Some commenters have suggested that Barth's withdrawal from the mayoral race is a ploy, and that she'll get back in. We are highly confident this view is wrong. Barth has little to gain from another two years as mayor, and much to lose in a bare-knuckles campaign when she has already alienated a large number of her former supporters on a range of issues from community character to transparency and fiscal responsibility. Barth is retiring gracefully. Let's respect that.
A few commenters have suggested that Jerome Stocks will get back in the race. That's a non-starter. The Dump Stocks campaign has destroyed his brand permanently.
At this point, unless a well-organized candidate from the Prop A folks or from someone in Vina's 28 dissidents comes together, Kristin Gaspar looks the heavy favorite for mayor.
Agreed
ReplyDeleteI'm voting for Audet!!!
ReplyDeleteYup, I agree with this assessment. It's a sad state of affairs when someone like Gaspar is the prohibitive favorite for Mayor.
ReplyDeleteMy take on Teresa is this, she took a lot of heat for most of her term as virtually the only dissenter after Maggie's passing. Can you imagine being on the opposite side of Stocks for all those years? After that, it's all Prop A. Without getting into it, because we already have ad nauseum, she ended up on the wrong side of popular sentiment on that one. We all know how pissed people are to this day.
So I think she saw the handwriting on the wall, not wanting to battle it out with Gaspar and her huge out of town warchest, and the inevitable dirty pool mailer from team Stocks.
Give Teresa that, she did not play dirty pool with campaigning or any of the other tactics employed by Team Stocks. Her results definitely came up short as mayor and leader of the "majority", but I think the intent and effort never wavered. We're lucky to have someone like Teresa to volunteer their time, otherwise we may have had Doug Long on the council at the same time as Dallablabber, Stocks and Bonds.
The future will be interesting, because the non-darkside needs a candidate. Who will step up?
-Mr Green Jeans
Audet's not running. Save your time on that. Speaking of that, what will all the Teresa haters do to fill their time now that she's passing the torch. LOL....
DeleteThe guy's name is Bond, not Bonds.
DeleteIt's Bonds after a couple of Scotches down in Jerome's rumpus room...
DeleteThe original post by EU, and Grean Jeans at 9:08 absolutely nailed it. Nothing left to say about the story of T Barth.
Delete--TNG.
No dirty pool? When you have your supporters pound the pavement and bust their backside campaigning for you and THEN stab them in the back with prop A lies, twist the knife with desert rose, then disembowel you with support for a slime bag city manager what do you call that? It is dirty pool with betrayal added as well!
DeleteYes, I think there was "dirty pool" played, too, re Teresa's stating she "supports the public's right to vote," and then coming out against the Right to Vote Initiative. She knew very well the impression she was giving to people, publicly and privately, including by her candidates Lisa and Tony's having signed the Right to Vote on Upzoning petition.
DeleteIt was also dirty pool for Teresa and Tony and then Tony and Lisa to run on trust and transparency, respect and integrity, and then not honor campaign commitments to enact a local Sunshine Ordinance, once elected.
It's dirty pool to make promises about replacing the City Attorney and not to keep those promises, either.
Two of Teresa Barth's biggest mistakes were in hiring MIG to create the failed General Plan Update, then not insisting that the reams of statistics should still be used, insisting that public input should be correctly quantified and qualified.
The other huge mistake was in Teresa, along with retired Planning Director Patrick Murphy's recommending hiring Gus Vina to the rest of Council, at an exhorbitant rate of pay, after Vina's vote of no confidence by Sacramento City Council for his tenure as City Manager there. Vina subsequently hired an almost entirely new "cabinet," which cabinet was formerly just designated "Heads of Department." These out of area dept. heads don't understand the traditions or history of Encinitas, and have taken over City Hall, making for terrible morale and an exodus of long term employees retiring earlier than they had planned.
Probably a year or so ago: Barth hosted a community get-together at the Cardiff library. A resident asked if she planned to run for elected mayor in 2014. She said she didn't know. Then she said when she ran for council in 2006, she promised her husband she wouldn't run again in 2010. She said she broke that promise and doubted she could do that again. Conclusion drawn then: After her term ended in 2014, she would drop out of local electoral politics. What she announced today is consistent with that conclusion.
ReplyDeleteThe majority of Encinitas voters are against Gaspar and what she stands for. That majority expressed itself in the Prop A vote as it had previously done in the Ecke land vote.
Gaspar hasn't announced her candidacy, but her pandering indicates she will run for mayor. Since she doesn't have majority support, it doesn't seem likely she would be elected unless there's nobody else in the race, or if whoever else is in the race is even worse than Gaspar.
Please list Vina's 28 dissidents so we can choose some candidates.
ReplyDeleteSurfer Joe
DeleteThe Kowabunga Kid
The Strange Thing of Leucadia
Mary Louise Geissen
Cardiff Kook
Bruce Wayne
Stoner Steve
Karen Pannikin
The Grand Poo Bah of the Leucadia Club
Roundabout Ron
Prop A Pete
....
This is only a partial list. Personally I'd still like to see Dennis Holz, but that's not happening either.
DeleteCrazy Louie
DeleteNO to Gaspar getting re-elected and NO to her as mayor. We have had our share of idiots, and we need some fresh new, intelligent perspective to represent what the citizens of Encinitas want. Gaspar has ignored and voted down some major issues that were important to Encinitas. She needs to go. Barth made her choices and her choices cost her dearly. It is time for her to get out also. She has been an inadequate representative and totally blind to what the City Manager has done to this city.
ReplyDeleteA few are:
ReplyDeleteJerry Sodomka
Donna Westbrook
Andrew Audet
Julie Grabol
Lorri Greene
Lynn Marr
CJ Minster
and more I cannot think of right now
Those 7 perenial rock throwers will never run for office.
DeleteBarth is gone, the question is who will run against Gaspar? We probably won't know until July....
ReplyDeleteNone of these people will run:
ReplyDeleteJerry Sodomka
Donna Westbrook
Andrew Audet
Julie Grabol
Lorri Greene
Lynn Marr
CJ Minster
Dr. Lorri has already stated on this blog she's not running. I would assume would have thrown her hat in if she was running. It will be someone else....
I would assume Lynn is not running.
DeleteHow about the nice panhandling guy from down in Roadside Park?
DeleteI hope Lword runs… that would be hilarious.
ReplyDeletePlease Run Lword!!!
Is Vina's list available through a public records request?
ReplyDeleteWe need candidates!
Fascinating that Barth never met a fee or cost she didn't approve and she leaves as one of the big spenders at city hall. She waltzes off into the sunset and leaves behind a $10 million white elephant that she still hasn't explained how its to be paid. Oh sure the " Art center " will generate $180,000 per month says Lynn but how do we know that will be sufficient . I'm sure the Barth disciples will give her a standing ovation at the next council meeting but now is the scariest time for the taxpayers of the city.... Watch her spend and vote to increase taxes , fees, etc. she has the next 9 months to screw the people of this city into the ground. God help us.
ReplyDeleteBarth chose MIG, nuff said.
DeletePV was approved by a 3-2 council vote, supported by a massive citizen's campaign that supported the purchase. ( I would advise against using Lynn as a reference source.)
DeleteMIG was not ineffective the General Plan Update. Stocks & Friends were the ones that derailed the General Plan Update. The "ugly baby", as he called it, was only in the draft phase when he disbanded the GPAC and created a hand picked "new" committee, ERAC. It would not fair to blame MIG for the General Plan Update results or to lay that on Barth.
I made an error, a big one, and have since admitted as much, when I made that guestimate of $180K per month in lease revenue for Pacific View. Purchasing PV is not a mistake; terms can still be agreed upon that would mitigate the fact that the City is overpaying.
DeleteWe all make mistakes. By admitting them, we can learn from them. Unfortunately, Teresa Barth didn't seem to learn from her mistakes. Wasting at least $1.5 Million on MIG was a huge mistake the City made, through Teresa Barth's recommendations.
Doing damage control in setting reasonable terms for purchase of Pacific View could help both EUSD and the City of Encinitas in their elected officials' upcoming campaigns.
My greatest misgiving is that Barth and the rest of the council continue to let the fraud of Encinitas "fiscal health" continue. I want a forensic accountant now, and this was part of the platform that Rachelle Collier ran on many years ago. It is time!
ReplyDeleteWC Varones for mayor!
ReplyDeleteAudet or Varones for Mayor!!!!
ReplyDeleteDon't rule out Dr. Lori running. She has been on the inside of city hall for 5 years. She might surprise us yet.
ReplyDeleteShe is not an insider… she was a parks commissioner….. they don't do shit and have zero authority and zero credit at City Hall. RUFKing?
ReplyDeleteNot even…. park commissioners don't do not do anything or get any respect. Ask Lorri. Did they even present a long term plan about the Regional sports Park.
