Wednesday, April 16, 2014

Question

Should part-time politicians in a small town so broke that it can't afford to maintain its streets receive car allowances and lifetime pensions?

They do.

163 comments:

  1. No.
    Next question,
    It was interesting how Muir, Barth and Shaffer were boasting how their council salaries were not added to their pensions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. but the years do...

      Delete
    2. What do you mean, but the years do? The years count but their salaries don't?

      Delete
  2. There is irony considering that they are trying to make us all walk and bike and they get a car allowance. Their pensions really aren't very much since a council member has to serve 6 years to get one, and it is pretty small.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Barth Shaffer and Muir each receive enormous state pensions. Stop lying.

      Delete
    2. The question had to do with should they get pensions from having been City Council members. After serving at least six years, they get tiny pensions.

      If any get pensions from other government jobs is irrelevant. That's not to say the enormity of pensions like Muir's is justified.

      Delete
    3. 10:37 PM
      What is the amount of a tiny pension - $500 a month? That will help pay utilities bill.

      Delete
    4. Apply the formula to their tiny salaries while factoring in time served after reaching the minimum to calculate the amount. After finding the amount, decide whether or not you want to comment about exorbitant council member pensions. IOW, don't jump to conclusions based on ignorant presumptions.

      Delete
  3. Let me see..... that would be ......NO!

    ReplyDelete
  4. What is a council member's car allowance? $500, $600, $700?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They should get reimbursed per mile at whatever the going IRS rate is. Sabine gets a $500 per month car allowance. That's ridiculous. Dunno what the council members get.

      Delete
    2. you mean the council that wants us to ride bikes?

      Delete
  5. The city has a collection of 10 or 11 credit cards for the upper echelon employees. The monthly credit card bill runs around $18,000 to $19,000.

    ReplyDelete
  6. De-inc!orporate - cityhood has been a disaster

    ReplyDelete
  7. Doesn't bother me as much as the amount our 45 or so firefighters are making in overtime every year....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Become a fireman then.

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

      Delete
    3. 8:01,

      HAHAHA that's a good one.

      Encinitas Fire Department is a very exclusive private club. They get hundreds of applicants for every one open position, and the winner is not the person with the best experience, certifications, and physical fitness.

      Delete
    4. And you need to be as fat as a walrus to move up in rank...

      Delete
  8. Gaspar only council person NOT to approve council pay hike for Mayor.
    Good job Gaspar! We don't know how to pay for Pacific View, but we can certainly increase salaries.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ya Ya phony Gaspar,I think she's running for somthing may be dog catcher.It's officially election season.

      Delete
  9. Gaspar and Muir big on showmanship very little leadership GAG

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe. But that is why she will win.

      Delete
  10. Barth reminded me of Stocks's bullying last night. So much for civility of this Council. Disgusted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agree, completely.

      Delete
    2. Maybe she is tired of meetings that go on too long. Perhaps she has decided to take no prisoners now that she's no longer in the game.

      Delete
    3. Only her praise of staff and the 101 group count. Anyone who expects professional standards of those we pay is attacked. Teresa has the lowest standards of any mayor that we have every seen since she praises staff even more than Bond and Dalagar. She guards Gus like a cougar.

      Delete
    4. I like 1:42s comments. Go Teresa like it rip!!

      Delete
  11. Mayor at last night's meeting and at council meetings for going on 1 1/2 years has been snarky, snarly, snappish, crotchety, cranky, ill tempered, with almost constant frown on her face, as someone said on open council meeting post, before this one.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Whatever she decided, it was unprofessional and exactly what she fought with Stocks about.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She certainly has a different perception of herself than is captured on council meeting tapes. Then ironically, she talks about how proud she is to have created a civil environment.

      Encinitas revisionist history continues.....

      Delete
    2. In one encounter with her I saw what her true colors. Everyone got to see it last night, she is now equal to the other despised mayor.

      Delete
    3. I bet she has many colors. Nobody is monochromatic.

      Delete
    4. I like Barth and she didn't increase all pensions for every City Employee including herself by 35% now did she.

