaffer, Barth, Muir and Kranz

    they are all equally failing the citizens of Encinitas, perhaps that is why they all get along so well.

    ReplyDelete
  19. The word on the street Barth,Shafer and Kranz are not running again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kranz will run again because he likes hobnobbing with the big shots. Haven't you seen his new hair and his new clothes. He makes more ow then he ever did at whatever he was doing before. If he goes 2 terms he gets medical for life and other stuff. You may be right about Shafrer and Barth. They both have pensions.

      Delete
    2. Barth could never win again, her career is going to end up like the christmas tree she donated to the Cardiff center.....................up in smoke.

      Delete
    3. Barth's career is down the toilet.

      Delete
    4. I think the joke will be on you in that I think they will all 3 be running again. Barth will run for mayor next year...

      Delete
    5. Barth may run for Mayor but she will be defeated and it will be ugly. She has failed on every level. Pensions are out of control, there is less openess at city halll today not more, she allowed the $400,000 lawsuit on her watch, she told untruths about A, the developers will still go after..............but most important no one, and I mean no that previously supported her grass roots efforts will walk street for her

      ps- didn't Barth say she was only going to serve 2 terms? Another lie I guess

      Delete
    6. Right, and James Bond never ran after he said he wouldn't either. It's politics, that's how it's done, like it or not...

      Delete
    7. 3:59, You may be right, she might be defeated, but she will have the power of incumbency. And not to sound like a broken record, but be careful what you ask for, Less one of Jerome's minions take up the cause, a la Mark Muir, so we end with a council of Muir, Gaspar, Person X (developer backed) controlling the show...

      Delete
    8. Barth Shaffer and Kranz have been no different then Jerome Stocks, they have voted exactly as Stocks would voted. That is a fact.

      Delete
    9. Well, you can't know that, because Stocks is gone. In the past, you could look and see that Maggie voted with Stocks and Bonds most of the time. That is a fact...

      Delete
  20. Kranz is running for sure, he needs and wants that pension. It is interesting as Tony had us believe he was going to fix our roads - then goes and supports Sabine who wasted taxpayer money burying the road report. Then Kranz had us believe he was going to protect community charachter- of course he supported the Prop A ballot untruth and voted against Desert Rose- is it any wonder residents are starting to call him 'Phony Tony".

    ReplyDelete
  21. CLOSED SESSION- This Tuesday at 5PM. Here is what is going on in a closed session.

    1. CLOSED SESSION: CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR AUTHORITY: Government Code 54956.8 PROPERTY: 608 Third Street, between E Street and F Street, Encinitas (former Pacific View School Site) CITY NEGOTIATOR: Gus Vina, City Manager TO NEGOTIATE WITH: Timothy Baird, Superintendent of the Encinitas Union School District UNDER NEGOTIATION: Price and terms

    2. CLOSED SESSION: CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUSEL, SIGNIFICANT EXPSOURE TO LITIGATION AUTHORITY: Gov. Code Section 54956.9 (b) NUMBER OF POTENTIAL CASES: (1) CIRCUMSTANCES: Regional Water Quality Board’s -Notice of Hearing and issuance of Complaint No. R9-2013-0152 for administrative civil liability against the City of Encinitas and USS CAL Buildings Inc. for violations of Order Nos. 2009-0009-DWQ and R9-2007-0001, and Basin Plan Waste Discharge Prohibition 14.

    3. CLOSED SESSION: CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL, EXISTING LITIGATION AUTHORITY: Gov. Code 54956.9 (a) NAME OF CASE: Palmer v. City of Encinitas Case No. 37-2012-00056767-CU-PO-NC (Tort Liability Matter)

    4. CLOSED SESSION: CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL, EXISTING LITIGATION AUTHORITY: Gov. Code 54956.9 (a) NAME OF CASE: Treggon Owens dba Tregtronics v. City of Encinitas Case No. 37-2013-00053540-CU-BC-NC (Breach of Contract)

    5. CLOSED SESSION: PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AUTHORITY: Gov. Code 54957 TITLE: City Manager REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION

    ADJOURNMENT

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cutting up the spoils of the taxpayer bounty ...

      Delete
    2. Why isn't the City Attorney listed? Didn't he get his performance plan done on time? And why is the hearing that the City has requested to dispute the fine levied by the Regional Water Quality Board being discussed by Council in closed session under the pretext of "significant exposure to litigation?"

      The Water Quality Control Board is NOT threatening to sue! That Agenda Item should be heard, OPENLY at a Regular City Council Meeting.