ReplyDeleteNo Council has ever asked the Parks and Rec. Commission for any input on the Park, except to ask citizens for names of the Park. I was Chair of that sub-committee. 175 citizens of our community came up with some awesome names and our sub-committee narrowed the names down to about 20 to share with the whole Commission. Then we narrowed it down to about 7, if memory serves me. I presented the names to the City Council, which at the time consisted of Stocks, Bond, Dalger, Houlihan, and I think Maggie. None of the names the cities gave were selected, instead Bond, wanted Encinitas Community Park, which the Council agreed to. So 11:22 is correct. One of the many reasons I got off the Commission is because we were not asked to do anything, and we were not supposed to initiate anything unless the Council asked us to. When Vina began his "strategic plan" stuff, we were supposed to write what we wanted to do. It was all bogus, because the Staff took it over. I left because I has too many issues with the new Parks and Rec. Director. Enough said on that subject.
DeleteShould have said "citizens" after none of the names.
DeleteAt last night's State of the City address.... Kristin Gaspar gave a pandering, idiotic, 20 minute speech/magic show trying to prove her bonafides as a fiscal conservative. It was agonizing, patronizing and moronic. This is your next mayor folks unless someone legit steps up. (And none of the suggested candidates above are legit.) There is no doubt that she's running.
ReplyDeleteTeresa Barth spoke before and after Gaspar. Clearly no love lost between those two. Teresa explained that all was not bleak, as Gaspar suggested, and offered the "glass half full" (her words) version of what's happening with our town. It was classy and carried an appropriate tone of cautious optimism.
Say what you will about Teresa but she has not sold out and dearly loves our town. She has consistently been an advocate of the DAO and an agenda of preservation. There was (and remains) enough misinformation and confusion about Prop A that I'm willing to give her a mulligan there, especially since it passed.
Your "dump Barth" folks are getting what you want here so please show some class and allow her to bow out gracefully. Since Gaspar is a near shoo-in for mayor, who's going to fill her council seat? That seat has "swing vote" written all over it.
I agree 100% with 1:24. It seemed like a Twilight Zone episode. Agonizing, patronizing and moronic are perfect terms to describe Gaspar's performance.
DeleteI am embarrassed that Gaspar is going to be our next mayor.
Barth showed her true colors when she choose to spend the city into bankruptcy. She'll move out of the state while still collecting her Calif pension. I'm predicting Oklahoma or Arkansas , somewhere where no one knows her and costs are low. Will you join her?? We hope so, as the remaining few of us work at getting this cities finances back to black.
DeleteI'm embarrassed that Gaspar ever got elected, and got the most votes.
DeleteAgree 1:24, Teresa never sold out, she tried to preserve our town for the people. She got totally tripped up by Prop A., but as you say, it passed anyway.
Teresa isn't moving, you will see her around town, unlike Stocks, Bond, Guerin, Dallager and the rest of the clowns who really screwed up our city via the Hall Property and the Pension increase.
I'm still proud to say I supported her, because she has a level of integrity and didn't take money from out of town fat cats or put out low blow mailers, which is Gaspar's stock in trade.
The city's financial mess goes back 20 years, you can't lay that all at Teresa's doorstep. Part of the mess lies with the people of this city for taking a nap while team Stocks dug the financial hole...
Ummm...the financial madness continues with the Pacific View purchase and her support for a sales tax increase. She is a typical tax and spend liberal.
DeleteTeresa 3 biggest failures.
Delete1. PV- This was NOT a City Issue. The losers just committed the City onto another $15 million Trophy project we can not afford or need.
2. Prop. A.
3. and the biggest by far--- keeping and giving the loser Gus Vina an excellent rating. She should have demanded that a real long term financial plan be developed by the City Manager which provides a realistic projections of revenues and expenditures with a complete look at the Regional Sports Complex. If we had this document it would be obvious that we can not afford PV.
Barth is nice, but not smart enough to be leading a City. Nor are the others. I'm glad she's stepping out. We need to vote out Gaspar. We need two new faces on City Council. Audet and Varones on City Council would make property values spike!!!
A Barth agenda of preservation? Opposed residents on Desert Rose, Opposed residents on Prop A, Opposed residents in hiring a spin Doctor, Opposed residents demanding legal action against EUSD- please.....................the attempt to rewrite history is nauseating
DeleteCouncil's hands were tied on Desert Rose by state law including the density bonus. Prop A is addressed above. Teresa (and the council) opposed residents in hiring a spin doctor? How many residents opposed it? How many favored it? When was that vote? Taking action that 5 residents speak out against can't properly be described as " opposing residents."
DeleteHow many residents wanted the City to take legal action against EUSD? What sort of legal action? At what cost (legal action is ALWAYS expensive and uncertain)? So you don't like the city hiring a PR person but you want the city to hire an expensive law firm to pursue a very difficult case the city would likely lose? Hmmmm....
That's the thing about public office, you can't please everyone. Teresa has always done what she truly believed was in our town's best interests, even when it ran counter to her personal beliefs (ie. Desert Rose.) She's definitely not going away and will live here to experience the consequences, good or bad, of her/council's decisions.
9:12
Deletecompletely agree
9:12
Deleteuntrue- council could have sided with residents on Desert Rose and a. Rounded down the density like they do in LA. b. Opposed the developer on environemntal grounds- as the law provides c. Opposed the developer on safety grounds- as the law provides.
BUT- the developer was represented by Marco Gonzalez of the Coast Law group who gave money to Barth. Also another partner their I am told named Peck is a huge Barth supporter. Add to that the nice new park in front of the Coast Law building has a new park built at taxpayer expense.
Barth compalins in her newsletter there is no participation - yet when all public speakers who take the time to go to city hall to promote good fiscal responsibility by opposing hiring a spin doctor speak out Barth ignores them- and wastes the money. $135,000 could have been aproved that night (6/12/2013) for traffic calming at Paul Ecke- instead Barth spent it on VIna's spin Doctor. Facts- pesky things.
Bob Nanniga began instructing the council to take action on PV thru legal means in 2007. He was supported by many writing letters to the editors and even more going to city hall instructing the city to take legal action- Barth never did, instead she followed the advice of Sabine who awarded Phil Cotton an extra paycheck, buried a road report and lost the law suit on the Hall Park-. Yes, hiring a real lawyer to take action would have saved the taxpayers millions- you and Barth might like wasting our money over paying for property we were legally entitled to buy for less- I don't.
You can attempt to rewrite history but you can change the facts
How could any one listen to Gaspar for 20 whole minutes without becoming nauseated? I would have had to leave the room. She will continue to fool all of us into believing that she is a fiscal conservative (that will be the biggest joke of the year). She desperately wants to become "Queen for the Day". We need someone to run against this nazal voice and get her out of office. She is nothing but a political wannabe with no political savvy and smarts. We must do better.
DeleteBarth "praised" the desert rose development- watch the video. It was like a slap to all us Olivehain residents, hands tied for insults as well.... doubtful.
DeleteThere is no evidence the City would have likely lost legal action taken to stop the action, or to take Pacific View through eminent domain, which allows for the School District to be paid fair value for the donated school land.
DeleteWhy did you GO to the State of the City Address, if you knew you would be so nauseated? You knew both Barth and Gaspar would be speakers. Why pay to attend? You could have left the room, if you watched the video, afterwards.
DeleteAny State of the City Addresses should be repeated, as special presentation agenda items, at City Hall, during Council Meetings, with an opportunity for public comment, afterwards.
Hey CRAP lovers, why do I have to watch a homeless guy change his clothes at the bus stop on the 101?? How do I explain that to my 4 year old?? When will you CRAP lovers say enough is enough and have these bums run out of town ?? Next time I'll take my daughter home return for the bum and dump him in front of one of the CRAP lovers homes.
ReplyDeleteWas that the guy in front of Karina's on Saturday? I saw him talking to himself, but he wasn't changing.
DeleteHere's how you explain it to your kid "In the 1980's, our country's leader decided that we as a nation no longer would care for our mentally ill, but instead give them all a one way ticket to California". "Now there are sick men and women who don't feel well on our streets".
How's that?
-Mr Green Jeans
not very convincing… how about…
DeleteThat guy probably started getting drunk in all the downtown bars, and his life started falling apart until he ended up on the street. Getting drunk and becoming an alcoholic is a slippery slope and not to be taken lightly.
Drinker beware.
7:54- or you could explain it that California no longer teaches children about personal responsiblity and self-reliance and instead spends taxpayers money on rewarding unions and illegal immigrants and so there is no money left over for taking care of Americans-
Deleteeverything with you GJ is political idolatory - trun off the MSLSD
MGJ- ur on legend. How about this... The ACLU sued the fed govt to stop locking up mentally ill people that are not a danger to themselves nor others. So tens of thousands of psychos were released onto the streets. Hell, the ACLU sued to allow a crazy man to shit on the sidewalks of NYC. Let's put blame were blame is due.
Delete8:22, the guy I saw was a schizophrenic, between 50-60 years of age, wearing a white shirt and tie, in front of Karina's around 9-11 am with all his stuff in nice suitcases. No booze to be seen.
