Thursday, March 20, 2014

Shaffer re-flip-flops (un-flip-flops?) on taxpayer-funded push-poll to advocate sales tax

Just days after Lisa Shaffer flip-flopped on her vote to use taxpayer funds to hire a consultant to run a push-poll to create the illusion of public support for tax increases, Shaffer seems to have re-flip-flopped back in favor of spending public funds on the push-poll.  Shaffer's e-mail newsletter didn't mention the flip-flop, and city sources tell Encinitas Undercover that Shaffer has re-reversed her position and now once again supports the taxpayer-funded push-poll.

For some background on Gus Vina's hand-picked tax pollster Catherine Lew of Lew Edwards, see what she did in Modesto. Kinda reminds us of the pre-determined outcomes Vina got from the supposedly neutral report from notorious pro-developer attorneys Rutan & Tucker on Prop A.

In related news, Shaffer, Barth and Kranz  appear to have decided to buy Pacific View at EUSD's asking price of $9.5 million.  It remains to be seen where the money will come from in a city that is completely broke.

228 comments:

  1. It all makes perfect sense now. They want to buy Pacific View in order to garner the votes for a sales tax increase then use the tax revenue to support Vina's Angels.

    I can't wait to see how many of the bleeding heart Pacific View supporters on this blog will quickly change their opinion in favor of the tax increase.

    Who'da thunk it that Muir and Gaspar would be the sane voices on the council? Dump Barth the Bully!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sounds like $quint-eyed $tock$ talking!

      Delete
    2. Someone on this blog posted the same comment 2 weeks ago when WCV posted a piece about the tax the first time the council discussed it.

      Delete
  2. Eh, methinks you may be giving them too much credit to be figuring that out amongst the 3 of them. Hell, if Muir and Gaspar can't agree what they're doing, I guarantee you Lisa, Tony and Teresa, where there's no love lost multiple ways, can't figure it out. Either way the tax will not pass.

    What's up with the auction of Pac View? Is that happening, or will there be another "delay"?

    -Mr Green Jeans

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, the tax increase will not pass. Lisa Shaffer is foolish to flip flop once again, because a great deal of taxpayer money would be wasted on what essentially is another "satisfaction survey" or push poll.

      Delete
  3. The 5 Stooges Comedy Hour!

    ReplyDelete
  4. How about buying it by cutting Gus Vina and his cabinet. All of them make between $150-$200,000. If the top layer were discarded that could pay for Pacific View in 5 years, and citizens would be paying for something that we actually want.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't want PV… We can't even pay for the regional sport complex.

      This Council is wacked.

      Delete
  5. Since it was a confidential bid, then anyone's anonymous speculation that the bid is for $9.5 million is pure conjecture. As I've repeatedly said, the City can, WITHOUT RAISING TAXES, afford to purchase Pacific View, especially for a reasonable price, taking into account the Naylor Act, because the property would bring a significant lease revenue stream, unlike the former Hall Property regional sports complex, or the Library, or the Mossy Property, which have all been used as de facto "collateral" for previous lease revenue bonds.

    Except during construction, lease revenue bond funded projects, are not supposed to rely upon the General Fund for continuing debt service or maintenance. Ongoing funding is to be generated by a LEASE revenue stream.

    The City of Encinitas, and even the State of California, re building new prisons, is infamous for getting banks to lend them money for projects that are NOT funded through lease revenue streams. This has been allowed, and even encouraged, in part, due to the malfeasance of banks, which are also infamous, now, for making bad loans.

    Lease revenue bonds are frequently inappropriately used to raise money by banks in cooperation (conspiracy) with "bond attorneys" representing public agencies, to AVOID a public vote for a general obligation bond. GOBs are designed to allow a public vote on projects that do NOT generate lease revenue streams.

    According to Scott Chatfield, who created the SavePacificView.org website:

    Special closed school board meeting tomorrow at 2:30 p.m. to consider postponing the Pacific View auction bid deadline until May 22.

    "Action Recommended: Approval of potential extension bid date for sale of Pacific View Site to May 22, 2014."

    . . .What I read is that speakers on Pacific View won't be allowed since it's an agenda item. Is that your take as well? I have a call in to EUSD's Elizabeth Wallace for clarification."

    --Scott

    Here is my reply:

    Scott, according to the Brown Act, which is part of California Government Code, real property negotiations are only allowed, in closed session, if they are preceded by an open session, allowing an opportunity for public comment.

    Despite what Elizabeth Wallace, [Baird's secretary] may say, public speakers must be allowed to address a Pacific View agenda item, before the Board of Trustees goes into closed session. The City of Encinitas has also been allowing public speakers after Council reports back, into "open chambers" which must follow any closed session conferences. For EUSD closed session meetings, only the Board of Trustees and staff, such as Elizabeth Wallace and a District Attorney, and Tim Baird, as negotiator, are allowed to be present, just as only the City Attorney, the Clerk, and Council Members should be present for City Council closed sessions.

    It was inappropriate, before, for John DeWald to be present in closed session escrow conversations, if he was. My understanding is that both John DeWald and April Game were present for closed sessions, although I could be incorrect on that. It was inappropriate for Superintendent Baird to release the City of Encinitas' confidential opening bid; it was also inappropriate for Baird to respond to the City's letter to the Board of Trustees and to the Superintendent, without first getting public authorization to do so, from the Board . . .

    The District should, for reasons of transparency, provide video coverage, or at a minimum, an audio recording of Board of Trustees meetings.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. no one will read this garbage. Concise Lynn Concise. Say it in under 25 words.

      Delete
    2. 9:29 I read it and I'm not Lynn.

      Delete
    3. I read it too. Lynn has facts. Others don't. Is the school board contemplating extending the bid date because there are no bids above the minimum bid?

      Delete
    4. That meeting of the trustees is happening today without notice apparently.

      Delete
    5. The school board doesn't give a rats rump for the Brown Act...

      Delete
  6. No way will a sales tax ever pass in this city. It's already been established that you have to have 4/5 majority vote of council to get it on a ballot and that is NOT happening. So save the $100,000 plus for the consultant to try and manipulate us smart folks in Encinitas. We see through the sneaky tactics and it isn't going to work. Shaffer, Kranz and Barth can pay for PV out of their own pockets for the remainder of their lives.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with most of your post, 8:57. Purchasing Pacific View should NOT be tied to the issue of raising sales taxes.