      All of this lack of transparency with respect to the "missteps" of the Hall Property Park development of a regional sports park, and also with respect to the City Attorney and City Manager's secret goal setting and workplans, demonstrates that Barth, Shaffer and Kranz have all failed to live up to their campaign promises of acting, ONCE ELECTED or re-elected, in the case of Barth, to insure more open government, and to encourage, rather than discourage, public participation.

      Delete
  22. Yes, looked up the retirement formula for city council 5 years vesting rites.2 percent of yearly wage times years of service at 55 years of age.A council Person makes 1500 hundred a month or 18000 thousand a year so 36 dollars a month times years of service.You need to be elected to 2 terms to qualify---------------- 8 years of service times 36 dollars = 288 dollars a month at 55 years old

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ahh but the more committees you serve on the more cha Ching you earn increasing your pension. Go ask Jim Bond if he doesn't enjoy his $2K a month extra??? For a scarecrow he wasn't so dumb.

      Delete
    2. Pensions are based on your city salary only about 18000 a year

      Delete
    3. 4:54 is correct, it's the per diems or whatever on the water board and the other juicy committee jobs that kick down that extra $. To be fair, I think most cities work that way, which isn't to say it's right. Otherwise, the pension above would be about $3400 a year, not exactly a mint. Wouldn't be enough for me to put up with all that crap...

      Delete
  23. WOW ,that's a lot of money. I think I'll run

    ReplyDelete
  24. Next week Barth, Shaffer, and phony Tony will give the final vote for the ordinance that changes, among other commissions, the planning commission term from 2 years to 3 years. Shaffer said it was to encourage more people to apply. The planning commission also gets paid $50 per meeting. Not bad money when many of the meetings only last from 2 minutes to 40 minutes. Wow, $25 dollars a minute for each commissioner. That's better than the staff salary. It pays to "volunteer" for the planning commission.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please, it's $50.00....

      Delete
    2. What part of volunteer is not understandable? The city is built out.
      There is no "major" work for the planning commission. Paying the commissioners makes them employees in the IRS wording. Remove the ordinance that gives the council the ability to pay any commission. Planning commissioners were volunteers, with no monetary gift, until 2009 when a former planning commissioner ask that they be given some monetary compensation.

      Delete
  25. 2:54-That is the only Commission that gets paid anything. The others are totally volunteer. And there will probably be a few vacancies on some for next year, so anyone interested please put your name in.

    ReplyDelete
  26. This bank robber is more honest than the Encinitas pensioners.

    ReplyDelete
  27. 3:39- Yes, mental health professional is the right word, and one doesn't have to be a psychologist to see some failed logic on a few of these posts. In grad school we all had to take statistics. Our professor started a lecture with eating ice cream causes riots. We all starred at him, as we couldn't understand how this could be. However, the logic was: Eating ice cream is done more in the summer than winter. Summer, if it is hot, can lead to frustration and in some cases aggression. When one person starts a fight with another, and others join in it can become a riot-think Watts riots in the 60's. Therefore eating ice cream causes riots. There is a small correlation, but even a face value, most people would not believe that statement. It does bother me that anyone puts Shaffer, or any of our elected officials, in the camp of condoning rape. 1 in 4 women in the U.S. gets raped. That IS a statistical fact-Google it non-believers. Hopefully, posters will at least keep rape out of their "facts". I cannot believe that the Occupy movement condones rape, therefore if women were raped in NYC during an Occupy rally, it does not mean a think, except a lot of women get taped in NYC on any certain day. It even happens when there is a tea party event. But, I also doubt, that most tea baggers think rape is OK.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Dr. L with all respect and not to be a wiseacre can you cite an example where there was a reported rape at a tea party rally? thanks

      Delete
    2. Hey dude/dude-ette. Let the topic rest. The point has been made. It's not about whether you like Occupy or the Tea Party, it's that rape is wrong. End of discussion.

      Delete
    3. with all respect 9:04 your post makes no sense. whonposted rape was ok? no one did. What was posted is there were rapes at the occupy camps in NYC, it turns out that there were reports of rape at Occupy NYC. Some people support the Occupy movement that destroyed property and others don't. That's the end of the discussion.

      Delete
  28. OK, does anyone know how much money Encinitas gives to ICLEI each year?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Fred there was a post here by WCV that it was about 10K a year

      Delete
    2. Is it in the city records, or where can we go to find that info.

      Delete
  29. I remember in the early 90's Encinitas had money (18K?) invested in the R.J. Reynolds tobacco company- and it seems one other tobacco company. That went over like a lead balloon with the citizens (I think! Hope we still don't support that effort).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The council is investing in bars and liquor.

      Delete
    2. And developer campaign contributions. Let's not forget those.