DeleteThere used to be a crew of alcoholics in the park, but one of the gentlemen passed away this summer. I don't see them there now. There's one guy with a hat and a beach cruiser who's there every day, but I never see him drinking.
the lady with the Poodles, the other lady who sits on the bench in front of KArina's are also schizophrenics, as is the Asian lady who put a huge whole in the antique clock shop. Sadly, she also drinks..
-Mr Green JEans
-Mr Green Jeans.
So let's blame the nation's problems with mental illness on the ACLU? Those are some select cases, and I'm not going to argue the "lock up the mentally ill" angle that we had a couple of months ago with the guy in Leucadia.
DeleteThe bottom line there was Reagan was behind the increase in the mentally ill and homeless in California. Prior to 1981-82, you never saw homeless people in CA, unless they were alcoholics. I've lived in So Cal my whole life, and the homeless and mentally ill problem is an epidemic. You can't pin that one on the ACLU....
8:39, ironically, my dad's best friend developed a program that taught personal responsibility in schools. Success in school starts at the home....
DeleteTell her there are homeless people.
DeleteWow, 7:47, you're young enough to have a 4-year-old daughter? You sound like a cranky old man, a guy who got nowhere in life, hates himself and takes it out on everybody else.
Delete9:15- there were no homeless on the streets of LA SF or SD while Resgan was governor of Calif. where do you get these crazy ideas?? Public schools?? Rewriting history doesn't work. Reagan did nothing to kick crazy people out of hospitals. More urban legend. You sound as if Reagan ran for office just to kick mentally I'll people out of the hospitals..
DeleteWhat is not urban legend is the CRAP lovers in Leucadia want the return of homeless, drunken bums, hookers, drug users. LRSP was a haven of violent loons when I moved here. Wild eyed nuts that would shit and piss in the alley ways and stand In the road and howl at the cars that pass by. The CRAP lovers find this endearing, quaint, dare I say .......Funky !!!
Thanks 9:35- where do you live I'll bring the homeless to your house to shit, piss, puke and change clothes at your front door. Ohhhh wait you don't want that?? Geez, another limousine liberal.
DeleteNo not old nor cranky, fat and bald yes, old and cranky no. Just someone tired of Leucadia being the dumping ground for what's wrong.
Where is Karina's?
DeleteDear All: I have lived in California most my life and went to Cal State Fullerton, when Reagan was governor. Here is the real story. At one time in California there were large psychiatric hospitals that housed the mentally ill. They were not what you might call the best facilities, and the patients were pretty much drugged all of the time. However, they did have a roof over their heads, food, etc. Reagan thought that these hospitals were either too inhumane or he wanted to cut budgets-take your pick. Anyway they were closed. I was living in Orange County and my friend worked at the one in Los Angeles. These were not hospitals for the criminally insane, as they are still housed in Atascadero, but for people who were just severely mentally ill. Reagan got together some of the leading authorities on the mentally ill, and they stated that it would be more humane to have group homes, with a caretaker living there. It would also be less expensive. Unfortunately, for reasons I really don't remember, the hospitals shut down and the group homes were never put into place. Therefore, those patients who didn't have a family or relatives to go back to, were put out on the street. And the homelessness of the mentally ill, at least in California, began in large numbers. Remember there have always been homeless in our state. My grandmother used to feed the "hobos" as they were called back then. This was in Los Angeles. Most of them lived by the railroad tracks, where she also lived. This was in Glendora. So, this is a brief history of California and the mentally ill. Most of the mentally ill people on the streets are harmless. I know 3 of them in Cardiff and often stop and talk with them or buy them a cup of coffee. They just hang out, as they have no where to live. Perhaps you all might want to remember that "there but of rate grace of God, go I". That's my Sunday sermon, now back to your regularly rescheduled hate fest. And, by the way, the Parks and Recreation Commission was never asked to do one thing for the big park except help find a name, which then Stocks and Bond dismantled and gave it the name they wanted.
DeleteDr. Lorri,
DeleteThanks for your input. Actually, I started seeing the homeless explosion in the early 1980's in the greater LA area when Reagan was president, not governor, although you're right, he started the cutbacks when he was governor. Reagan was no fan or mental health care.
I know there have always been homeless people in ca, but not like there are now. Who remembers them bricking in the front of Horton Plaza downtown to keep out the homeless? Ask anyone who works at an SD city library about the homeless. My buddy is a librarian and was attacked several weeks ago by one of the mentally ill patrons. The libraries are a dumping ground for the homeless and mentally ill because they have to let them in and can't ignore them like the rest of our society.
You're right, most people are harmless, but it's a little scary when one's trying to look for a job at the Encinitas library and you have to sit next to someone who's a little unhinged.
Here's a good background on CA and mental Illness.
http://www.salon.com/2013/09/29/ronald_reagans_shameful_legacy_violence_the_homeless_mental_illness/
Also, remember this, a lot of the homeless are Viet Nam vets who fought for our country. I'm a pacifist, but I still support our vets, and the way we treat them is a national embarrassment...
9:39, Really? No one wants a homeless explosion in Leucadia. Why would you say that?
DeleteRead what the good Doctor is laying down, they changed the configuration of mental healthcare in ca in the 1970's, and then in the early 80's gave a lot of one way tickets to California. That coupled with the recession, and all of a sudden you had the homeless living in cars. Sad but true.
As for Encinitas, we live by the beach, even the homeless want to be here. Since downtown has become "vibrant" as we say on the blog, I have seen a lot more homeless people circulating, and that's all in the last 2-3 years. Add that to the heroin problem, and we have some real issues.
-Mr Green Jeans
GJ during the Cradiff specific plan community meetings (that Barth avoided) residents talked about how promoting underground parking wouldlead to an increase in vagrants and crime. Looks like it is coming to be downtonw - ,aybe the new code enforcement officer can get on it
DeleteMGJ- I said nothing about wanting a homeless explosion in Leucadia. Reread my posting.
DeleteDr.L- you make it sound as if Reagan ran for governor on a platform of kicking mentally ill onto the streets . Sorry the Dr. Before your name doesn't make you an expert.
Even if the group homes had been set up, how would you keep the mentally ill from leaving?? Lock them I side?? No different than the hospitals and would invite another ACLU lawsuit. During the great freeze of 1985, mayor Koch ordered the NYC police dept to round up the homeless so they would not freeze to death, they fought the police kicking and screaming. 3 nypd cops were hospitalized with Injuries and the plan was abandoned . If someone choices to live on the street so be it, buy them all the coffee you want, but clearly they aren't pissing and shitting in your yard. If they did, I very much doubt you'd have the same opinion...
11:48-Actually, in this case, a Ph.D in psychology after my name does mean that I have had extensive training in treating the mentally ill. And, no, Reagan did not run for governor on a platform of kicking mentally ill out onto the streets. I am sorry if I gave that impression. I am just saying that when he was governor of California, in fact he signed my undergrad diploma, the hospitals were shut down and the smaller group homes never happened. I don't really know what happened to the homes. Perhaps there were people that didn't want them near their homes, or perhaps the ACLU got involved. I really don't care to go back and look it up at this time. I do remember the Horton Plaza situation when the developers wanted to build it. They moved the homeless south toward 13th street by the YWCA. I was doing one of my many internships near there, working with men that batter women. An FYI for those interested. A psychologist in the State of California, where I am licensed, requires a Ph.D. plus 3000 hours of supervised internship, plus passing a national and state exam. We are the most difficult state in the union when it comes to the licensing of psychologists. And we also have the power to have anyone committed to a psych. facility for up to 3 days. The County Supervisors just passed an Ordnance to change that to 30 days if necessary. However, the same problem exists. Where do we put these people, except in jail, where they just learn to be criminals. I am not saying all mentally ill people are harmless, but most are. The exception might be a paranoid schizophrenic who thinks the cops are aliens, which happened a while back down on Midway is San Diego. And yes, a lot of our returning veterans are coming home mentally ill. Makes sense, as they are being given amphetamines to keep them awake, making them have 3 or 4 tours, versus one, as they did in Vietnam. All that killing cannot help but make any sane person a bit crazy. And when they return they do not get the help they desperately need. I am not a big fan of any war, where the enemy does not have a uniform, but if we must send our young people to war, at least we could do is have resources for them when they returned, badly injured, either physically or psychologically. Someday, if Wc would like me to, I will post what I wrote about my own PTSD after one of the veterans I had been working with, committed suicide. It might give a little perspective. And, this was a man who was in Vietnam. This is such a complicated issue, and I really appreciate anyone who understands that and feels compelled to get involved in some small way. We owe it to our society to keep the balance between those who need help, and cannot get it, and keeping people safe from homeless people, who are not always mentally ill. It is a balancing act that our government, be it local or national, has not been successful with at this time. And I mean both democrats and republicans.
Delete7:47- May I add one more thing. Perhaps you could tell your 4 year old daughter about mental illness in a language she could understand. Something like "You know honey, that person is sick. You can't see it because it is in his or her head. But it is sad that they don't have a home like you do."That might make a "teachable moment" as we used to say with our two daughters. And as far as undressing, I see that all of the time on 101 with surfers taking off wetsuits, and it seems as normal to me as it seems to others. I don't hear a lot of people ranting about that and I hope we don't start. This is a beach community and hopefully we should be able to tolerate a little more than San Elijo Hills, or some other gated walled up community. I have lived here 30 years and still love it, homeless people and all.