      In my opinion, tying these two together, and recommending another unwanted and unneeded push poll, wasting more taxpayer money, designed to push an agenda of raising taxes, is another attempt by the current mayor and our former deputy mayor, Lisa Shaffer, to manipulate and polarize the community.

      We do not have to choose between being fiscally responsible and saving Pacific View in the public domain. The public already owns the property. EUSD Superintendent is, unfortunately, also manipulating the Council majority, and his Board of Trustees. Eminent Domain would have been a MUCH less expensive way to go than paying $9.5 Million! I don't believe that number; a rumor started by an anonymous poster does not equal fact, or even informed opinion.

      Delete
    2. Lynn,

      What should be the most the city offers to the district?

      Delete
    3. I am not a real estate expert, nor an attorney, but based on the price Del Mar Shores was purchased for by the City of Del Mar, and based on what another surplus school in Ocean Beach sold for (per acre) to that city, and based on other factors such as Prop A, the applicability of the Naylor Act, the possibility of an Eminent Domain lawsuit, and the most current appraisal in public/semi-public zoning, using local Comps, and based on past failed attempts to rezone, through the Planning Dept., Planning Commission, Council, and the fact that an attempt to rezone would also have to go through the Coastal Commission, which DOES consider community character and historical significance in the Coastal Zone, I feel that the City could offer $5 Million, with the stipulation, that the land would remain in public use, and would remain in the public/semi-public zoning for perpetuity.

      If the City wished to dispose of the property for any reason, EUSD should have first right of refusal to purchase, providing the zoning could not be changed, 30% if the land would remain for open space, including but not limited to fields or community gardens, and the Old Schoolhouse would remain on site, in perpetuity, as well. Public/semi-public zoning should remain on title, as I said, for perpetuity, to keep our irreplaceable asset, part of our heritage, in the public domain.

      Delete
    4. Too many hitches in your giddyup. No.
      Do you live in the real world?? It's no wonder some people want you to run for mayor, but being the leader of " planet crazy" isn't something to list on your résumé. Again NO to PV.

      Delete
    5. It's not up to you to decide, for selfish reasons, 7:40, what would be in the best interest of our community, future generations, and in alignment with the intent of the original donor of the land.

      Delete
    6. Nor is it up to you to decide ....no to PV.

      Delete
    7. Again I'll say it... 650 written letters for support to purchase it or save it, is 1% of the cities population. That's not a mandate!!!

      Delete
    8. Save Pacific View! 721 Save Pacific View emails sent so far, through the SavePacificView.org, site.

      By writing comments on the Save Pacific View site, they are forwarded to all of Council and all of the Board of Trustees, who will be able to authenticate your letter through your e-mail address.

      I never said it was up to me to decide; it should be up to the community, especially those willing to advocate for saving an irreplaceable asset, part of our heritage, in the public domain for a true community art and learning center.

      The community has rallied to make it happen.

      Delete
    9. with all respect- the weak willed council appears to have been bullied into overpaying for a property they had first right of refusal to buy. I will wait to see the price- sadly this looks like more failed leadership by Barth-Shaffer-Kranz

      Delete
    10. I think I understand why Lynn wants to save PV... That's where the alien mother ship comes and goes at midnight but only during blue moons. It's a ride to planet crazy....
      No to PV.
      And yes by telling others they have no right to their opinion you are self righteously saying only your opinion is important. Your opinion is worth a flaming bag of poo. No more no less.
      Oh and you don't need to tell me or anyone else that Norby doesn't get a pension.... We already know that from your previous 1200 mentions
      No to PV.

      Delete
    11. The citizens were duped into passing school bonds a few years back and Gov. Brown suckered the State with the same approach. Then we hear it is used for pay raises for the unions and administrators! I will NEVER vote + for any bond issue again, especially schools!

      Delete
  7. I can't stand this council. That being said Pacific View is worth getting. They have overspent on a few things in our cities history that are worth it... Moonlight improvements easily cost 1 million too much but are great, the library was way too much but if the Sheriffs put down their donuts long enough to stop the constant drug dealing, it would be a great place. The sports park is a colossal waste and should never have been built. Pacific View will be worth it in the long run because of its proximity to downtown, which, when we get rid of the bar problem, will again be great.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not. PV is not worth pursuing. We have real issues to tackle, not just buying more property we can't afford or need. If you buy it, sell Quail Gardens property

      Delete
    2. The Park hasn't even opened yet. It's going to be fantastic. Maybe not for the local few shut-ins that complain on this blog, but for a lot of people it will be wonderful, and long overdue.

      Delete
    3. Put the crack pipe down- $80 million for a skate park (we already have one at the Y) a dog park and few ball- fileds- yea- everyone in town is gonna be going there-

      Fact- kids population in Encinitas is declining

      I am all for sports, skate park and dog parks- we arleady have them. $80 million dolalr waste-

      but hey, now that they don't need Cardiff Elementary for Little Leauge let's sell that off to developers to pay for Bareth's malfeasance as well.

      Delete
    4. Nope. Even healthy active people know better than to get fresh air next to a freeway, when the beach is 6 blocks away. Go rethink.

      Delete
    5. Have to laugh about the community park when I picture 40 to 50 year olds trying to skate board. Now that would be a sight to behold. Dog park (Bah humbug). I'm tired of stepping in all that crap. Oh right, we all should be encouraged to breathe in those exhaust fumes from the traffic on I-5. I think there will be more sick people in the near future because of this.

      Delete
    6. 9:38....its going to be fantastic...
      the Hall Sports Park is a dog park, a skate park and 85% sports fields. Great, I agree, for organized sports leagues that need an unlimited amount of fields on Saturdays. Not a community park for all. $70-$80 million cost to the taxpayer that the city says cost $20 million.

      Delete
    7. Skate park, dog park, four ball fields, $40 million to buy the property and build the park. Outrageous for a park that few locals will actually use.

      Delete
    8. Barth wants the average commuter to go to skateboards.

      Delete
  8. The money for Pacific View should come from getting rid of two dozen uneeded pension hogs. There are your funds.

    ReplyDelete
  9. If you offer on PV, sell the quail gardens property.