      Delete
  30. Dr Lori................were there Occupy camps? yes. Did woman report that they were raped in the NYC occupy camp? yes. Did occupy destroy millions of dollars of private and public property in NYC and Oakland? yes. You can psycho analyze this in an effort to justify behavior but it is simply what it is. I don't support the destruction of personal property, I don't support rape of any kind and I don't support occupy. Others might support occupy, I don't.

    There was not a post about all rapes. It seems to me you are attempting to justify a positon. There was a post about reported rapes at the occupy NYC tent city. There has never been any reports of rape or destruction of personal property at tea party rallies, I suspect they would take offense at your teabagger descrition. Interesting to note that woman are safer at a tea party rally while they have reported rapes at occupy camps. No one posted Shaffer does or does not support violence. The post was Shaffer supports occupy, which according to news reports she does. It is what it is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 8:23- Yep you are probably right. I must be ignorant or just plain lazy not to figure it out. But, if I may offer just one tiny suggestion? You are reasoning by using the "ice cream causes riots" defense. It holds no Face Validity. Not saying yo;u're wrong, but your correlations are not accurate. Happy Holidays, or Merry Christmas, whichever applies, if any.

      Delete
  31. The rape thing is a bit over the top, though I too am not an occupy fan. About 15 surly occupiers camped in our yard for a few hours on their way to San Diego one day. Uncool. But that's what we get for not building to the sidewalk.

    ReplyDelete
  32. why over the top Fred, it is what it is. The post did not claim anyone did or did not support that behavior. I did not support the Occupy crap, their actions were those of thugs and bullies, in my opinion. their website says they want a global revolution, i don't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Occupy movement was one of the most unorganized and unfocused movements we've had. Like hippies gone bad. I'm sure there were a lot of people involved with good intent. But what a fizzle and it only seemed to spiral down.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZKIRCJUXYA

      Delete
    2. Hi Fred I disagree, Occupy was orchestrated and organized by professional agitators. In San Francisco SEIU Union thugs organized and bussed in UC Berkeley students many who didn't know what they were doing, the shut down traffic in the city and prevented honest simple hard working citixens from going to their jobs. In LA SEIU Union thugs shut down ent4ances to LAX and assualted cops, in NYC organizers got food, tents, water to feed a btallion of soldiers for weeks. Communist organizer Lisa Fithian trained Occupy leaders and promoted the violence. There was a heavy chicago influence to occupy and Bill ayers played a key role meeting with occupy leaders.

      Delete
    3. Hi 9:45. I don't disagree.

      Delete
    4. Professional Agitators, like anarchists? Ooh, scary. Commies, in my backyard, call the John Birch society. Move on. Obama still won the election, move on, Rand Paul won't win the next one, Move on. Shaffer still has 3 more years, move on....

      Delete
    5. 7:00 am, so you support the destruction of private property, the destruction of public property, the harassment and intimidation of business owners, civil servants and citizens? why do you mock, is it because you can not defend the atrocious actions of Occupy?

      Delete
  33. According to Wikipedia the Occupy movement started with the following:
    The Occupy movement is partly inspired by the Arab Spring,[21][22] and the Portuguese[23] and Spanish Indignants movement in the Iberian Peninsula,[24] as well as the Tea Party movement.[25][26][27.
    How about that-The Tea Party is involved in the Occupy Movement. I did not know that, and apparently some others did not know that either.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They're both movements that can happen because of the freedom we have in this country, despite how much people in one camp or another might not like it. There are unlikeable or worse people in each camp, but there is probably good in both as well.

      There, let's drink some punch and take a nap, or get on to why the fire chief quit.

      Delete
    2. Great idea. Why did he quit?

      Delete
    3. 9:08 still waiting on an example of where there was a reported rape at a tea party rally? also where was there destruction of private or public property at a tea part rally? lastly why was millions spent by taxpayers to pick up after occupy while the tea party ralliers always pick up after themselves? maybe we should step away from the punch bowl and see things as they are.

      Delete
    4. 9:37, still waiting for you to justify your connection between Shaffer and Rape. I'm not really a supporter of the occupy movement, I can't help you. I'm sure you have your mind made up, let's move on. I get your point. Jeez. One note Charlie...

      Delete
    5. 6:53 It is simple, there was not a post of a "connection between Shaffer and rape" this is in your head, not mine. The facts are there were reported rapes at occupy NYC, along with destruction of public and private property. Some people support Occupy.

      Delete
  34. Dr Lori check out the movie Occupy Unmasked, it is an interesting perspective

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The question is... Who made and produced the movie and whose money is behind it? Interesting indeed. Don't believe all that you hear and half of what you see and remember that nobody has all the facts.