DeleteCrappy Pappy is spurting his fecal fixation at us all again. Such anger and hatred, 7:47. Seems you have nothing better to do than jump out of bed and start spewing your crappy accusations all over this blog.
DeleteWhat a joke! Crappy Pappy = Roadside Park Bum, from Leucadia Blog.
7:51 from the council meetings I have gone to I have to disagree - Barth is not for protecting and poreserving the Encinitas of today for today's residents- she is for promoting a 'new encinitas' for 'tommorrow's' residents and creating a 'new brand' that is a 'new definition' of Encinitas of tommorrow-
ReplyDeleteBarth sided with fat cat out of towners who wanted to defeat A- she layed down with fat cats from Chicago ($8,500) fat cats from Arizona($2,500 I beleive) and fat cats from LA ($6,500 I believe)
Barth not only sold out - there was never anything to sell out - she always has been a social engineer and a regionalist, she just hid it well.
Barth didn't have the political will or understanding to create the new Encinitas you speak of. The Sculpin was right, the only surprise is that people thought Teresa had more intellectually or politically on the ball to understand what is going on and where to take the city - she didn't, and I for one never thought she did. If you thought she did, you probably weren't paying attention.
ReplyDeleteThat money you speak of comes nowhere close to what Stocks and co. gathered over the last 20 years, and that money didn't come to her, it was against prop. A. Socialism, good god, we wouldn't want that. The next thing you know, they'll elect a black man president....
9:08 nice try-
ReplyDeletefact is Barth sold out and aligned herself with the high density characther destroying fat cats from Chicago- you can't change that or rewrite history. She actively promoted lies to the public- you can't change that either. Socialism- good God, yo are right I don't want that. You might need government taking care of you, I'd rather take care of myself.
I voted for Obama and sent him money- he has been the worst president of all time - the world will be safer - it is worse - we will be open- he is not - "tell Validmir I will have more flexibility after the election" suppose you will rewrite that as well. It's kind of like barth telling voters she is for trust and transparency and then letting Vina withhold important financial information from the council and the public- see how it works? I do.
that's silly
DeleteWell, 9:24, now we know to ignore everything you post. Anybody who calls Obama the worst president while Obama's predecessor was George W. Bush can't possibly have a valid observation or opinion on anything else.
Deletethe world is less safer under Obama- fact
DeleteIslmaic Jihadi's have grown their bae of power under Obama- fact
The rights of woman, homosexuals and religious freedoms aroudn the world have gotten worse under Obama- fact
The middle class in America has shrunk under Obama - fact
Education in America has gotten worse under Obama- fact
Cost of family health care has gotten worse under Obama- fact
Cost of college education has gotten worse under Obama - fact
So, do you have any facts to share only ideological opinions?
As a person who voted for President Obama he has been twithout a doubt the worst President in my lifetime. He is great at whipping up misleading rhetoric but he has achieved nothing except enriching himself and his family and friends-
Oh, 9:53, you're the guy who labels your ignorant, twisted opinions and faulty analysis as facts. You start from a basis of built-in bias, then you see everything through that distorted lens. You're looking for somebody to blame. Obama becomes your convenient target, but your view is not objective.
DeleteHere are some real facts, as opposed to your BS:
• 9-11 happened on Bush's watch.
• Bush & Co. invaded Iraq, a country that had nothing to do with 9-11, causing the deaths of about 5,000 Americans and so many innocent Iraqis we lost count, causing the injury and maiming of countless Americans and Iraqis, and costing the US $1 trillion.
• The US and global economy crashed under Bush's watch.
• Obama has spent five+ years trying to repair the damage Bush caused.
You have only yourself to blame for voting for Obama, he's exactly what I thought he was, a newbie without a lot of knowledge on finance or the will to be effective. Obama=ineffective, Bush= destructive...
Delete10:52 ah yes, why take responsiblity for failures when it is easier to blame someone else. Some information you left ou
Deletemore americans died under obama than died under bush in afghanistan
iraq is less secure since obama took office
Iran is closer to the bomb and has set off a mid east arms war since obama took office
the middle east is less secure since obama took office
black unemplyment is worse under obama than before
health care cost are worse under obama the when he took office
I voted for obama and I wish I hadn't
I didn't vote for Bush twice and am glad I didn't. I don't feel as if I contributed to the two worst presidential terms in US history.
DeleteYou forgot one thing... You're six years older and not much wiser since Obama took office.
DeleteAmen to that 12:02
Delete7:47 AM
DeleteThen don't take you daughter to the library because it is being turned into a community office for counseling with social workers for the homeless. The program is modeled after the San Jose King public library which is also the San Jose state university library.
9:24 did you vote for Bush? Maybe you missed it but the criticism of Obama came from a person who not only voted for but also claims to have donated to Presdient Obama's campaign. That person sounds to me like an independent thinker.
ReplyDeleteSounds to me like someone who didn't do their research or pretended to themselves that they'd get something other than what was obvious.
Delete10:58 or someone who trusted the state run media machine called nbc cnn abc cbs pbs -
DeleteActually that's the corporate run media machine. Don't watch tv, your mind will improve...
DeleteA year-old list. There's been a lot more accomplished since then despite an obstructionist House of Reps.
Deletehttp://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/02/15/a-long-list-of-president-obamas-accomplishments-with-citations/
Oh, 10:58, Republicans have been trying to de-fund PBS for years because it's not part of the corporate-run media machine.
DeleteIrony: Encinitas as part of CA 50, now CA 49, has always been an island of sanity within the North County district that elected Randy Duke eight times, Bilbray and Issa I've lost count of how many times. Yet, here on the EU blog, we have a bunch of blinded right-wingers, apparently residents of Encinitas, who can't see past their prejudice.
Gewnn Ifill wrote a book daying how terrific Obama was in 2008 - then she hosted the presidential debate - confilct of interest you think?
Delete12:10 ideologist like yourself are the problem, as are ideologist on the right- all ideologists are blidned to reality and truth- and the propagandists on both sides PBS / FOX are content to promote that blind allegiance to ideology.
PBS is a communist propaganda, I used to listen to it and thought I was smart, until I started getting news throuhg unbiased sources.
ISSA has done and is doing a great job. It might not matter to you that an Encinitas Navy Seal lost his life at Benghazi and that the WH has lied and blamed a video- but don't ask the rest of us Encinitas citizens to join you.
Right PBS promoted the Obama campaign lie Al Qauda is on the run -
12:10 please..............apparently in your world anyone who has an opposing veiw of President Obama is a racist- even those who once voted for him. Your narrow mindedness is on full display.
Delete11:56- IF you like your plan you can keep your plan- lie #1
DeleteIF you like your doctor yu can keep your doctor -lie#2
IF you like your hospital you can keep your hospital -lie#3
On average families will save $2,500- lie #4
For most families rsates will go down and coverage will go up - lie #5
Republicans and Democrats have had 150 years to fix things. That should have been enough. But considering it took the national debt 227 years to amount to 6 trillion dollars and its taken Obama only 7 years to increase it that same amount, I've lost all faith in both parties.
DeleteThere was not a deficit under Clinton. GW created huge debt; his actions led to increasing deficit, including under Obama.
DeleteGod knows there's never been any lying in politics. "I Never Said Voodoo Economics" -Bush the Ist...
Delete12:55, Ifill's alleged conflict of interest was noted at the time. I don't think it had that big of an influence. 9 out of 10 Americans don't even know who she is, because she's on PBS.
DeleteBadly run campaigns lose elections. Let me give you two examples: John Kerry, Mitt Romney. Both could have won with the right campaign.
I'm a registered independent, but the Republicans right now are absolutely clueless on how to win. They don't know how to appeal to the 3 big voting blocs of the youth, minorities, or women. Until they figure that out, they will keep repeating the same mistakes.
All the other name calling about how many people died in a war, who screwed the economy mean nothing on election day. You have to appeal to a wider base now, understand social media and modern fundraising.
Appealing only to old white people will no longer work, and that's just a fact of demographics in this country. My advice, give up on the culture wars, and figure out an econ. plan and sell it. I think Romney had the plan, but could not sell it. Man is that guy wooden.
-Mr Green Jeans
P.S., PBS is not run by communists, but they enjoy a good latte in their Prius, lol. Don't watch tv, read books and think for yourself.
Delete-Mr. Green Jeans...
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIf the next president is not a Libertarian, he or she will make Obama look thrifty.
DeleteIs the city of Enc better or worse off after 8 years with Barth on the council ??
ReplyDeleteWorse.... 10 million worse.
ReplyDeleteFalse premise, there are 5 council people, you can't lay it all at Teresa's feet. The blame is shared by council, the city manager, staff, and people who don't vote.
DeleteIf it wasn't for Teresa and Maggie, we would still be stuck with people like Guerin, Doug Long, Dan Dallager etc. The big killer was and is the vote to raise the pensions, during which time Teresa was not on the council. Maggie was, and sadly voted with the boys, as she did most of the time.