    Plus Fire Vina. He sucks!!!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Man-

    Our City Council makes Oceanside's Council look stable and logical. What a disappointment, when the majority had such good opportunities to really turn around City Hall. What did they do, listen a proven loser. Geeze!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Logan Jenkins has always maintained that there is a 'crazy' competition between O'Side and Encinitas. Game over.

      Delete
    2. They should play that Benny Hill theme song music at the start of every Council meeting - everybody running around in circles, chasing their own shadows. Ship of Fools headed to the rocks.

      Delete
  11. I think its great that the city made an offer and returned to negioations with the school district. The city needs to remain strong and agree on a reasonable price. DO THEY THINK WE IDIOTS AND WERE JUST GOING AGREE TO THEIR OUTRAGEOUS 9 MILLION ASKING PRICE - I THINK NOT!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the district is canceling the auction, then the price paid by the city will be between 10 and 11 million dollars for a property valued at $4 million. Shaffer calls it a legacy property and it will be hers: a property well located in a bankrupt town that will not have the money to renovate it. Her legacy will be one of malfeasance.

      Plus, the city doesn't have the 10 to 11 mil. Go figure?

      Delete
    2. We plenty angry - white man takeum land from red man - can'tum we all um get um along um???

      (Johnny Depp stand-in)

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

    ReplyDelete
  13. I know I make mistakes sometimes, but "DO THEY THINK WE IDIOTS...?"

    ReplyDelete
  14. Thanks Fred. That one is classic. I'm surprised it wasn't signed by Lynn. Too Funny.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lynn usually gets an A for grammar and spelling. Current spelling for English words however has no continuity. A sensible language should have words that are spelled like they sound and visa versa. Probably the most major improvement to English happened a few hundred years back when an "s" replaced two "f''s". Waytago whomever! But to improve English now would meet with a lot more public friction than do proposed roundabouts. "I before E except after C" is also a bad rule: (Receipt; Their, Weird, Weiner, Stein and God knows how many other words.) But there are few things stronger than a bad tradition.

      Delete
    2. Fred:

      That's only half. Its "I before E except after C, or when sounded like A as in neighbor and weigh." Unfortunately English keeps the spelling of adopted foreign words further confusing our spelling. German has clear spelling rules for WienerWeiner and Stien/Stein, as Spanish does with J pronounced like H (El Cajon and La Jolla).

      A trick that Lynn uses. Write your post in a word file and use spell check, and then copy and paste to the blog. It won't catch all the mistakes, such as your/you're, to/two/too, and their/there. For that you have to go back to grammar school. If Pacific view is saved, maybe there will be grammar classes for bloggers. :-)

      Delete
    3. Are you Shaffer's understudy? Are you currently wearing her mortar board hat with the 1902 tassel?

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

    ReplyDelete
  16. This Council reminds me of Alice in Wonderland. The public never knows who has eaten a cookie, and how much of a piece they ate. Or they drink something and still don't know if they are up or down. Either way, I am following the White Rabbit who is going down an entirely different hole. Crazy voting has become the new norm. However, we are amazing compared to La Mesa. Over a month ago I asked for the last 3 years for billings from Glen Sabine and how much their City paid him and for what. Encinitas had it to me within the 10 days that is required by law. La Mesa had 30 days, and what they sent me was not even close to what I asked for. If you think we have it bad with Sabine, I feel even sorrier for the citizens of La Mesa.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe they tabled your request out there in La Mesa.

      Delete
    2. Maybe not everyone see Sabine as you do - imagine that!

      Delete
    3. 1:15: How anyone "see Sabine" is irrelevant, as is your comment. The point is, the City of La Mesa is not abiding by that part of Government Code, which the legislature has passed as the California Public Records Act.

      Delete
    4. Don't just talk or blog about this illegal injustice - DO SOMETHING!

      Delete
    5. 1:15 PM They don't see $abine alright - rats hide in the sewer.

      Delete
    6. Lynn-Your point is right on. There are laws on the books that say a public agency must abide by the California Public Records Act. La Mesa is in violation. I'm certainly not going to sue them, but i find it interesting that their City Attorney is the same as ours, and since I have emailed all of their Council about this, nothing has changed. I still don't have what I asked for. What does that say about Sabine? Perhaps nothing, or perhaps he knows that nothing will happen if the City doesn't comply with my request. We all know how hard Kevin Cummins fought for the road report. I have no idea if he thinks it was worth the hassle and the nightmare, but is it not possible that Sabine suggested to our City not to give it to him and he would go away? Just wondering?

      Delete
    7. 2:21, we ARE doing something! We're bringing these violations to light.

      Delete
  17. Good one 9"04. Think I swill give up on La Mesa and stick closer to home. I did send their City COuncil an email about this, but I am not about to drive halfway to Arizona to go in person. Think I will take the path less traveled , or in other words, move on. Sabine is here for good. I'll post some numbers in the near future, however, I just my find an extra leprechaun to push one more time for an RFQ. I can still do that during oral communications, as I doubt he will be on the heavy agenda from Council. Been there, done that, might be their motto. And, I think I will forget that I am not wealthy, nor am I poor. I will give back in a different way, but I sure did like the former city employee take on Gus. Too bad nothing will happen. So here is my plan. Each week someone speak at oral communications about something that they do or do not like about how the Council is dealing (or not dealing) with Vina. I will share my Parks and Rec. Commission experience and how Vina overrode both Muir's and Barth's direction to do exit interviews with Commissioners who did not re-up, which would be me. There is a great line from "A Few Good Men" when Jack Nicholoson says to Tom Cruise "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH! Now, off to help people that would really like my help.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Lorri, for your continuing service to our community, and for caring, deeply about truth, justice, and freedom.

      Delete
  18. Back at you Lynn. You have become a incredible seeker of truth, and have given us so much information from the work you do for all of us. I, for one, appreciate it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I love group hugs and I think one is needed on this blog. We all basically want the same thing, so why do certain people feel that they have to "trash" other people just because there may be a difference of opinion? If this group cannot get it together we are no better than the people we are challenging.

      Delete
  19. Lynn= waste of time

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lynn represents a citizen who is exceptionally well informed. I rather see her on the council than anyone presently seated. Her knowledge of civil affairs and protocol is simply amazing.

      Delete
    2. Ahh haaaa haas haaa haaa haaaa! Good one.

      Run Lynn run!!!!

      Delete
  20. How not to negotiate 101- We Cave!