      Delete
    2. It features Breitbart.Produced by Citizens United. Follow the Money.

      http://www.thenation.com/article/170453/occupy-unmasked-unmasked#

      "The film propagates two key anti-Occupy memes, both very popular in right-wing circles during the movement's heyday in the fall of 2011—namely, a dubiously-sourced image depicting a young man rubbing his buttocks on a police car and an alleged epidemic of rapes at the encampments. "

      Delete
    3. 6:56 can you explain why occupy caused millions of damage to private property in NYC and Oakland, I did not know this. I also didn't know Occupy attacked policed in LA and NYC and Oakland. Can you tell me why SEIU used Berkeley students to block other citizens from going to work in San Francisco. I also read that in NYC some business owners claimed their stores were ruined by Occupy at Zucati park, I did not know this. Lastly, I read that the reported rapes at occupy are real, can you explain.

      Delete
  35. 9:21- That may have been the sanest comment anyone has made. Thank you for your perspective. However, I will check out the film, as I have not seen it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dr Lori isn't the question who made and produced the occupy movement that destroyed private property and set up tent cities that abused woman? Isn't the question why haven't the perpertrators been held accountable? we know Occupy is terrifyingly real, we know occupy destroyed public and private property, yet why did news anchors support them and glorify them? heck, why did shaffer support them? ask the right questions, don't follow the sheep.

      Delete
    2. No, you should ask who has something to gain by slandering the Occupy Movement, that's good critical thinking, the same way questioning the Occupy Movement is good criticial thinking. Oops, sorry, we wouldn't want that....

      Delete
    3. Slander? Read the news. Occupy destroyed millions of dollars of public and private property in NYC and Oakland. Oakland and NYC spent millions of taxpayer dollars picking up the waste human feces the ooccuy thugs left in the park. The occupy SEIU thugs blocked work places preventing average citizens from going to their jobs and instilling fear. The occupy movement allowed the reported rape of woman in the NYC occupy camp. These are all facts. You clearly would prefer Americans not know the facts of Occupy. Hey, you can support the destruction of private prerty and rape of woman if you want to, don't expect us to join you.

      Delete
    4. And guess what, it's over. We get it, you don't like unions, hippies, liberals, commies. Screw you for insinuating I support rape or destruction of property. My main point is you're trying to equate Shaffer with support for Rape and destruction of property, which is just wrong, and you know it.

      I might add that these are the Mike Andreen and Jerome style politics of divide and conquer that they used against Maggie and Sheila Cameron before. Bring up a topic that has no bearing on local politics, play to the old fearful, conservative mindset. Hire a clown if you have to as a form of harassment.

      Dude, we don't go for this kind of crap in our town, this isn't orange county, Encinitas is better than that. You can disagree on Prop A., plastic bags, dogs, beach sand, density, bars, that's all legit. What you're talking is out of date, past history, fear mongering nonsense...

      Delete
    5. 8:53 I have to disagree. The topic of Occupy, UN Agenda 21, ICLEI are all relevant to our local governance, as are the leaders that support these groups. Heck I had never heard of them until I read about them here on WCV. Also I disagree that there was a post equating any person with rape and destruction. Is it possible that that is your interpretation? What was posted was that there was an occupy movment. That it was reported that at the occupy camps in NYC there were reports of rape. What was posted was some people support the occupy movement. Is it posible you are drawing conclusions?

      I do not find the information about Occupy, UN Agenda 21 or ICLEI out of date. By the way, the Coast News today had an article that the city council is going to redfine what our community characater is? I smell a rat. Groups like ICLEI, UN Agenda 21 and Occupy all use words as propaganda to hoodwink a trusting and uninformed public. Many people think Occupy was some good movement until they learn the truth. Why is Barth and the council redefining our community characther? After all, they opposed Prop A.

      Delete
    6. I don't know Mike Andreen, you tell me. Make sure you readjust your tinfoil hat...

      Delete
    7. I read that article this morning too. Do we think Barth, Shaffer, Phony Tony and Muir/Gaspar are qualified to redfine our community character? After all they all sided with the developers on Prop A and the developers at Desert Rose. Strange that Barth Shaffer and Kranz would aling themelves with this Andreen person you mention. Wasn't he a developer operative?

      Delete
    8. I don't think they're aligning themselves with Andreen, who lives in Oceanside, but still runs the new Encinitas Chamber. Andreen is Jerome Stocks operative. He ran the anti Sheila Cameron hit site Wire Fire many years ago. He will no doubt be back in action as we get closer to the next election, with the usual spin, like you see above where the poster implies Barth, Shaffer and Kranz are developer backed. Developer backed would be Gaspar and Muir. Follow the money, the out of town money and the fire money that goes to those 2. The other three did oppose Prop A, so when the time comes, you'll have to factor that in.