      She has a right to be bitchy... I would be a queen bitch if I had to listen to Sheila and Lynn babble all that crap every meeting for the last 8 years.

      Honestly, thats enough to make any sane person never want to step up and serve on City Council.

      I know I couldn't stand it. I would have to listen to pandora or watch netflix while they were blabbering.... what a waste of our precious life.

      Delete
    5. 8:37. Lynn pays their salary along with the rest of us. She has every right to address the council. If they don't like it, they can give up their seat.

      Delete
  13. Agree with the comment about the irony of Barth, Shaffer, Kranz trying to make us ride everywhere on bikes, or walk, all with their big fat car allowances. They shouldn't get any car allowance, as they live in the City of Encinitas, and work here. To avoid being hypocritical, they should take the bus, coaster, or ride their bikes to all city and private events.

    I thought that Council Members are eligible for a pension after having been in office for only five years? That means they have to be reelected, but don't necessarily have to serve out their second term, to get their "tiny" pensions.

    I think retired government employees already getting one or more government pensions, per household, don't need more money from the government trough. Does staff or council get health benefits after retirement? Do they make contributions toward their benefits?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If memory serves me right in the required high school reading we had of the book by George Orwll called "Animal Farm" Some animals were more equal than other animals

      Delete
  14. As a reference to our fire fighters one need only to watch Morgan Spurlocks' hour long program the Inside Man on cnn last season when he covered the bankruptcy of Stockton and how fire trucks responding to calls are pelted with rocks regularly in some neighborhoods because of their lucrative deals with that failing city government. Shameful for that behavior surely but also shameful for their fire dept.deals that contributed to the failing of that city. No one can imagine that could happen here but the resentment of Stocktons populace toward the fire dept and their sweet deals has turned back on them. Police severely cut back but the firefighters, nope. Patrols reduced because of lack of personnel, growing crime because of this lack of surveillance, neighborhoods run amuck, empty houses all over the city because of the mortgage crisis. It was striking to see the effects of mismanagement that came about because of their city councils actions or rather inactions. Could this happen here? Will our firefighters become a symbol for all that has gone wrong while they revel in their high wages and benefits? I for one hope not but it is not inconceivable. It happened there and some of the reasons are all too familiar. Finally, no, the guster was not mentioned by name specifically in Morgans report. Sadly similar mechanizations are in place here. This is a tough issue to tackle because we all respect those who choose to go forward into such situations while the rest of us run away as fast as we can for self preservation. Bless our firefighters for their commitment but there has to be a point when these high wages and benefits are called into question. To imagine them answering calls and being attacked for doing so because of the financials in place is too sad to contemplate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fighting a fire when you are trained, equipped and paid to do it is a job. No one forces this upon them, this job they do by choice.
      Only firefighters, airline pilots and hookers work 11 days a month. And airline pilots and hookers don't put in 24 days. But then neither do firefighters.

      Delete
    2. Good point in your first paragraph, 4:46. Firefighting is a job with inherent risks. Does that mean firefighters should get outrageous salaries and pensions? No.

      Coal miners', high-steel workers', bridge builders' jobs have inherent risks. Do they get outrageous salaries and pensions? No.

      Delete
    3. I'm building a collection of rocks....

      Delete
  15. City employees get into CalPERS after five years of employment. A former council member told me pensions start accruing for council members (they're not employees) after five years. 8:33PM above said it's six years. I can't find either on the City website, but I did find that council members are paid $1,186 per month. So, regardless of whether their pensions start accruing after five or six years, considering how minute their salaries are, their pensions can't be much. If they're on the council for many years (Stocks was on for 12 years), maybe their pensions would start looking significant.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Isn't that why Stocks and company voted to up their pensions 35%? He figured out he wasn't going to get enough, so made sure that it would be increased. Sneaky B_ _ _ _ _ D!

      Delete
    2. I don't know either, when Council becomes vested in their Calpers pensions, 5 or 6 years, although I believe I read before, it's after five years. But once they are vested, the money accrues from when they first received their salary. Muir, Shaffer and Barth are all probably already vested through Calpers?