    ReplyDelete
  21. THIS BLOG LOVES LYNN - RUN LYNN, WE'LL SUPPORT YOU!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes Lynn everybody loves you you're the smartest person around. Please run!!!

      Delete
  22. 1:15PM- I have to agree. Not everyone sees Sabine the way I do. Perhaps it is because he has threatened me with 2 lawsuits in the past, and has verbally harassed me. I didn't like it when Stocks did it to me, or anyone else for that matter, and I don't like it from Sabine. If you are OK with spending lots of money on a contract city attorney and not ever having that contract go out for an RFQ, I certainly will not change your mind. I really don't even care anymore, truth be told. I was asked to check on him by many people and I have done it. I will go before Council one more time only with current information, as the last time I asked for an RFQ, I was told the information I provided them was too old, but he is also a legacy if one thinks about it. He has knowledge of this city and how it operates, the good, bad and the ugly. I am way past the point of caring if he overcharges us, doesn't use paralegals to keep the costs down, etc. I did my best, but there must be an awful lot of people who think differently about him than I or he would have been gone by now, given what I and others on the Council know. So I agree totally agree with you, whoever you are.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You didn't mention he is terrible at what he does. Why wouldn't the city seek competent legal help? Something really off keeping this guy.

      Delete
    2. Something smelleth to high heaven in yonder council chambers - the fetid legal briefs are afoul!

      Delete
    3. Knows where the bodies are buried.

      Delete
  23. $aber Tooth $abine is like the good old porch dog - he done got legacy and that there institutional history. He also has fleas.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Can I get an AMEN?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Sabine is crooked as the day is long. This is not a secret. Councils for years have known who and what he is. Why haven't they fired his ass. Figure it out. Follow the money

    ReplyDelete
  26. Well it's official. The City is going to buy Pacific View. See the UT or Teresa Barth's FB page. All I want to know is how are we going to pay for it. Oh well, I'll let you younger folks figure that one out, since you wanted it so badly.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I have no problem depending on what they paid. Barth is well aware the city has very little funds, she is also aware mMuir and Gaspar are not going to vote to raise taxes - I suspect weak kneed Barth over paid and now placed the whole city at risk

    ReplyDelete
  28. Baird reports Barth Shaffer Kranz over paid and got bullied into paying 9.5M, nealy 2M more than the high end appraisal. Who says Baird even had another offer

    Barth tax raising loyalists are already posting on the UT we need to raise taxes, this Weds Barth Shaffer Kranz will be saying how we need to upzone other neighborhoods to pay for pensions and Pacific View.

    I wanted PV, but at that price Barth and Bairc win and taxpayers lose.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Although it looks fiscally crazy on the surface, it is the right move. First correct thing those three council members have done and the first blush of showing leadership. To pay for it fire Sabine and Vina and cut 10% of staff immediately. You three Kranz, Shaffer, Barth, are winners on buying Pacific View and if you will next remodel the staff at city hall we can all move forward. Gaspar & Muir get a major selfish fail on this one, proving they have no pulse on the will of the citizens in Encinitas, proven as well by their stance on supporting the bars which Shaffer and Barth want to help steer in the right direction. Residents in the future will be proud of what you three did in taking this bold step, you did the right thing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 9:06 completely disagree, Barth caved, who knows if Baird even had an offer.? Barth Kranz and Shaffer also know Muir and Gaspar won't thankfully raise taxes, so they strapped the city even more. Barth and Vina look like they conspired to deceive residents and the council on Lew Edwards, city staff are retiring because of Vina and Barth's culture of intimidation

      Think about this barthe shafferShaffer and kranz all told untruths on A and you trust these people? Dump Barth, and no new taxes

      Delete
    2. Didn't Kranz vote with Gaspar and Muir on the bars?

      Delete
    3. What an illogical rant.

      Delete
    4. Yes, Kranz, Gaspar, and Muir all voted against the Deemed Approved ordinance.

      Delete
    5. Planet crazy to 9:06..... Come home we need you.

      Delete
    6. Is there better governing and sites as nice as Pacific View? Then I might consider...

      Delete
    7. Still - Dump Barth.

      Delete
  30. Perhaps Muir is worried his rich pension is at risk.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pensions will be doled out before any other expenditure - guaranteed!

      Delete
  31. You have just witnessed "living outside your means". They paid way too much for that property. Somehow they will find a way to stick it to the citizens. Hang on to your hats and please no complaints when reality hits us hard.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They have already stuck it time citizens, Barth could habe objected the 2007 lease as a council person and didn't, the lease allowed eusd to lease it to the city for 1$ and allowed the city to change use from open to a storage yard, who lookedend after resident rights to open space and a discount - no one. Shame on Barth and previous councils

      Delete
  32. Reality is this is a premier property, location, great future ahead in what can be created. Unlike that poison park by the freeway that was $tocks lame vision.

    ReplyDelete
  33. They paid too much, probably about 2 million too much. But compared to what they waste yearly at city hall that is a drop in the bucket. Now fix the waste at city hall starting with salaries, pensions, redundant services, etc. Plenty to trim there to pay for Pacific View if they will get a "real" city manager.

    ReplyDelete
  34. They want to turn it into an artsy fartsy type of place of which most of us are not interested.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. bag to differ. Arsty far sty types bring higher property values. I support that. Lets make this place the best place on the world. By doing so, will promote more human kindness in this earth.

      Delete
    2. That was…..

      Delete
    3. 11:03- have you lost your senses? In 2004 this was the best place on earth- Then Norby aided by Stocks, Barth and Dirty Dan re-zoned the 101 without a vote of the people. Today we are pacific beach with drunks. Of coruse phony tony wrote an editorial saying no upzone vote had happened without a vote of the people- another nice lie out of city hall.

      Delete
    4. 9:03 - correct.

      Delete
  35. Tim makes it sound as if they actually paid more then their asking price of 9.5 million. Is that true?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. check out EUSD get's raises and salary increases buried in today's Coast News- the article say Baird is taking in about $48M a year in revenue but spending about $51M- EUSD under Baird and the board is going broke just like the city- why is that story buried on back pages? BSK over paid for the property and caved - the property should have been sold for less and Barth shaffer Kranz should have litigated but lacked the courage and character- much easier to waste taxpayer money and then hire expesnvie surve consultants to raise taxes on everybody

      Delete
    2. Litigated? Our city attorney is not capable of winning a lawsuit.