-Mr. Green Jeans
I don't get the nostalgia for Maggie - she didn't do the city any favors during her tenure as council person.
DeleteDalager was an abboration of small town politics - anybody that ran won. He was (is) dumb as a brick and thinks kick backs are part of the system. Gaspar is the female equivalent.
Wow! You really are dumber than you look 11:09.
Deletepeople liked the puppy and kitty angle, and Maggie connected with people, it's that simple.
Delete11L55 Laughing here. How can 11:09 be dumber than they look when you can't see them? You must possess super powers.
ReplyDeleteThis thread is about Theresa, but since Pacific View seems to be a large part of her legacy, I'd like to introduce an idea for Pacific View. I'll have time to write up the idea this evening--this is just a teaser.
ReplyDeleteFirst, my personal views on Pacific View:
The City is doing the right thing in buying Pacific View, although they probably paid about 20% too much. Someone else may have been willing to pay more than $8M, but I think I would have tipped my hat to them and let the property go above $8M.
I like the idea of an Art Center / Commons. It will be interesting to see how consensus develops on specific plans.
Personally, I believe we should pay for things, and I'd be willing to support a 5-year half-cent sales tax boost to pay for the purchase. I respect people who don't want Pacific View and don't want to pay for it. What bugs me is people who want Pacific View, but think we should not have any sacrifices to get it. (Still think I'm J. Stocks?)
The teaser / hints:
If there was a plan that could give us the Arts Center / Commons on Pacific View and improved downtown parking, would you consider it? What if it required a rezoning vote under Prop A, without running afoul of the EUSD requirement that Pacific View stay under current zoning? Finally, what if the plan expanded the local sales and property tax base without a sales tax rate increase, and didn't require much if any added debt burden?
All of these things are possible, but it does not come without trade-offs. Some of you are going to hate the idea, I'm sure.
--TNG.
Depends what the plan is, but I think all options should at least be considered, other than a sales tax.
Delete-Mr Green Jeans
1:23 If you are so in love with PV then sell your property and pay for it. The majority did not want it and NO to an increase in the sales tax. It is high enough. Instead, let's get 5 smart people on council and quit spending beyond our means. Now that would be possible.
ReplyDeleteThe sales tax idea is dead. The majority did want to buy PV, but thinks the City paid about double what it should have. Now the idea is to develop a way to have PV pay for itself. Calling it a "legacy property" was entirely accurate. Future generations will look back and thank us for buying the property and preserving it for public use.
DeleteAgree, 1:53. Thank you.
DeleteYep. We'll never know if it could have been gotten for less. And it will take a long time to pay off, but it's an investment in perpetuity that will create jobs, generate a lot of money and enrich people's lives. It also was certainly it's last chance of availability for public use and not more sprawl - as nice as the condos could have been.
ReplyDeleteActually Fred, we could have gotten it for 9.5. I haven't a clue as to why we went to 10. Now comes the tough part. It isn't over until the City tells EUSD how we are going to pay for it. If that isn't done, then there will still be an auction. What do you propose,as I know you were for purchasing it.
Delete1:23- Let me say it bluntly. They are laughing over at EUSD for our Citys "stupidity". First, they had no bidders, sorry Fred. Second, they would have gladly taken 9.5 million, so why 10? Third, how do you propose to do an end run around Prop. A, Fourth-the City owns a piece of property in the Target center, so why not use that as an art center? and lastly, why should the citizens that didn't want this financial liability now have to pay for it with a tax increase, especially in these times? I would say no to everything you proposed. How about a mental health center?
ReplyDeleteWell, let's see, 2:23. First, as has been repeatedly pointed out, there will be no tax increase. Second, Prop A doesn't come into play because the zoning stays as it is. Third, yes, EUSD scammed the City into paying about double what should have been paid for the property. The board members who sided with Baird should plan on being voted out unless they quit first, and Baird should plan on losing his job. Fourth, the PV property is a jewel to be treasured, while the property near Target is in retail central, not appropriate and probably too small. Fifth, majority rules, and you're in the minority. Sixth, its now on the City and the PV purchase supporters to find a way to have PV pay for itself. Maybe you'd like to join us and quit your bellyaching.
Delete2:23
DeleteWhat 4:44 said. And how bout
#1. Can you post evidence there were no other bids?
#2. Perhaps we could have got it for less. We still won.
#3. No end run around Prop A is necessary and I'd be the first one to vote yes for a small performance theatre on one corner that exceeded 30' - and that could be done right.
#4. Sell the 10 year limbo city property at the Target center and put the proceeds where they belong now. Commercial property goes for more than public property and it would be a two sq ft. for one sq ft trade off for a good portion of the PV expense.
#5. Increasing taxes was recently not approved. (But we all know that Greyhound bus will be back, regardless of reason).
Good idea, 5:44 — sell the City property near Target and put the proceeds toward the PV purchase.
DeleteWhat makes you think anyone wants to buy that property?? It's a dying mall....
Delete7:02
DeleteThere are no dying malls on ECR anymore and sales are up 7% from last year city wide. That's what. Its already zoned commercial too.
1:27, 2:23, 1:57, I said I would personally support a sales tax bump, but I recognize that it's politically a dead issue, so the plan I will outline this evening contains no sales tax rate increase.
ReplyDelete2:23, there will be no "end run" around Prop A. The people would have a vote.
--TNG
Okay. Chores done. I'll break this up into a few posts, because there is a lot to consider. This first post will cover the basic outline of a proposal to give Encinitas the Arts Center / "Encinitas Commons" on Pacific View, but avoiding a big debt burden, sales tax rate hike, or rezoning of Pacific View (which is a condition of sale the City apparently agreed to). Later posts will discuss various aspects in detail.
ReplyDeleteThe basics:
1.) After consulting with citizens, the City comes up with a plan for Pacific View that includes whatever the citizens deem appropriate: an Arts Center? Cultural Learning Thingy? Whatever. But here comes the plot twist: this parcel will be a multi-use design, to also include a new City Hall.
2.) The City would hold a competition for the redevelopment of the existing Civic Center property on Vulcan. The City would publish the decision criteria in advance, and the criteria would not be a simple sale to the highest bidder. The winning bid would be the best overall design that provides a balance of public spaces and commercial uses, the best design to fit with surroundings, and enough money to fund most or all of Pacific View.
So the basic idea would be to consolidate the two big City properties downtown (Pacific View and Vulcan) put both of those uses onto one parcel (PV), and use the sale of the other property to both fund PV build out, and retain community control of what happens on the Vulcan property. And since the Vulcan property would need to be rezoned, the public would get to vote on the whole shebang--more detail on that vote in a later post.
--TNG.
Forget it. City Hall stays where it is. PV evolves into a first-class arts and learning center with a great auditorium/theater like the one at Dove branch library in Carlsbad.
Deletecivic center? You mean sell city hall below the library? Yea, we know how great taxpayers make out when government sells assetts we have already paid for
DeleteHere's a better idea- pull the $10M bid and tell EUSD, Baird and the slimy selfish self seeking school board we are the city is filing a suit under the Nayor Act.
When the city wins - and they will- Tim Baird and the selfish EUSD board members will be even bigger pariahs in town becuae the city will be able to buy PV for less that $3M
OR- the EUSD board could come out looking like champs by booting Baird and selling the PV site to the city for $5M - which would be 100% more that they would get when they go to court and lose
Of course such a move would take real leadership that none of the 5 council members have been willing to show. A few public speakers have advocated such aggressive action to stand up for residents - but the council has ignored them. Choosing instead to overpay, and apaprently now concocting a new scheme to sell city hall after it is upzoned for hihg density mixed use.
Just to clarify, I have no connections to any developers or Council Members. The ideas and opinions are mine alone. I'm a tech exec. I'd rather stay anon here because my present and future colleagues and employers may not agree with my politics.
Delete--TNG.
Remember, the Naylor Act only refers to recreational use (i.e. playgrounds/ball fields) and only up to 30% of the property. The purchase price under the Naylor Act is greatly reduced for that part of the property but doesn't effect the rest of the property. So even if the city was successful in a lawsuit, you're only talking about a third of the property. While this will reduce the overall price for the school site, the rest can be set at market rates.
DeletePart 2: More details to consider:
ReplyDeleteThe Civic Center property on Vulcan is larger than PV, and has the potential for about four terraces with unobstructed ocean views. As such, the commercial value of the property should be greater than the $10M the City just committed to PV. Let's say the City could get $14M from a bid with a balanced plan the community would support. The first $10M would cover the cost of purchasing the PV property, and the remaining $4M would be applied to construction costs of the new City Hall / Arts Center / Cultural Learning Thingy. Further, the redevelopment of Vulcan would represent net new sales and property taxes. It's conceivable that the City could come out financially ahead and we get the new Arts Center / Cultural Thingy free of charge. All without additional debt or a hike in the sales tax rate.