      Delete
  16. You can decide to be someone who brings people together, or you can fall prey to those who wish to divide us. You can be someone who educates yourself, or you can believe that being negative is clever and being cynical is fashionable. You have a choice.
    Hillary Clinton.

    This blog is an epic fail that erodes the cultural fabric of Encinitas.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Encinitas UndercoverApril 17, 2014 at 7:17 PM

      You can decide to be someone who brings people together for the cause of good government, transparency, and fiscal responsibility, or you can fall prey to those who wish to deceive the public to protect special interests. You can be someone who shares the truth about what goes on at city hall, or you can believe that going along to get along will get you favors from the insiders' club. You have a choice.

      Hillary Clinton? What does she have to do with it? Are you endorsing her or condemning her?

      You comment is an epic fail that provides great entertainment on a Thursday evening.

      Delete
    2. 7:09, if you consider this blog an "epic fail that erodes the cultural fabric of Encinitas," then why bother reading or posting here?

      I agree with 7:17, your comment is an epic fail other than providing entertainment. Maybe your comment is instructive, too, about hypocrites.

      Delete
    3. Hiilary Clinton..... Really?.... OMG.... haaa... haaa.a haaaaa.... haa!

      Delete
    4. 8:29 You hit the nail on the head. Why are they spending their time reading the posts. Seems to me they need something exciting in their life.

      Delete
    5. This blog does bring people together, against the careless spending, lack of leadership and outright fraud down at city hall.

      -Mr Green Jeans

      Delete
  17. Hillary Clinton- responsible for 4 dead americans in Lybia- Hillary Clinton lies and blames a video. Hillary Clinton lies to american parents of dead americans in Benghazi saying we will get the video maker. Hillary Clinton- goes to testify before congress on Bengahzie and refuses to testify under oath

    Hillary the Liar- that is the company you keep.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 7:13 has been identified as a Darrell Issa voter.

      Delete
    2. 7:13 needs to go back to his Fox bubble. Issa is an ass.

      Delete
    3. Let's not even start with debates about politics outside our own city. We've got plenty here to keep us busy for a very long time.

      Delete
    4. right- let's not talk abotu Hillary's lies- let's blmae others.

      Facts are facts. All written above about HC are true. I voted for Obama - disappointed for sure- now go ahead and call me a bitter racist only because I speak the truth you can not debate

      HC, President Obama and Susan Rice lied to the public blaming a video to get the President re-elected, the press - David Gregory, Gwen Iffill- Brian Williams, Croft, Anderson Cooper all promoted the lie-

      This should be alarming to us all.

      Delete
    5. I was alarmed when Bush got voted into office the SECOND time.

      Delete
    6. I was alarmed when Obama got elected a SECOND time (and I voted for him in 2008) Wonder if Obama would have won if the NBC, ABC and CBS would have reported he lied up the Bengazi Video tp protect his whole Al Quada is on the run lie- oh yea, and the whole if if you like your plan you can keep your plan lie? Oh well, Candy Crowley was given her own show after moderating the deabte with the whole "get the transcript Candy" set up.

      Wonder what Obama meant with the hit mic "Tell Vladimir I will have more flexibility after the election" comment? Will neer know- All the reporters refuse to ask him about it.

      Delete
    7. Seems to me it was George W. that invaded the wrong country. How many lives were lost because of that decision? Many more than the Benghazi incident. I also remember the economy getting "tanked" under Bush and it's been going down hill since then. I remember Bush first came into office with a nice surplus. Where did it go? What did he do with it? I won't bother you with all the rest of the things he did wrong. Hopefully, you can figure that out on your own.

      Delete
    8. Add 9/11 happening on his watch. The worst president in US history, and the future will not redeem him nor his buddies Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and Powell. We're still cursed by his legacy.

      Delete
    9. it is being reported that they are begiining to make jews register special ownesrhip of property in ukraine and bring passports to local offices- "tell vlaidimir I will have more flexibility after the election"

      islamic flag of hate, intolerance and subjegation of woman and homosexuals raised over burning american consulate in lybia - president lies and blames a video

      if you like your plan you can keep it

      Delete
  18. Democrats and Republicans are the same in that its what the press wants you to pick sides like a soccer match but the outcomes the same...