      Delete
    9. But Barth Shaffer and Kran all sided against the residents at Desert Rose and voted to approve the clear cutting of trees and the destruction of wetlands- shouldn't we fact that in? I know Gaspar and Muir are with teh developers but so are Kranz, Shaffer and Barth. They opposed A and sided with Andreen and n Stocks of the citizens who walked the streets to elect them.

      All five of them are working with Vina now to 'redfine our community character'. How can you you say you want to preserve and protect community character and then after you are elected say you want to redfine it?

      Delete
    10. Dude, vote how you want, if you even live here. Sounds like you're either Andreen trying to spin against Barth, Shaffer and Kranz. What vote specifically are we referring to on the tree and wetlands? Sounds like more double-reverse Andreen Spin, trying to turn the non development crowd on Lisa, Tony and Teresa. Is Alice Jacobsen going to run again this time?

      If you don't like what we've got, feel free to vote those folks out. But if you've lived here any length of time, you know what happens when we lose people Like Dennis Holz, Sheila Cameron etc. You get Kristy Guerin, Danny D, Jerome, Kristin and Mark. People who don't even care or are trying to go to the next rung.

      Seriously, think about it. Somebody will always be on council, and if you think the votes will always go your way, you're dead wrong...

      Delete
    11. Hey, I could think of supporting Mr. Holz and Ms. Cameron. They both seem to have integrity. I don't agree with them 100% but they seem real.

      I am referring to Desert Rose, there was a wetlands that was impacted and they clear cut mature trees to add increases to density. I am all for keeping current property rights, I am opposed to council's generous interpreteaion of density bonus laws that benefit developers and screw local residents

      Delete
    12. Please anyone but Sheila. She is a whack job and if you have lived here long enough and saw her when she was on the Council you would know this. Holtz, I liked.

      Delete
    13. Er, they're not running, as far as I know Mike. Just trying to get some sense of perspective on what/who you're likely to see in office based on the past. But if you're Andreen, you know that already.

      FYI, the density bonus law is a state law that developers use every time. FYI, Lisa talks about it extensively here. Again, her words, not mine. My take is that any council would have passed this, due to the threat of lawsuits.

      http://www.shaffer4encinitas.com/desert-rose/

      Delete
    14. err- you are a Shaffer troll

      FYI the council could have stood with the residents of desert rose and voted to protect the wetlands and trees, along woith community character. The council did not. Slimy Shaffer along with the others sided with Marco Gonzalez and the developers. Now residents are having to suit the city they pay taxes to to protect their property values and quality of life. Shaffer said she stood for protecting community characther but she threwshe threw the residents under the bus.

      FYI density bonus only applies to residentially zoned property. Shaffer and the council are now working with Vina and developers to rezone commerical property to residential inviting more density bonus and greater traffic, pollution and loss of quality of life. Shaffer, Barth, Phony Tony, Vina, Muir and Gaspar are calling this an overlay zone, not a theft of our quality of life and community character.

      Signed a one time Shaffer supporter and campaign contributor

      ps- Shaffer is for herself only

      Delete
    15. Nope, I'm not. I'm not that happy either, but there's a lot of low blow type assertions on this blog. Hey, remember when Marco was supposedly an environmentalist too? Things and people change, or they drop the pretense of what they were pretending to be. To me it's are you going to go with the voters and your promises, do what the city rules say, or try and balance the two? Most of the time our council goes by the rules, always has.

      Lisa should have at least voted, that's your job on the council. I've ripped Kristin for not voting, and I feel the same way about Lisa on that one. It didn't help that Muir had to recuse himself.

      I'd like to hear more about the overlay zone, it doesn't sound good, but I need to either start watching all the council sessions, or reading more.

      Your points are valid, I don't agree with her, but she at least gave her reasons. In the end, I guess I'm a cynic. I'm not sure we're ever going to get what we want out of our council, but I still have some hope.

      Again, we have to look ahead and try and see who's waiting in the wings, what are we likely to end up with. I would love to see some "I'm down on Lisa etc" folks start declaring for the election....

      Delete
  36. rigyt, let's just skip over the millions of dollars in public property the occupy thugs caused and lets ignore the rapes in occupy camps and lets ignore the oakland and NYC residents who were violated and harassed and prevented from going to work. Right, let's not believe any of these facts or the fact that Lisa shaffer supports the Occupy movement. Let's all run down and stick ournheads in the sand at san elijo state beach and pretend none of these facts exist.

    ReplyDelete
  37. FACTS? Good Lord in heaven. Please help 9:30. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Fire Chief Quit - Rumor has it that the salary was too low for managing 4 fire agencies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He didn't know the job scope and salary before he took the job? I don't buy that...something else is up.