Also, the Vulcan site has huge potential for underground parking decks cut into the hillside. The City could make public access to a specific number of spaces part of the bid criteria. The additional parking at Vulcan would expand parking available for the Coaster, for downtown generally, and for events like fairs and parades. Visitors to Encinitas would have easy access to and from I-5, and their cars would stay off the 101.
Vulcan also boasts one of the best views in town, which is now basically wasted on an ugly blacktop parking lot. Personally, I would rather have a place to hang out, eat, or shop there.
Next: politics and Prop A.
Listen to the developers salivating to get the city hall property. Every few years the developers and politicians du jour try to convince the people to sell the property. No way, no how.
Delete5:04- Is this a joke, or are you serious? So far, I would not like any of your proposal, as it goes against the purpose of purchasing PV to begin with. City Hall should stay where it is, as it is already built, has solar panels, etc. Good grief! I'll take it all back if I read the other parts of your proposal and find out this is a late April Fools joke:)
DeletePart 3: Politics and Prop A.
ReplyDeleteOf course, the Vulcan property would need to be rezoned, and that means a Prop A. vote. Before the vote, the City would complete the competition for development plans and bids, and select one. The vote would be framed as an up or down vote on the whole package, consisting of: (1.) rezoning of Vulcan, (2.) in support of the winning bid plan, and (3.) using the funds from the sale and new tax revenues to fund the purchase and construction at Pacific View.
A "No" vote on the package would be a clear vote for borrowing, as there are no other viable options on the table Remember, by the time of a vote, the commitment to purchase Pacific View will have long ago been made. The vote will not be about whether to buy PV, but strictly on how to fund it. Unless someone has invented a time machine, there will be no third option to unwind the purchase of PV.
The plan is smart politics as well, because it provides an accountability shield for City Council. No matter how the Prop A vote turns out, there will be people who are upset at the consequences. The anti-development crowd will be upset if the Vulcan rezoning passes; the fiscal hawks will be upset if the Council floats bonds to acquire and build on PV.
Here's how the shield works:
Scenario 1: Anti-development citizen is upset that the rezone and development of Vulcan has passed. Council Member response: "I understand your point of view. But I didn't vote for this. Under Prop A, this was an issue for the voters to decide. Your quarrel is not with me, it's with the voters."
Scenario 2: Fiscal hawk citizen is upset that the City has decided to fload bonds to pay for Pacific View. Council Member response: "I understand you point of view, and that's exactly why we put forward an alternative for the voters to avoid borrowing. But unfortunately, that option was voted down. The voters have tied our hands. Your quarrel is not with me, it's with the voters."
The Council Members get an out either way. Fairly or unfairly, this option uses Prop A to put the funding decision for Pacific View right into the lap of the voters.
I'll take a breath while people accuse me of horrible things.
--TNG.
I still think you are "playing with us". No one would ever buy this proposal, or I don't think anyone on this blog would. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that other bloggers. It is very clever, as a movie plot, I will give you that. And, it took a little time to make it fit so nicely. So, you seem like an intelligent person, and have a good sense of humor. Maybe you might like to run for City Council? I am serious about that, whoever you are, unless you are Jerome Stocks, then forget it.
DeleteSome interesting thoughts in there TNG, but yes, I worry of this smelling too much like developers trying to get their mitts on some prime views with that property. I think with city hall and the library already there, the horse has left the barn. I don't think the city will go for that option.
DeleteFrom a strategy point of view, I see the logic of what you're saying as far as the financing options, but a lot of voters won't see it that way, and will blame the council regardless if they don't like the outcome. The council knowing how people think, won't want to even go there, lest they be blamed.
I think there will have to be some less exotic, possibly less palatable financing options, like selling the Mossy lot and or any other properties held by the city. Something has to give. Thanks for at least proposing something..
-Mr Green Jeans
Dr. L and GJ,
DeleteI'm new to the blog, but I've read enough to peg you two as adult voices in the room--much respect for your reasoned and respectful tone.
I'm completely serious about the process, and letting the voters decide on the mechanism of financing. Although, if the competing bids came in too low and/or without enough benefit to the community, I would personally vote against the rezoning package. In that case, I would be consciously deciding that adding debt is a better option for Encinitas.
And Dr. L, I don't think I'd ever consider running. My day job wouldn't allow it, and I don't suffer fools gracefully, unfortunately.
--TNG.
TNG happy to hear you are not considering running for any seat. I doubt you would have much of a fan club.
Delete8:58, you and I agree on something. ;-)
Delete--TNG
If the City Hall property is bigger than Pacific View, then there would not be room at Pacific View for all the administrative offices and an arts and learning cultural center "thingy" as you portray it. There definitely wouldn't be room for fields and community gardens, which, according to State Law, the City should have been able to purchase for 25% of the fair market value, for .85 acre, 30% of the land.
DeleteYou are leaving out the public open space component, which State Law requires the City should have been offered prior to the open space being destroyed, through secret development deals and lease agreements, that never saw the light of day, with the public.
I still doubt that you are a "new guy," but I feel the best solution would be to negotiate well, using political pressure, with EUSD, to accept terms of 0% over 30 years, provided the previously agreed upon terms are met, PLUS 30% of the donated land, donated for playgrounds and fields, would remain open space for public use, in perpetuity.
I feel community gardens would be lovely, and that they could help produce a revenue stream through weddings. What's wrong with that? Any small amphitheater to be built should stay at the 30' height limit.
Anything too large at Pacific View, would create additional parking challenges within the neighborhood, already impacted by POOR PLANNING and too many concessions given to developers, to John DeWald, when he constructed Pacific Station. That was when the problems downtown, associated with alcohol serving establishments started, in earnest.
Pacific Station was allowed to be built with far too little parking, just as Gil Forrester stated, in his appeal, which Council, as usual, ignored, not addressing his issues, or his suggestions.
Meanwhile, existing classrooms should be rehabbed so that a revenue stream can start coming in as soon as possible. But before that can happen, as I've said, Council must nail down terms of 0% interest over 30 years, because the City is paying over three times the only appraisal using local comps, in the current time frame, and the current zoning.
Pacific Station has nothing to do with the alcohol problem downtown.
DeleteThere is plenty of FREE parking at PS. I've never had a problem parking there.
Grap your scrapper and paint brush and get busy fixing those class rooms. Talk is cheap. Action, you scream for action but provide no leadership. Which will make you a great council person.
We're paying $10M for community gardens?
DeleteListen to the developers salivating to get the city hall property. Every few years the developers and politicians du jour try to convince the people to sell the property. No way, no how.
ReplyDeleteIt's currently a barricaded fortress for the privileged bureaucrats against the lowly public.
DeleteI'd rather see a nice 2-story retail/restaurant plaza open to everyone there.
Well, I'd like to see the backside of the Rite Aid mall dolled up as nice as the front and accessible to the businesses there.
DeleteAnd the children...they come into the picture where? Watching you hang out, eat, shop?
ReplyDeleteIn the rush for the arts center, wedding venue (yes, there are folks drooling at the prospect of revenue there)...the reason for the purchase everyone was so high and mighty for preserving is hardly listed, if at all.
5:57, I intentionally left out details of what would be built on either parcel, because I don't know. Those details should come to light through community input (Which the City will try to ignore, but I can't control that).
DeleteThe jist of my musings is this: should we pay for The property and construction on Pacific View with debt, or using some version of the plan outlined here?
Once the details become known, the voters will have a vote.
Personally, I can't even say how I would vote until the details become clear.
The question is whether the process makes sense. Should the voters be given a choice on how to fund PV (assuming we become legally committed to the PV purchase, which I expect will happen soon.)
And the gist of my comments is that in ALL of the above posts, I don't see the kids (the point of buying PV - remember?) seems to be missing from our rush to arts center, "hang out" spot, shopping, etc., etc., etc.
DeleteI was not waiting on your opinion of what may come up for vote or how you might vote, just commenting that the children are missing entirely from the conversation. It wasn't that long ago that a bunch of well-meaning folks were pleading with council to honor the PV legacy "for the children."
Rant over.
The surplus school site should have 30% of it preserved as open space, for the children. Also, the arts and learning center that has long been a part of the vision, including the proposal Envision the View, created in cooperation with the Artists Colony, focuses on an arts and learning center for the children, although there would be programs and classes for adults, as well, presumably.
DeleteThere is no need for a public vote, because the land does not need to be rezoned, we don't need to raise the height limit, as was done for ALL of San Dieguito Academy grounds, when the request had only been for a theater building, correct?
There is no reason for a vote to raise taxes, which the public would not support. After all, we already voted to have our property taxes raised by School Bonds O and P, and also voted to have taxes raised by Prop 30, statewide. We are not going to vote in another tax because some of our Council Members are acting as though they are playing a game with Monopoly money.
9:35
DeleteSeriously? You wouldn't vote for an awesome small theatre a little higher than 30' so that the backdrop could be utilized a million ways with the Pacific as part of the scenery? Why not?
Please explain to me how money will be generated monthly for an Artists Colony and a Learning Center? Would the city charge a monthly fee to use the facility? Shouldn't there be more input citywide to see if there is a majority who want PV to be used for this? I am getting the idea that only a select few want it for an Artists Colony. When it is finally purchased (deal not done as of this posting) more citizens should be involved as to what would be the best use for this property. After all, it will belong to ALL of Encinitas.