      Delete
    3. Sabine told the public there was an extra pay period for an employee who was on an annual contract- Sabine can't count to 52 but he can count to three -

      Delete
  36. Gaspar and Muir played the game well. They knew the 3 amigos would vote yes to purchase PV so they very safely voted no to enhance their chances to be re-elected. These 2 are the bar and developers friends. Don't forget you read here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The current city council need to be replaced. Vote tomorrow.

      Delete
    2. they voted smart. We didn't need that property. Now to pay for it, we will sell quail gardens. Lets start building this City.

      Delete
    3. Three amigos??? More like 3 stooges!

      Delete
    4. woop woop woop

      Delete
    5. Agreed on Muir and Gaspar, they don't even have the guts to vote No. Bond would have voted no, maybe even Stocks.

      -Mr Green Jeans

      Delete
    6. how do we know MUir-Gaspar did not propose a lower price? How do we know that lower price might have been accepted by Baird saving us millions?

      BSK actually think people are going to build a statue or palque fro them-


      We need a statute of Bob Bonde in town! There's selfless leader who wants nothing but common sense leadership

      Delete
  37. You made valid points within this content that I feel need further exploration. I agree with most all of this info.

    Ice hockey skates & Ice hockey gloves

    ReplyDelete
  38. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's a spambot post, above. I noticed WC about it.

      Delete
  39. What happened to repairing our roads?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Go to Home Depot and buy your own asphalt and fix it your self. At least you'll know it was done properly.

      Delete
    2. 6:46 do you beleive you are smart enough to raise our taxes? Is it your believe you are smart enough to take more of our money and give it to failures like Muir Gaspar Barth Shaffer and Kranz who have let Vina create a culture of misuse by recklessly and secretly spending our money?

      Delete
    3. 8:58- all the council members need to go, including the head of public works and parks and recreation. Chop head!! Fire 50% of the staff, cut salaries by 60% for others.
      Go buy your own asphalt and fix your own road, the city won't do it for you, they only care about trophy projects. Your road ain't one of those.... You lose.

      Delete
    4. 12:17 you must live on Birmingham- where we all lose, except for the new $6.2M Barth-Muir Fire station located right behind a perfectly serviceable fire station Barth- MUIR closed

      Delete
    5. They need classy digs therein to eat their donuts.

      Delete
    6. Donuts deserve five million dollar backdrops. It helps appetite when you are nervous that alarm will ring...as it does every couple years.

      Delete
    7. Cruise the beach and check out the chicks - on your way to Vons.

      Delete
    8. Walk...don't run - you might trip in a pothole.

      Delete
  40. As with any property transaction there are winners and losers.
    Winners- Lynn and her crowd of zealots. When the real bills of PV come into play she and her crowd will be long dead. Sticking the costs on the backs of the young people in the city. Way to go Lynn, once again the aging baby boomers show everyone it's all about them. On the bright side Lynn, we can expect less of your illogical rants against the Leucadia streetscape because the city hasn't the money.
    Losers- the L101 Mainstreet association and the community of Leucadia. Take a good look around citizens, walk the 101, what you see and have today is as good as its going to get....no sidewalks, no flowers, no trees, weeds, dirt the norm. The north end of 101, is and will always be.... A shit hole. Nice work zealots. How much funds from the Leucadia streetscape were stolen by Vina, Barth and crew to help with the down payment ??? The L101 board and William Morrison should be livid today. Stabbed in the back by Barth, Kranz ( a closet Lynn fan and fellow zealot to keep Leucadia Crappy??) and Shaffer.

    Hey Beacons Bob, you can take down that stupid sign calling to keep Leucadia crappy, you won. Is that sign permitted?? Just wondering. (Not that the city will enforce the rules and regulations. Maybe they 'll unleash that new code enforcement officer on the sign law breakers?? Naa, he's politically connected.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 6:44 - you reveal your ignorance and knwoledge of city finances along with who is at fault- you blame Lynn as you dare not hold the real failures accountable-


      Barth is as complicit as Muir and Gaspar . Kranz and Shaffer are as complicit as Dalager and stocks. Vina and Sabine as culpable as Phil Cotton

      All the kleptocrats at city hall have wasted our money on theri own foolish and self serving aspirations= Dangerous Dirty Dan over paying for the Hall Park is no different that BSK over paying for Pacific View- and how do those loser purchawes compare with over paying for the Mossy Yard that Stocks and Bond over paid for- oh there about the same. And how about pension hog Muir ? In 2006 or 2008 a bond offering was sold to the public that the money would be used to "Complete the Hall Park" of course that money went to complete unneeded and unwanted fire stations instead and 4 years later Vina was back raiding funds and doing another bond offering-

      The city finance problems are not about the 101 - they are about a long standing of failures of elected leaders from Barth to Stocks to Dirty Dan- blaming anyone other that those charlatans is odious

      Delete
    2. What young person can buy a property here? Even Condos are 600k. Only established, 40 somethings making 100k or more can buy in this town. Encinitas is now Beverly Hills by the sea...

      Delete
    3. Earn it your housing, live where you can afford, be the best you can be- it's the american way.

      Goverment should provide housing- It's the Barth Shaffer way.

      Now Barth and Shaffer want to increase our taxes to pay consultants to hoodwink the public on a tax increase - while allowing Vina to run a culture of fear and intimidation of local city workers working at city hall if former employees speaking at city hall are to be believed.

      Barth and Shaffer don't stand for transparency and free speech for all, only for those who agree with them

      Delete
    4. Well we had a great guy Holz who has integrity but wasn't a developer tool so the rotary got Dan and it has been a downhill expensive slide ever since. Those that didn't vote or chose the wrong people....well don't do that again.

      Delete
    5. We have more fire stations - we need more Vons to service them!

      Delete
  41. Crappy is that dense developement at north end of Vulcan, what an eyesore.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Shea Property near Ashbury?

      Delete
  42. 6:44, you've revealed and underlined your complete ignorance. The $20 million for Streetscape would come from TransNet tax funds through SANDAG. The City's only contribution would be staff time involved. You can't even attribute the $30,000 per year the City gives the L101MSA because that's a general subsidy, not specific to Streetscape.