      Delete
    2. Salary too low??? The Enc fire chief earns an unbelievable sum of money for supervising 70 men. The equivalent salary for a Navy Capt on an aircraft carrier would have to be $11M a year. Too low??? Bull Fucking Shit!!!

      Delete
  39. The operative word above is "Rumor".

    ReplyDelete
  40. At least the donut budget was reduced after Muir retired, but now sponges $175K a year. Now he is selling the city to the developers BURP!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  41. Gaspar was elected by signage and stunts - she is a shill for her husband's business and their cronies. Doesn't bode well for future elections if someone as incapable as she can get in so easily.

    ReplyDelete
  42. 2:33
    The link to Lisa's site is good, thanks. I've felt all along that council basically was misled by whomever to write what they did on the ballot statement against Prop A. Especially with (but not limited to) the "we'll get sued" and "Prop A will raise current height restrictions in Cardiff" fabrications.

    Lisa's take on the matter is "That said, as a City Council, we do not have the authority to disregard (high density laws), unfortunately."

    But Prop A did not exclude affordable housing from being built here in Encinitas. Prop A only limits the height of such projects (barring a public vote). The cities that get sued by housing authorities adopt blanket building moratoriums.

    I'm with others in that they believe the "requirements" for affordable housing here in Encinitas are ridiculously high and that another amnesty program could greatly ease current quotas. I.e. instead of punish a property owner with an "illegal unit", reward the community by counting it toward the (ever increasing) quota for affordable homes.

    Am I nuts?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's sane and salient in my book.

      Delete
    2. You might be nuts, but what you say here makes sense. They need to look at an amnesty program that could bring in existing units, because the #'s requested for affordable housing are not doable. Has anyone besides the obvious brought this up at council?

      Interesting question, anyone know who did write the ballot argument against Prop. A?

      Delete
    3. 6:18
      Thanks.
      7:34
      Thanks (?)

      Delete
    4. 7:34
      Yes. That's one of my favorite questions: "Who?" I once asked Pat Murphy "Who" decided a certain procedure. Guess he thought I was targeting him as the culprit as he answered "You can blame me if you want to". But I hadn't even considered him - and still didn't glean he was the responsible party. Felt more like he was protecting someone. That was several years ago during the Miller regime.
      When one idea gets promoted, it's rarely if not impossible the collaboration of two or more. Someone initiates the idea. With the ballot statement it may have been a collaboration with later editing as there are several subjects highlighted. But I think one would be hard pressed to find anyone admitting they wrote the worst parts of it.

      Delete
    5. Fred, Muir and Shaffer sat together in subcommittee in front of a subset of the 28 identified activists. The two council members came prepared with drafts of what they'd like to see in the ballot arguments against and combined them into a final copy.

      No one is "hard pressed" here. It happened, in front of a handful of city employees and residents and was recorded.

      The council as a group ultimately sat and went through the arguments word by word and agreed collectively. Even if fed some of the information ahead of time,the council had the final wording and they AGREED to it. The buck flipping stops there, folks.

      Delete
    6. My question was more general, but I think I got the answer. Did the council have to prepare the ballot arguments, or did they chose to take it up. Sounds like a civics question, I know.

      Delete
    7. They had to prepare them. They then wordsmithed when all five were together in an "open" council meeting (one in the sense that they happily lied right in front of us), with Gaspar calling in from a remote location. They then agreed and put the language on the ballot.

      No excuses: the five council members were responsible.

      Delete
    8. My perspective: Gus Vina chose Rutan & Tucker, known to be pro building industry, pro development. How did he come up with that decision? The so-called independent report was full of speculation and conjecture, designed to give Council false arguments in their failed attempt to defeat Prop A.

      But first, before their false arguments, Glenn Sabine, City Attorney took conjecture and speculation to another level in his ballot pamphlet so called "impartial analysis," which according to Election Code is required to be fact based and impartial. Sabine took Joel Kuperberg's (of R & T) conjecture to another level, that of falsehoods. Kuperberg wrote that the language in the initiative would create an ordinance that could be construed to raise lower set height limits in residential neighborhoods, for instance.

      Sabine's false conclusion, and prejudicial NOT impartial interpretation printed up at taxpayer expense in the voters' pamphlets? "Lower set height limits in residential neighborhoods WOULD be raised."

      At Wednesday night's Strategic Planning Transit Workshop, Part 2, Shaffer had asked, can we set standards that are more stringent than State Standards when it comes to development? Glenn Sabine quickly quipped, "You'd have issues with CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) if you did that!"