DeleteClasses would be taught; money was being generated by the Artists' Colony when it was where Moonlight Lofts, which went bankrupt, now is.
DeleteTalk to Danny Salzhandler and Dody Crawford for good ideas, which they put in their proposal to EUSD, through Baird, who put out an RFP for proposals in the same public/semi-public zoning in February of 2012, after Baird agreed to let his bogus 10/11 lawsuit against the city "toll." But in closed session, Baird did one of many baits and switches: he opened an improper escrow with John DeWald and April Game, which depended on rezoning to mixed use. DeWald and Game should never have been present in any closed session meetings with the Board of Trustees, according to the regulations regarding real property negotiations contained in the Brown Act.
Money could be and will be generated from a lease revenue stream. Plus, artists could rent their studios, which could be the rehabbed classrooms. If they have students, a portion of their fees, for taking classes, would go to the Artists'/Historical Society foundation.
Plus a portion of vendor rents from ALL Farmers' markets in the City could go to the foundation, as part of a revenue stream. Why should so much go to Leucadia 101 Mainstreet Association? Performances could be done at the school; tickets could be sold, as they are, at the library, once it's rehabbed. The grounds could be very beautiful. Interns and design students could assist in staging some events, which could bring in more revenue.
The possibilities are open to our motivation, dedication and imagination.
Fred, 30 ft. height limit, with the possibility of small, outdoor rooftop productions, on a flat roof, should be enough. There are other venues for performances in this city, including San Dieguito Academy, which built a new performing arts center, correct?
DeleteBut if people want a larger ampitheater, at Pacific View, they could vote to exceed the 30 foot height limit. That possibility would come down the line, after the classrooms are rehabbed and the excess blacktop, which paved over the playing fields with a parking lot, are removed.
I would vote no on creating a large edifice, because of problems associated with parking. I would like for our City to keep this a true community arts and learning center, not an interregional "complex."
Parking spaces on hard top do not count as open space according to Education Code, which mandates that the Naylor Act must be acknowledged and addressed, before a school district EVER asks for rezoning, which was what the threatened auction was all about. I also heard there were no actual bids received by Baird. The Trustees should know whether or not there were. However, Maureen Muir was forced to recuse herself by Baird and a directive from his hired gun school district attorneys, so she's out of that particular loop.
You need CCC permission for anything .... It won't happen.
DeleteWhy should private, for profit farmers markets have to give up their monies to fund PV ??
DeleteConcur with the above, it's kind of hard to count revenue streams that aren't available to the public.
DeleteRe: "For the Children"
DeletePV is being purchased by and for the City as a whole--all of us. The plans for what to put on the site should reflect the consensus of the community as a whole. I support children's uses on PV in proportion to the will of the community.
Now, if we continue down the path toward $~16M in additional bond debt (on top of $~40M for Hall), then personally I would push for 100% of PV dedicated to childrens' causes. It's only fair, as they would be the one's paying for it.
--TNG.
8:37
DeleteThey wouldn't have to. But if they preferred the venue of PV instead of where they are now, the same portion of proceeds could go to PV.
The private Farmers Markets are only held on Sundays at PEC School with permission of the School District. These events also affect parking in the neighborhood every Sunday; if you've ever gone to one, and we have, to many, you would know this.
DeleteThese Sunday events are being held on public land, Paul Ecke Central. Pacific View is public land. The Farmers Markets manager, Ron LaChance, should still make his 1/3 cut, wherever the events are held.
There is no reason a city subsidized non-profit business group, L101MA should, year after year, continue to receive one third of the rents from vendors at the Sunday Farmers Markets at PEC.
The Farmers Markets are for profit; L101MA, EUSD, and the PTA are NON-PROFIT. I know the line between public and private gets very blurry, for some, especially to those who rely upon, and take for granted, insider connections, special privileges, and ingratiating influence with their public/private "partners in crime."
Sorry, that was me at 6:32.
ReplyDelete--TNG
We could tell.
DeleteSome imagination! Whatcha smoking buddy?
ReplyDeleteBring back the Vulcan Square Shopping Center with Mayfair Market, Ben Franklin, Hagen's Children's Wear, paint store, barber shop and laudromat. Vacate Pacific Station and move City Hall in there. That's justice!
ReplyDeleteThat Mayfair was kind of spooky by the 80's...
DeleteHe's the hairy-handed gent who ran amuck in Kent
DeleteLately he's been overheard in Mayfair...
Well the rats never left..... they just grew and sit in front of microphones.
DeleteLOL, although lyrically "Lawyers, Guns and Money" is more applicable.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete6:32 I'm with 7:12. I'll take some of whatever it is your smoking.
ReplyDeleteWcV-And he'll rip your lungs out. Personally, I'm with 8:42. "bring lawyers, guns and money, the shit has hit the fan". Warren Zevon
ReplyDeleteYou forgot Judson's TV, Anderson's Jewelers,Chef Pat's & Mode-O-Day. The only thing quality at Ben Franklin though were Sci-Fi bubblegum trading cards and salmonella turtles. I lusted over the color TV's at Judson's though. Look at us now. Spoiled rotten with color TV's in our pockets and never happy.
ReplyDeleteThose items were at Ben Franklin when it was where E St. cafe is now. Same inventory when they moved up on the hill?
DeleteLove those Sci-Fi trading cards. What was Mode-O-Day
Delete-Mr Green Ray Gun
10:59
DeleteE St Cafe was Rasco's five and dime. It later moved to Vulcan Square but can't remember at which location the name changed to Ben Franklin. But both sold turtles. And both had magic twelve dollar reel to reel tape recorders. Mode-O-Day was a woman's clothing store I think was also at VS,
The City has high DEBT which I would like to see lowered by selling some of its property. I say start a petition to sell PV and Quail Gardens.
ReplyDeleteThis City needs a real City Council and City Manager to get City Hall back in order. We are currently tanking under the current leadership.
I'm thinking the city doesn't own Quail Gardens....
Delete5:51 means the property on QG Drive that the City owns, not the botanic gardens themselves. Selling that property and the parcel near Target sounds like a good idea.
DeleteA few more details . . .
ReplyDeleteDel Mar City Hall sits on 1.5 acres. Solana Beach City Hall occupies only 1.07 acres. Pacific View is just short of three acres. If the parking was underground, surely there is enough room on the PV parcel to put a modest, functional City Hall, and our Childrens Thingy/Cultural Whatchmacallit/Art Whatever. Of course more could be done if City Hall wasn't there, but that's one of the compromises to consider. Is it worth sharing the PV site, if it means getting the new PV Commons for free, without much additional debt, and no tax rate increase?
--TNG.
Solana Beach's population is tiny relative to ours, and Del Mar's is even tinier. Do the ratios of City Hall acreage to populations to see what ours should be.
DeleteHuh? Then New York's City Hall should be . . . Baltimore?
DeleteNote particularly the final sentence: "New York City Hall is located at the center of City Hall Park in the Civic Center area of Lower Manhattan, New York City, between Broadway, Park Row, and Chambers Street. The building is the oldest city hall in the United States that still houses its original governmental functions, such as the office of the Mayor of New York City and the chambers of the New York City Council. While the Mayor's Office is in the building, the staff of thirteen municipal agencies under mayoral control are located in the nearby Manhattan Municipal Building, one of the largest government buildings in the world."
DeleteIt stands to reason that the amount of space any city government's offices/facilities take up would bear some relationship to the population of the city.
Going by the averaged acreage to population ratios of Del Mar and Solana Beach, city hall and administrative space in Encinitas would be 13.42 acres.
You cannot assume that underground parking so close to unstable bluffs could be approved for Pacific View by the Coastal Commission, or by the City through our LCP.
DeleteAnother suggestion could be to install underground paid public parking at City Hall to help alleviate some of our Downtown parking challenges, if that's possible, there. Some of the revenue stream from the paid parking could go toward a lease revenue stream for Pacific View.
Council is NOT going to want to sell off City Hall to the highest bidder, after all the money we have invested into that property. The City would not want the cost of "starting from scratch" at Pacific View, and neither would most of the public.
Lynn,
Deletere: parking underground. You are correct. Nor can you assume that it would not be possible. This is one of the details that would require an expert opinion to validate.
re: selling to the highest bidder. You either didn't read, or are intentionally misrepresenting my ideas.
Finally: Let's let "most of the public" speak for themselves, eh?
--TNG.
Not sure I agree, Lynn. The money invested in the current city hall is gone and provides no benefit other than to house the city bureaucracy. That said, the money can be recovered through a sale (and possibly more) and put to a different use. That of relocating city hall and potentially improving downtown. This is a great example of the principle of "highest and best use". Structured correctly, it could be a win-win. I agree there's much at risk here, but I would rather the city spend $50k on studying this kind of a plan than polling us for a sales tax increase. I realize you were envisioning PV as an exclusive artists colony, and that's a great idea, but it's very expensive and is only one idea of many. Let's play this one out and see where it takes us.