    Buying PV and funding Streetscape are separate. The funds are from different sources that don't mingle.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The city HAD $2.5 M set aside to help fund streetscape.. How much has been stolen to buy PV ? Your ignorance is revealed.

      Delete
    2. the city has $7M set aside to fund capital improvement projects. Slippery Gus Vina went before the council in 2012 and told them the city's finances were great- the council raided these funds

      The city NO LONGER has this $7M

      Vina and Barth need to go, tell your neighbors (A former Barth supporter) -look at the facts

      Delete
    3. 10:34 Hilarious rendition of the facts. Do a story telling at the April 26th gathering at the Encinitas library!

      Delete
    4. Get the city council -members and Vina. clad in barrels with straps over their shoulders. standing at the off ramps to Encinitas holding posters - their signs will read "Bankrupt - will work for pension relief". Throw a puppy or two in for the cute factor.

      Delete
    5. , instead of .

      Delete
  43. Q: Would any developer spend tons of money on a property without knowing for sure it would be rezoned to allow development?

    A: No.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. exactly- Barth, Phony Tonmy and Shaffer caved- but hey, it's taxpayers money not theirs, so why act with logic and prudence- they can just get the overpaid Spin Doctor they hired to control the message - or raise taxes -

      Delete
    2. 15 months.

      Only took Barth 15 months to run the city finances off the tracks and into the 'red' lagoon'.

      This should be one helluva 'cross-fire' State of the City event with Barth and Gaspar both reporting the current state of this city: this is like Barth being told by her folks to sell the family cow at market for groceries only for Barth to trade Bossie for three magic beans: but in the Encinitas version fairy tale, Barth, Kranz and Shaffer eat the magic beans rather than plant them where they could provide food and the result is a giant cow-patty rather than a beanstalk deficit that they have now created that only a tax increase will fix.

      You want the streets fixed? News-flash. The Council never intends to resurface the streets, ever. As mad as that sounds, Barth/Shafer will let the streets crumble to dissuade commuters from traveling thru Encinitas, as part of their climate action plan: what, they are not that crazy?

      They are holding a meeting at the city this month to decide how many fruit trees to plant through out the city, where to plant them and maybe the first question is, isn't the city watering the medians with 'gray' water? Um Um Good! Why repave when the 'free fruit' will pave the local roads and help drive traffic out of town? Don't believe it, ask Barth or 'Parks and Red'.

      Barthonomics, translation 'Not very 'well-thought-out' and 'Hire Someone Expensive from Berkeley'

      Yes, Baird's brilliant 'auction' ploy stampeded Barth into paying $6 to $7 mil too much, but it was Barth/Kranz/Shaffer's decision to eat the magic beans. Its not buying Pacific View that's foolish, it overpaying 300%, hiding the truth from the public for as long as you could as a council, and now forcing Shaffer back into line when she balked at approving Lew's $100 K: but from Barth's point of view, what's another $100K when you are already $7 mil in the red?

      Delete
    3. I suspect that we might see another chapter to this story. Though the 3 Stooges agreed to buy the property for $9.5 million--2 million OVER the highest comp, don't be surprised if the school comes back in a few months and "lowers" the price with a lame reason like, "well, since the kids are going to be using it, we will put some in as well."

      Why do I say this? Barth, Kranz, Shaffer and Vina and Baird are all are in the midst of a PR nightmare, and this would be a way to save face and make them look like they made a good deal. Also, it would be a leg up over Gaspar running for mayor since Barth was already out telling people, "They (Gaspar and Muir) didn't vote for it!"

      This is strategy from a very sad group. Remember, it was Barth, Shaffer and Kranz who went along with Vina to get Peak Democracy and want to hire Lew Edwards. Now they also have an excuse to bring on Lew Edwards to raise our taxes on something that they couldn't afford. Just like the Park, they will use taxfunds to pay for other debt as well and will comingle funds so that it will take a forensic accountant to figure out where the money went.

      Delete
    4. 10:34, the city's finances were driven off the tracks in 2005 when the council at that time voted to up the pensions of the firefighters and other pensioned employees.

      We'll see if the EUSD does indeed kick in some money of if there is some outside dough to kick in. Heck, it still wouldn't be a bad idea to have an outside foundation come in and raise some money to offset the cost.

      This is where the rubber meets the road, can the city find a way to finance this that makes sense, will the people of this city help out?

      I didn't want the city to purchase the PV property at the inflated price, you have to call that bluff and make them show their hand, ie that they can't sell it.

      We'll see if there's more to the story.

      -Mr Green Jeans

      Delete
    5. Green Jeans-

      The people of this city have helped the city out. THe people of thsi city have paid interests on bonds to build fire stations, libraries and parks. The people of this city have paid to pay pensions and salaries. The people have paid for schools and education.

      Teresa Barth, Lisa Shaffer and Tony Kranz have wasted our money. Approving $135,00 for VIna's Spin Doctor, Apprving cloe to $1M for Vina's cabinet that we learned last week has created a war on woman at city hall by building a culture of fear and intimidation, by wasting $50,000 os a secret Rutan and TUcker report, by wasting $9K on a secret Peak Democracy

      It is time for the public to come together and demand an acounting. Teresa Bath has presided has been there for 8 eyars and city finances are worse not better. Now we learn Gus Vina kept information about the Barth-Shaffer-KLranz tax increase secret from the public AND the council. What kind of operation os Barth running- you migth think failing deserve more of our money, I don't.

      Residents have already paid for PV and should not be taxed twice to pay for it again. How many times will greedy politicans seek to take money the could be used for our families and waste it on spin doctors and hihg density lawyes to argue against Prop A and bone headed misuse of funds?

      You might reward failure Green jeans and think you and government are entitled to more of the money I earn for my family- but I call that theft- I've paid my taxes- get your greedy paws out of my pocket and speak for your own family not mine.

      You might believe in rewarding Barth's failures and Vina's secrecy by taking more money from me and residents- I reward failure by holding those responsible accountable. This has nothing to do with PV and everything to do with the failures of Barth for 8 long years- she can try and cover up the truth, she can't hide the facts.