      Planning Director Jeff Murphy then had to come up to the speaker's dais to correct our bumbling CA. According to CEQA (and probably Coastal Act Law, as well) different jurisdictions can set standards that supersede those required by the state. Once again, Sabine was wrong. Mayor Barth said to Jeff Murphy, "Aren't you glad you waited until 9:15? (or whatever time it was, I'm paraphrasing) We needed you!" Then she laughed.

      Similarly, Council could have, but did not do what Barth, Kranz and Shaffer all had promised; our new Council majority could have enacted a local Sunshine ordinance, which new EMC could supersede, but not be less stringent than, the requirements of the Brown Act, the California Public Records Act, and Conflict of Interest laws all contained within California Government Code.

      Instead, when Council does have discretion, as in allowing an online survey with respect to the CA and CM evaluations, or releasing Vina's and Sabine's performance and goalsetting workplans, that is all done in closed session. In fact, according to case law with which Council has been provided through Californians Aware's General Counsel, Terry Francke, the entire evaluations could have been done publicly, WITHOUT legitimate threat of lawsuits against the City for defamation or violation of any "Constitutional rights of privacy" quoted by Barth.

      But I guess they feel more powerful, more in control, more chummy, part of an elite, secret club, without the pesky public watching over them.

      Delete
  43. First: the amnesty units have been brought up, repeatedly, to a blank-faced and unresponsive council (all five).

    Second: Shaffer and Muir were responsible for the ballot statements against that stated a 30-foot structure could be built five feet from the property line, among other things.

    ReplyDelete
  44. The council doesn't want to hear about amnesty. They want to change zoning under the guise of meeting affordable housing reqs so they can build, build, build and change the character of Encinitas.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly. And they will sneak their zoning changes in during the General Plan Update when they embed the changes in the code and GP and then ask residents to vote for the whole ball of wax.

      They'll scare voters with vague threats of lawsuits into voting to pass the thing, and just like that, Prop A limits out the window. This is their Plan B to Prop A's passage. Über-developers just need to be patient...bide their time...and the development doors will be wide open to them and council will throw back in resident faces that we voted for it.

      Delete
    2. The Coast News reports the incomeptent untrustworthy city council who lied on the PRop A ballot statement are now meeting to "redfine community character'.

      They must be opposed and exposed for who and what they are. They want to take away our quality of life and small town and give it to the social engineers and the for profit developers and for profit lawyers who reprsent them.

      We need new candidates and to inform the public.

      Delete
    3. But Gus said it was "impossible to define community character." It will be interesting to watch the powerless five struggle to come up with anything meaningful under his watchful eye.

      Delete
  45. There were two subcommittee meetings with four council members involved with writing the ballot statements. The argument against Prop. A and the rebuttal were eventually approved and signed by the all five council members.

    The whole sordid affair goes back to City Manager Gus Vina who commissioned the Rutan and Tucker report before he had public council approval. This report served as the basis for the ballot statements. The blame for the false arguments falls squarely on Vina, who pushed the willing council to follow along. To this day the queen of ethics and the others don't think they did anything wrong, despite the fact that many public speakers pointed out the bias in the Rutan and Tucker report, including the infamous "bifurcation" of the city that would result according to them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. BS- Vina was not elected. Morever the incompetent self serving gang of 5 saw fit to give Vina a glowing poerformance review over the obhections of all residents who spoe. Adding sale to injury the Gang of 5 then voted to approve Vina's hiring a PR spin Doctor. Vian also pushed the council toa ccept the Cal Builders Bid even though the other contractors protested the award- why did they protest? Becuase Casl Builderds did not have the certifictions to handle the toxis carcinogens the council buried on site- Vina and the council's response to Cal Builders lack of qualifications and certifications was that the RFP said the contractor had to have the right license at the 'time work begins' and not at the time the work was awarded.

      Barth, Shaffer, Phony Tony, Muir and Gaspar are all the culprits to blame.

      The ballot statement rests on teh ehad of self serving shaffer, phony tony, unbelievable Barth and Muir/Gaspar.

      Delete
    2. So at this point, I'll be the person to ask, do you think anything would change with 5 different council members? Because over 20-25 years, we've had more than 5 council members, and from everything I've read, nothing has changed....

      Delete
    3. And nothing will change, except salaries will go up and pensions also.

      Delete
  46. We know this 11:04 this council has done nothing for residents. We also know 5 new council members could do not worse then this council.

    ReplyDelete
  47. I disagree with the 2nd part, that's what they said in Iran when they got rid of the Shah. And then the Ayatollah came in.

    I think this council is still superior to the Stocks/Bonds/Dallagher/Guerin/Duvivier years.

    Stocks, Andreen and their buddies in the Rotary club are still waiting in the wings, waiting to grab a seat so Muir, Gaspar and XXX will call the shots.

    So we're all just a bunch of whiners on here, lol, since nothing will change.