    If you voted for either Bush/Romney or Obama last few elections, You are the problem.

    If you voted for Ron Paul, You are part of the REVOLution and the Solution.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't vote for Ron Paul, vote for Gary Johnson, someone who actually proved he could lead a state and get results in the real world. Ron Paul is all talk, no action, and he doesn't support women's rights. That and he's way too old to be president. No one over 70 for president, ever. We've already been there...

      Delete
  19. Dam Lynn,


    If you were not such a retard on roundabouts, I'd say you actually spoke intelligently and semi concise at the last City Council meeting.

    You are definitely getting better.

    Huggs,

    CP

    ReplyDelete
  20. You know. I like Barth.

    She is like a smart German background. Keep it simple, concise and lets get to the point. No BS. Just the facts.

    I for one will be sorry to see her go. I think most of the slamming on this blog is by the BIA who stands to profit million on our quality of life.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 10:48. Barth needs all the friends she can get because her enemy list is growing at a rapid pace. We can't wait til she is gone.

      Delete
    2. 10:48,

      Magic 8-Ball says, "Very doubtful."

      Barth received a standing ovation from the crowd including members of the BIA at her first State of the City speech. She then voted the BIA position on the two highest-profile issues before the council, Desert Rose and Prop A. Then she gave an interview to KPBS saying young people and senior citizens want high-density development.

      Why on earth would the BIA slam one of their biggest boosters?

      Delete
    3. I think Barth's comments on density are over-played. She's not an urban management specialist. The question on density isn't the density per se, it's the crappy, poorly planned monstrosities like Pac. Station that are the problem. Done right, you can have density that is well done and makes sense.

      One of the posters on this board raises the key issue, and that is the availability of water in our region. Once the current drought ends, all thought of saving water or being concerned about available supplies will go away.

      As it is, you still hear relatively little about true conservation, grey water systems, drought resistant plants and where the hell water is going to come from for any major development.

      -Mr Green Jeans

      Delete
    4. 10:48

      In 2013 Barth opposed residents seeking to protect the environment, quality of life and community charachter at Desert Rose. She side with the high density lawyer who I believe donated to her campaign not the residents.

      In 2013 Barth signed her name to the ballot statement lie that 5 story building are forever banned in Encinitas and that no upzoning had ever happened with a vote of the people. When asked by me if she could produce such language in the citywide code she could not.

      2013- Barth printed misinformation in editorials and newsletters that Prop A would split the city in two- she created fear in hopes of promoting special interest and developer control of citywide land use, not resident control.

      In 2013 Barth ignored residents who went to city asking that the city not hire a spin doctor at an approved salary of $135,000 and use that money insteand for traffic calming or to benefit residents- Barth sided with using money to benefit the city manager.

      In 2012 Barth ignored residents who asked the city not approve $66,000 for the True North Survey that was used to benefit candidate Jerome Stocks and Mark Muir just before the election. The Survey later was used by council member Gaspars husband to send an election like mailer from a political action like committee. In 2014 Barth called the survey a 'feel good'. Residents had asked the $66,000 be spent on traffic calming or roads- Barth voted to use it to benefit government not the people.

      The list goes on and provides example of after example of wasteful spending, destruction of community character and closed secret government.

      2014 - Barth amends council member Kranz's motion requesting a "firm quote" from the Lew Edwards $100,000 bogus estimate to "direct the city manager to engage a firm"

      2014 When information is show to the council that Mr. Vina with held important financial information on the cost estimates of the Lew Edwards group Barth fails to hold Vina accountable.

      2014- Council members Gaspar and Muir directed Gus Vina to place on the agenda the Encinitas Taxpayers Association presentation on safety. For over a year Barth and Vina refuse, eventually placing it on the traffic commission agenda - not what Vina or Barth were directed to do.