      Dump Barth ( A former Barth supporter)

      Delete
    6. OMG- the comment about Barth and Shaffer letting the roads crumble to force residents out of cars and on to bikes is hilarious-

      what's not hilarious is Barth and Shaffer get a estaimted $350 dollar a month car allowance- to drive their cars while on tapxayers dime while crafting zoniong laws to try and force the rest of us to ride bikes like poor chinese peasants and live in 250 sq ft micro-units

      Delete
    7. Funny! Well the citizens are now playing the council but they don't see it. We will watch as they dig their grave.

      Delete
    8. who's grave, the council or the citizen's - a vote for Barth is the same as Gsapar , but atleast Gaspar ahs been more transprent and opposes highe taxes.

      Both Gaspar and Barth support upzoning and overturning prop A- they are no different

      Delete
    9. Everyone seems to agree that we need new people on the council. Like comparing F and F- students.

      Delete
  44. Baird and the school board played a game of chicken with the City and won. They fooled the City into paying far too much for the Pacific View property.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Baird should be kicked out of his job. These school board members should be voted out of office: Emily Andrade, Carol Skiljan, Gregg Sonken and Marla Strich. They took a hostage and were paid a ransom. The whole Pacific View episode is entirely shameful.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Does anyone know how much they actually paid?

    ReplyDelete
  47. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  48. FYI- Check this Weds. night's Council agenda. They may be trying to do an end run around Prop. A. It's about Density Bonus. Also, from what I understand, they City payed at least $9.5 million if not a little more. It cannot be rezoned, it cannot be sold, and it has to be used for the public. So far talk has been about building a community center (though we already have one) , an artists colony. I sure wish I knew what kind of deal was made, and what taxes will be raised to pay for it. I don't get the feeling that a revenue stream will come from whatever is put on the site. I doubt if anything will be built for a while, as we are already in debt.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You know they will issue a bond for this. Unless they get outside donations and sell bricks. Muir should donate half his pension, he doesn't deserve more than half.

      Delete
    2. Would you donate half of your pension or 401K after working 40 years for it? If he does, he should be recalled for being stupid.

      Delete
    3. Why didn't they use the Naylor Act to renegotiate the price? Why just agree arbitrarily on $9.5 million (if that indeed is the price)? An appraisal should have been done or average the ones that they already did.

      Delete
    4. A foundation, created through the Artists' Colony and the Historical Society has been set up, or is in the works? Money can be donated to such a foundation, which donations are tax deductible, as with the Encinitas Preservation Association.

      Existing classrooms can be rehabbed and maintained, just as was accomplished by the Artists' Colony on A Street, where Moonlight Lofts is, now; a lease revenue stream was derived from that property.

      Down the line, more improvements can be made, including, perhaps, a small amphitheater? Much of the work can be done by volunteers, if the City is able to lease the property to a foundation.

      Since the terms are still being worked out, EUSD should carry the loan, at ZERO interest, for 30 years. I hope Baird/Vina/Barth do try to do some kind of damage control. They did overpay, were NOT good negotiators.

      Not good when administrators act as though they are playing with monopoly money. This when Barth agreed to the Spin Doctor expense, agreed to spend hundreds of thousands to pay for engineered plans for Leucadia Streetscape on 101, when the massive amounts already paid to Peltz and Associates was to include Phase One, INCLUDING DESIGN.

      That's where all the money "set aside" for N101 Streetscape is going. But Streetscape is really a misnomer, because TransNet Tax money will NOT go to landscaping, planting, beautification, preserving the canopy, which we all want. In fact, with the current plans at least 21 more old growth trees would be felled.

      Why don't you go build a roundabout in your driveway, if you want one so badly, lol?

      Re Naylor Act, both the City and the School District were negligent in signing leases, repeatedly for Pacific View, NEVER taking the Naylor Act into the account. Baird has said that the City took the Naylor Act, Eminent Domain, and road improvements for Fourth Street "off the table" early on. That's what he was telling potential bidders, during their walk-through. Now I believe him.

      Somehow, it seems that Baird/Vina/Barth colluded to drive the price up. You can bet Barth will run for mayor, now.

      Delete
    5. Barth will be defeated. Word is leaking out, she can't hide the facts, the =city is in worse shape today then when she was elected. She has been a failure at every leave, and now she is secretive and shady as well

      Delete
    6. Isn't all that the responsibility of the City Attorney - SapHead Sabine?? Looks like he is in bed with Baird (along with select staff).

      Delete
    7. 7:16 Barth has known about this since being elected in 2006 and did squat, not a single press conference, newsletter or paper commentary. She was silent, complict. Sabine is not the leader for the city Barth is and Barth is a follower

      Delete
    8. Lynn- no one likes a sore winner. When the bills come due, you and your zealot friends will be long dead.
      PS- are there roundabouts in heaven, or only hell??

      Delete
  49. Since it will be years before anything can be built, level it and plant grass to use as a interim park. This will give citizens a use and feel for the site right off the bat. Obviously at 9 million it is to valuable to park trucks.

    ReplyDelete
  50. It could be pass-out park. The drunks would have a place to fall on their faces.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Barth recommended MIG- cost to taxpayers $1.3M results 0

    Dump Barth, she is not trustworthy

    ReplyDelete
  52. Muir should donate $80k of his $180 pension every year

    ReplyDelete
  53. How did he fight fires? With hot air?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The jumbo sodas that he bought at Vons.

      Delete
  54. Why should anyone donate their pensions 2:33. Would you be interested in donating yours, if and when you get one? I think not. Let's be real folks. Whether the pensions are too big or not is not the issue. What is done on this cannot be undone. That ship has sailed. However, it seems like even some of you on this blog think that we should purchase all sorts of stuff and then older people should give away their pensions. You don't like old folks? OK, perhaps we should go to the Soylent Green model? Remember many old folks have contributed far more into all sorts of government services that we will never use i.e.: the Park; Pacific View; Sharrows, as most of us cannot ride a bike in our golden years; a community garden( again a lot of older people cannot garden due to health issues; and the list keeps coming. I have never been a public employee so I don't have a nice 401K or a pension. But, I do not begrudge those who worked for them to get them. What I do get angry about is the people in the private sector that rape and pillage our money. Why aren't you going after them?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dude. You may get off working harder and longer so Muir and his firefighterfriends retire at age 55 with pensions of 175K but don't ask us to Join you. Public workers need self contributed 401K with a 3% yearly match for employer, that's it. You want to give your money to city employees great, walk down to city hall and give it away - but keep your greedy paws off the money I am earning to pay for my family. Who are you to take from me to give to them?