Delete- The Sculpin
It's a non-starter. No City Council majority would vote to move City Hall.
DeleteI and many others have advocated for a true community arts and learning center, with 30% open space, at Pacific View, not for "an exclusive artists colony," 2:01.
DeleteI am only speaking for myself, my husband, my daughters, and friends and neighbors, including online friends/associates at SavePacificView.org, who have told me, personally, that they all agree with our perspective on this. I do not pretend to speak for others, particularly naysayers whose primary concern seems to be a roundabout "trophy" project, through Leucadia, at $20 Million plus, which ill-advised plan these self-interested parties are now bummed the City cannot afford.
Guess what? We couldn't afford that roundabout plan, on any level, to begin with, even before the City agreed to purchase Pacific View and to maintain it in the public domain, along with the Old Schoolhouse, in perpetuity.
I agree with you, also, 2:17. A City Council majority would NOT vote to move City Hall. Nor would they vote to put that option on the ballot. Not-new-person's idea, posted on this thread, is a non-starter, and is actually advocating for more high density development downtown.
Questions:
ReplyDeleteDr. L, (and everyone), If you generally oppose the ideas above, which of these represents your view:
(a.) you are opposed to the concept of redeveloping Vulcan, even if it means funding PV and avoiding additional debt or tax rate increases. Without ever seeing the details, you are certain you would vote "no" on any package to fund Pacific View if it includes rezone and development of Vulcan.
(b.) You would oppose creating the alternative, and having a Prop A vote at all.
If your answer is B, how would you square this with your support of Prop A, which is after all the "Right to Vote" initiative?
How would you respond to suggestions of hypocrisy? Did the tag line for Prop A have fine print: The "Right to Vote," (but only on proposals where the vote outcome is likely to be "no").
--TNG.
You are using fallacious logic to set up a false dilemma, not "new guy."
DeleteYour idea is an alternative. There are many alternatives other than your idea. This is not an "either/or" scenario. The original vision, "for the children," would not REQUIRE a public vote, because it doesn't involve rezoning or raising the height limits.
The original vision does not anticipate structures at Pacific View being built over the 30 ft. height limit. Existing classrooms could be rehabbed and maintained, primarily by volunteers, through a non-profit foundation. Excess blacktop should be removed in conjunction with the rehab, ASAP, to restore public open space.
We taxpayers paid for the blacktop installation, when our property rights according to the Naylor Act were disregarded by EUSD and former Council Members, including Teresa Barth, through secret lease agreements, which contain clauses that recite future rezoning development agreements, never daylighted through staff reports at City Council Meetings.
Once existing classrooms are rehabbed, and the excess parking blacktop is removed, a lease revenue stream can be realized. Down the line, were a small amphitheater to be built, it could be done in such a way that 30 ft. height limits would be adequate.
If, after the terms of purchase are set, and PV is rehabbed, allowing a revenue stream, then if, through petitions, or by other means, letters to the editor, e-mails to the City, public speakers at City Hall, etc., the public actually voices a desire to raise height limits for an amphitheater, the City could easily sponsor a measure on the ballot to do so for only about $23,000 or less, providing the question were placed on the ballot during a General Election.
Assuming by "amphitheater" you mean a semi-circular outdoor structure, that's not a good idea. Its use would be limited to only the warmest weather with little wind and no rain. An indoor theater/auditorium would be great, a venue available 365 days and nights every year.
DeleteI leave the country for a week (no, not on my horse) and look what happens!!!! An idea! A good idea. A "think outside the box" idea. An idea that stimulates civil discourse. I like it. I'm not sure how it will work, but the fundamental issue is that the city has painted itself into a box and doesn't have a whole lot of palatable options. This, or something like this is compelling. City Hall at Vulcan never made a whole lot of sense. That property needs to be commercial since it's so close to transportation and the business district. Putting that property to better use would be a game changer for Enci, but it doesn't come without risk....screw it up and it's still a game changer. I never thought I'd say this, but hooray for Prop A since it forces a dialogue and consensus (but drastically increases completion time).
ReplyDelete- The Sculpin
Agree.
DeleteBut why put the politicians and bureaucrats on prime coastal property?
How about the old landfill site east of Willowspring?
WCV
Given the slope you have a perfect site to create a parking situation next to downtown, shops, view plaza (think del mar's) and a good interface with library. WINNING! And our less than deserving council can park there lazy & growing you know what's out on el camino where city functions will work just fine.
DeleteBesides being the original Encinitas, downtown is the heart. Everything else is like suburbs or hinterlands. It makes sense that the administrative center of the City should be in its heart. The original City Hall location was on Encinitas Blvd. near Westlake. The move to downtown was to the heart, and that makes sense.
DeleteWhat doesn't make sense is the huge parking lot out front. If parking for City Hall, the RR station and downtown retail could be put beneath the parking lot, and the existing parking space could be used for a more beneficial purpose, that would make sense.
At 2.82 acres, the PV site is not big enough for City Hall and an arts/learning center, even with underground parking. It's also in what is primarily a residential neighborhood that couldn't handle the traffic.
10:34 is Charlie Sheen. Thanks, Charlie!
DeleteAgree, 10:43; thanks.
DeleteHa! I certainly would not be averse to putting City Hall there, and that site also has some nice views. The drawback is that the city would be managing/overseeing a second (third if Hall isn't completed) construction project, but I like it.
ReplyDelete- The Sculpin
TNG-As I have been known to say to the media," no comment". And, if I were going to speculate into your alternate scenarios, I would first want to know who you are. I realize of this blog is Anonymous, and I know who most of the consistent people that post anonymously are. I don't know you, therefore, I will take a pass on responding to your idea. I think if you like it, you should take it to the City Council and see their response. I am not a Council member, therefore, in the long run it doesn't rally mater what I think on this.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean? I'm The New Guy.
DeleteI'm pretty sure you don't know me in real life. I'm not as politically active as most people on here, but I've always been a geek for political strategy. I read about Encinitas politics and try to stay informed, but I've only been to Council and other city meetings a handful of times. I love this town. As a non-native who has lived in many places, I have to pinch myself sometimes. I hope I can make some lasting positive contribution through this recent idea, or some other way, down the line.
Moving city hall to a different location isn't a new idea. It has been proposed in the past, but always with the idea of moving it further east to a more central location and away from prime coastal land. The old Encinitas dump would be a good location, except the decomposing trash underneath is still venting methane gas, unless the site is now safe to build on. The dump was closed in the 1970s.
ReplyDeleteThe financial calculations are not convincing. How will a new city hall and arts center (or whatever is built) break even with the sale of the Vulcan property (the building would be razed)? The library cost $20 million to build. The city has committed $10 million for the Pacific View property. How much is the city hall property worth? The city paid SDWD $1 million for half of the library property (the county still owns the other half). It sure looks like the proposed deal won't pencil out.
One last unpopular thing from me. I was not in favor of purchasing PV to begin with, or at least not four 10 mil. So, I am a non-player in this. For those who desperately wanted it, and I get that point as well, please help our City find a way of paying for it without more tax increases. Perhaps you are all wealthy, but I can assure we are not, nor are most of my patients. In fact I am seeing about 40% of them right now for free. This includes military veterans who cannot get good help from the VA, and I am not allowed to take their military insurance. Longer story and part of the problem, IMHO.
ReplyDeleteBut I do want to welcome TNG to the blog, if in fact you are new. As I said in another post, I like that you color outside the lines; that you are creative; and that you care. Great combo, IMHO.
Delete40% for free, how does that make the paying patients feel?? Knowing that they are subsidizing they others?? Through higher fees to those 60%. That's unfair. Isn't life about fairness ?? Equality?? Of course it is... Free health care for all. Let the rich phycologists pay for it. ( of course I'm joking)
Delete11:58 Actually my other patients don't know, and since they use insurance, I would suspect they don't care. Of course you are not joking, or you would not have thought of it to begin with. That's how it works. Sort of like saying "I'm not racist, or I'm not homophobic" . Just by saying it means you have thought about the differences. Just a little tip from a "shrink". I don't want to get into a war with you, so think what you will. Rich psychologists is a joke. I get paid $50.00 an hour from insurance companies. And, since I am self-employed I don't get all of the perks that others that work in private or public sectors get. Did you know that the average psychologist makes about $60,000 per year. We have malpractice insurance, continuing education that we have to pay for, unlike our City attorney, who gets his continuing education paid for by us, and the good citizens of La Mesa. However, if I choose to work for no charge, I hardly see how that is a problem for you. I could retire if I chose to, but I still work and I am over 65. And, if I had my choice, yes, there would be free healthcare to all.
ReplyDeleteLorri- I'm glad you give free care to people, many do but don't BROADCAST IT. That was my point but apparently you didn't see it that way, or I did a poor job of presenting it as such.
DeletePhycologists are under paid. ( that is not a joke). Sheez.
I don't know what phycologists are, but I'm sorry to hear they're underpaid. I'm sure they deserve more compensation than they get.
Delete