      I supported Barth in 2010 standing on corners holding signs. I had hoped for responsible spending, honest government, protection of community characther and transparency. Sadly, she has not failed to live up these ideals when it comes to city leadership.

      Andrew Audet

      Delete
    5. 9:07 AM
      Give examples of density well done.

      Delete
    6. Audet-

      I'm your biggest fan. don't get me wrong. I agree with all your points but on the first one. The City Council had/ has no choice with desert rose. If they denied it, it would have cost them millions in legal fees and it still would be approved. So:


      What would you have done differently about desert rose ?

      And

      What will you do about future density bonus law developments?

      Delete
    7. 10:48-

      good point. I stand corrected. I think she tries hard. She just isn't that smart.

      Delete
    8. 9:51 the city council always has a choice- the question is if they have the courage to take it. I believe the city is now being sued by the Olivenhain residents over Desert Rose

      Delete
    9. 9:51 please factually validate your claim that it would have cost the city millions in legal fees if they had voted to protect the environement, safety and community character of Desert Rose?

      Also, are you the judge making the decision? Last I heard the case was still ongoing. Do you know something the rest of us don't?

      Delete
    10. 9:51 - this "our hands are tied or we could get sued line" is old and tired and not true. There is much the city can do within the bounds of density bonus requirements to say no to developers and mitigate the impact of overly-dense construction.

      Where safety is concerned, the city can say "no" to a density bonus project, period, and that is (one of the few areas) that is legally defensible. The developer can try suing, but especially int he case of safety, the city is on firm legal ground saying no.

      The problem is that the city refuses to bite the hand that feeds the need for revenue to cover massive fiscal mismanagement.

      Delete
    11. Someone was going to get sued over Desert Rose, that much is true. We live in a Nimby world. As prices go higher, and less land is available, the conflicts over density, open space and ownership rights will only increase. State law on density bonus still trumps, end of story.

      Delete
    12. 9:29, there are lots of examples in downtown LA, SD and NYC. Pacific Station could have been done well, perhaps scaled down in the same spot, or somewhere else. Another good example is the units near Fred. I like the design, but the scale is way out of character for the area.

      Andrew, I love your doggedness buddy, but Barth is on her way out. She got in over her head as mayor. She went on the wrong side of Prop A.

      Let's be honest, what pol. keeps residents desires in mind 100% of the time? Answer: no one. We have a representative democracy, where we elect people to represent our views to the best of their abilities. We could argue all day long on the effectiveness of the current 5 at doing that job.

      I agree with your last paragraph, and I think I even stood next to you on the corner. Barth was outclassed in the position, and she made the mistake of thinking Vina was in her corner. Add to that her position on Prop A. and desert Rose, and that's where she's at, getting out of the job.

      Make no mistake, issues like Desert Rose will continue to come up, and the same choices will still be there, bow to the developers, or say no and face developer lawsuits on density bonus. Personally, I say fight the law, but I can't blame someone who points out that it is the law and avoids the lawsuit.

      I too would welcome an Audet campaign, but as I have counciled others, you're not running. We sure need you, though..

      -Mr Green Jeans.

      Delete
    13. 1:37 PM
      Stop it with the density bonus tripe. Density bonus law doesn't supersede the Coastal Act - the LCP.

      Delete
    14. 1:48 PM
      Specific examples, please. Addresses in LA, SD, and NYC.

      Delete
    15. Green Jeans I agree with you much of the time, but you seem to have drunk the "it's the law" density bonus Kool-Aid. Keeping within the constraints of density bonus, there are things the city can do to make it less attractive to developers that the city cannot be sued over, but nevertheless refuses to put in place.

      Go back and watch the council video from a few weeks ago and you'll hear several speakers point to what is done in other cities - things these cities are not getting sued over requiring - that we are not doing now. Let's start there.

      Stop swallowing wholesale what Murphy/Vina/Sabine & Co. are feeding you. The council falls in lockstep behind those three, so don't look to them for help beyond the "our hands are tied" plaint...unless you become part of the solution and start lobbying council to direct staff to look for kosher ways to minimize the negative impacts of density bonus projects run amok.