    ReplyDelete
  48. got news for you, stocks muir and gaspar are already calling the shots, and kranz shaffer and barth are just along for the ride.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Uh, I don't think so, that would require Stocks to still be in office. But make no mistake, the other side is still over there waiting, Prop A. guys...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We did our bit. It's someone else's turn.

      Delete
  50. Ha Ha. No, my point was to the Prop A. guys. Be careful what you wish for pushing Lisa and Tony out of office, the no doubt we'll screw you side is out there waiting with Andreen and Stocks.

    And as for doing your part, it never stops if you want to really fight the battle. A small group of us hung on waiting to try and push those clowns out office for most of the last 16-20 years. Those are the people who should really get the credit for pushing Lisa and Tony into office, not the Prop A. people.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Not to worry, as individuals the many Prop A workers are very much active still. No one is going back to sleep. We know it never ends, but the "where are you guys??" line is a bit tedious. It takes all of us to pitch in, all the time.

    As for credit for Lisa and Tony: they rode into office in large part on Prop A's coattails. Many of the central folks in the A campaign were also in your "small group," and between those working hard for Lisa and Tony and using Prop A as a central issue, the clowns were out.

    What's unfortunate is that Lisa and Tony are their apparent replacements, with Teresa never fulfilling her promises to tackle the tough issues on behalf of the little guys (most of us). That pill is a hard one to swallow, but none of the three will fool me again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Straight out of a line by the WHO "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss." SOme truth to this in this Council.

      Delete
  52. Tony has gone over to the dark side. Check out his new duds and his hair. Pretty soon he will get divorced and marry someone from one the the "great" families in Encinitas. How sad. Guess he has forgotten who put him into office to begin with. Next time he will have the Big Boys money.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Another unfounded, low blow shot on someone's personal life. Let it go.

    4:51, I think that's where a lot of the issue with Tony and Lisa stems from, the Prop. A people take credit for getting them elected, and feel that "(probably rightly so) they didn't get what they thought they were getting, ie support of the prop.

    Due mostly to time constraints and just trying to get over the hump, I was not a big Prop A. guy, ie it wasn't make or break for me. I was mainly focused on dumping Jerome. If I had to guess, I'd say a lot of the Prop A. folks tended towards New Encinitas as I recall, whereas a lot of the old school, anti-Jerome crowd are from Leucadia, to differentiate without using names.

    And honestly, I'd say Tony kind of got in on Lisa's jet engines. The lady raised 40k, did fundraisers, and did it better than anyone I've seen.

    Anyway, bottom line, are we going to let Jerome and the gang back in, or are we going to coalesce and find either great new candidates, or work with what we've got. Because the alternative is to splinter, and have guy's like Bob Naninga running and splitting the vote, ensuring Jerome, Jim etc. get back in.

    Obviously, there's a mix of folks, some with both interests.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 9:02 nice attempt to make hay for your gal Shaffer. Shaffer was elected because the citizens made other citizens aware of the chicanery of Stocks. The citizens wrote columns, sent emails, handed out flyers, called TV news..................Shaffer did shinola. Shaffer made stupid speeches that made no sense and everyone hoped she would be reasonable and competent and she has been neither.

      There is no debating Phony Tony has never been the same since going to the private party held by John Lynch and Papa Manchester at Flavor in Del Mar. Phony Tony rubbed elbows with the big boys and waterboy Logan Jenkins and quickly became the new Stocks and developers best friend.......he promptly threw residents under the bus at desert rose, told untruths about prop a, failed to fix our roads and gave Sabine and Vina A report cards. ..disgusting

      But have no fear, the same people who worked hard to elect the three will work as hard to unelect them. And note that good old Phony Tony needs that pension,.......he will do anything to get it. It seems that Yesterday's nobody is today's somebody, he won't want to go back to looking for a job...................hey, maybe he can sell insurance, just like Jerome..

      Delete
    2. So who do we have to run? Has anyone stepped up to the plate for 2014? If not, then we will have the same.

      Delete
    3. We need someone who doesn't need a pension, doesn't need his or her ego inflated by the big boys and girls, and will stand up for what they say they will or will not do. I understand that sometimes when you get into office you get more information, but you should let the citizens know about the new information. We also need someone who will tell Vina to take a hike, and get rid of Sabine. Maybe when we elect a mayor for the first time that person will have more power to do these things. Lisa keeps saying she is only one vote. But didn't she and Tony kind of lead us to believe that they, along with Teresa, all wanted the same thing? So what happened. Power, greed, ego, I could go on but you all get my drift. We need to start thinking about good candidates now. That's how the big boys do it. So we little people have to do it to. Anyone have any suggestions on who we could persuade to run?

      Delete