      Delete
    2. No true. Eliminate the pensions and sponcer legislation to tax pensions over 50k 50% to pay the outstanding pension debt!!!

      Delete
  55. You miss the point a 35% increase in one evening? They pick pocketed every citizen and should be no different than a common thief. They deserve the flack.

    ReplyDelete
  56. And what about the fake firefighters group to support electing his friend that paid him back this way? Just cause its legal doesn't make it right, explain how this isn't stealing?

    ReplyDelete
  57. 3:07, you're missing the point that public employees are grossly overpaid, benefited and pensioned in comparison to private sector employees. The measuring stick should be the private sector. Public should be pegged to private, not be a multiple of it. Public employees are bleeding the taxpayers to death while the places the money should be going are ignored. There is no justification for Muir's $176,000 pension. On top of that, he gamed the system to raise his pension that high.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What about this theory, private sector workers are underpaid, due to such considerations as eroding salaries, inflation, cost of living and foreign competition.

      Funny how a lot of people only started complaining about public workers once they realized they themselves were being screwed.

      And before you launch into me as "city worker #534", I work in the private sector. AND, I'm not for unsustainable pensions, we never should've allowed the city to go down that road in 2005. But that's what apathy gets you, council members like Stocks, Bonds, Dallablabber, Guerin.

      The city WAY overpaid for the mossy Nissan property, but that one didn't get a lot of press. At least this property is in a prime location, which is still no excuse. I will never understand why they didn't call Baird's bluff on the price, maybe they thought that public opinion was behind them.

      Delete
    2. 7:55 how many excuses are you planning to make for the failures Barth Shaffer and kranz? Really dude you actually denigrate residents concerned with government pay as jealous people? Your efforts to spin for Barth are obvious

      No sitting council member is more responsible for the failing finances then Barth, look at her voting record. PUBLIC OPINION is not behind Barth ( a former Barth supporter)

      Delete
  58. Didn't we recently lose a fire chief that was here a few months because the pay was too low for the amount of work necessary to run 4 cities?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. no- the fire chief quit likely becuase of teh culture fo fear and intimidation Gus Vina and Tersesa Barth have created at city hall. Listen to the speech the ex-city employee gave at city hall last week- the culture under Vina needs to be investigated by a third party to rule out any improprieties nd protect against future possible lawsuits

      Delete
    2. Work?? You're kidding, right???

      Delete
    3. It is tiresome driving to Von's on Santa Fe-

      Delete
    4. Built a Vons adjacent to every station - or better yet, house the firemen in the Vons. They could bag groceries when they're not working, so you'd see them all the time!

      Delete
    5. That is funny, the Von's firehouse. On Santa Fe

      Delete
  59. Would Muir even be a councilman if not to protect his pension? This is the game, spend,spend, spend, THEN say well you residents want all this (pacific view etc.) so now we need density and building, higher taxes, metered parking to pay for it. But REALLY they want cash flow for PENSIONS - outrageous undeserved pensions at that. The added disgusting part is Muir will say "I voted against the spending" when he knew how the vote would go, and the outcome would feed the free spending pension trough which is all they care about, same reason they want to have bar revenue and destroy our great town in the process. ENOUGH!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why does he need to protect his pension, it comes from the state, not the city (no longer a city employee). Even if the city went bankrupt, his pension would not be effected.

      Delete
    2. You don't really think the state pays the pension of every former city employee in California, do you?

      Delete
    3. 10:01 who do you think pays the state! Gas tax, income tax, sales California i ......california is becoming at best a socialist state at worts a communist state. Barth Shaffer and Kranz want to take money from families and give that money to the government employees - it is called a transfer of wealth.

      Delete
  60. I can't believe our broke city Council over spent on that Pacific view property. They are getting worse and worse. They are getting near the incompetency level of Jerome stocks.


    Unbelievable. I am voting for someone that will reduce the pension debt and fix my roads!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, only dope smokers and conspiracy theorists are available.

      Delete
  61. Did the city ever get an appraisal on the PV property before they made their decision or did they just make a willy-nilly decision on their own?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They got 2 appraisals -- both for WAY less than they paid.

      Delete
    2. They are more stupid than they look.

      Delete
    3. woop woop woop

      Delete
  62. Stocks is looking better every day!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What day you talking about - Doomsday?

      Delete
  63. $tock$ is the worst, but they are all neck and neck. What a race.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Fricken morons … that property is nothing special. Its just like the property next to it.


    9.5 million for 2.8 acres of non developed land with serious hazardous waste disposal issues? Man did the City get hosed our what?

    Why would they buy this property. They could have built an art complex on some of the other land it owns like on quail gardens.

    OK now that they bought this, sell quail gardens.

    ReplyDelete
  65. I have a great idea. Now that we own it… lets make it high density low income property. Say R1-50. We could meet all our low income needs plus the poor could have oceanfront views.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Green Jeans = Marco Gonzalez or David Peck

    These guys work with both EUSD and the city, so they are now a public paid PR arm for both agencies and would like to see the current power structure continue after the next election.

    Read the post above and other posts where Green Jeans makes excuses for Teresa, Tony and Lisa. Also, GJ doesn't disagree that this whole deal might change later and more money could appear to help out. I think the whole thing may have been set up to save face. Our City pays an inflated price for the property, then a bit later, the school comes back and takes a lower price so that Barth, Tony, Lisa, Vina, and Baird can improve their poor public images. After lowering the inflated price to a reasonable one, they can claim that they all "get along," and have leadership.

    Barth has already been pointing out that they (Gaspar and Muir) didn't vote for it. It also makes no sense that the city would pay 2 million more than the highest comp.

    I smell ratones!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You wish I was Marco. I do too, Lawyers make a lot more money than I do. I don't even know who David Peck is.

      I love it that when you try to give a perspective on negotiation, that you're immediately labeled a spy, a traitor. If you read back on my other comments, I never supported paying full price for the PV property. The city should've waited it out, called Baird's bluff and then come back with the 5k offer.

      Instead they gagged it and helped him out of the corner he painted himself into. I think Baird is an ass clown, at least as a realtor. People with kids can weigh in on his role as an educator, I claim total ignorance there as I have no kids.

      I now return to you "Hatefest, the sequel"..

      -Mr Green Fog

      Delete