      Delete
    16. Done correctly, it's not "drinking the koolaid" but reasoned risk management. If the odds of losing in court are great, it makes no sense to waste resources. As you point out, there are many things the city can do to prepare itself for the next development, but frankly I think it's over all of their heads.....

      - The Sculpin

      Delete
    17. The Desert Rose hearing was at 10:30 this morning at the county courthouse on Broadway in SD. Save Desert Rose, represented by Everett DeLano, vs. the city of Encinitas, represented by Glenn Sabine. The contention of the lawsuit brought by SDR was that the City should have done a full EIR for the density bonus project proposed by the developer at the end of Desert Rose Way in Olivenhain. If the City had done an EIR and it had limited the density allowed under the DB law, the developer would have sued the City. So the choice for the City was which lawsuit do we want?

      Delete
    18. You sound like the little grey haired lady who complimented the heck out of Barth at the council the other evening.

      Delete
    19. 2:48 your conclusion is the Barth led council joined by rumored mayoral candidates Muir and Gaspar decided to stick it to taxpayers rather then developers- hoping the taxpayers would go quietly into the night-

      Barth and Vina were visibly shaken during the density bonus meeting at city hall to weeks ago regarding Fuvlie. A video was show showing many many angry and hostile residents in Leucadia willing to fight and take action to protect their community characther - it was a moment where rulers of banana republics realize if they keep screwing the public their days are numbered.

      Barth, Vina and the other 4 council members have been working to defeat Prop A by upzoning the city under the ruse of a overlay zone-

      Residents learned that night that whenever commerical is rezoned to residential the state assumes control

      Encinitas residents are fighting back- SDR is Concord and Lexington in a different sort of way

      Delete
    20. Sculpin, I'd love to see a developer try suing the city because it erred on the side of safety. The much-touted by city hall David Meyer suit ended in a settlement that no one knows the details of. So much for quaking in our boots over developer suits.

      Done right, the city can and should mitigate the effects of density bonus. Done right and within the confines of density bonus law, the developer's odds of losing in court are, in fact, great.

      Delete
    21. So city attorney has shown he cannot do his job in the way that supports what citizens want. He needs to be fired.

      Delete
    22. To solve density bonus problems that await Leucadia (especially) there needs to be downzoning knowing every developer will try to utilize density bonus. That is the end run that will work.

      Delete
    23. 3:31 - I'm not disagreeing with you. There are always hazards to litigation, but done correctly those hazards can be materially minimized. Encinitas is just not there yet.

      - The Sculpin

      Delete
    24. 1:51, See the Spanish Modern development on Los Robles in Pasadena, or how about Park La Brea in Los Angeles. How about some of the case study houses? NYC is all density, pick a block, pick a century. There is good, there is bad, do you want Frank Lloyd Wright or Shea Homes design # 500.1-C?

      I vote for Frank. I think we can agree, Pac Station as implemented = El Sucko.

      Delete
    25. It will be interesting to see if the OC group that bought the property with four established older homes on it where I live now live now are going to stuff 4 two story condo's in the alley between Diana and Jasper will ask for density bonus

      All four residences have been occcupied for many years and have served for the most part as affordable housing as rental units. The new development with be sold for independent ownership at the highest price possible.

      Delete
    26. Agree with the Sculpin, thus we need candidates who as part of the platform agree to at least try to take on Density Bonus as currently interpreted in the city.

      The city has been granting density bonus from Leucadia to Olivenhain the same way for 15 years, whether it's Desert Rose, Hermes, Daphne, Greystone, Shea, Barrett American etc...

      I think it's obvious that with Sabine and Vina on the employee side of the ledger challenges won't happen, so that would be a good 2nd portion of the platform, which of course is risky, if you get in office and then find out there's no support for dumping those 2 with the other council members...

      So 2:06, I agree with you, but without council leadership who will agree to take on the mantle of limiting density bonus, we're back to square one.

      -Mr Green Jeans.

      Delete
    27. 3:54, I saw that the property over there went on sale behind the Boardroom, or Our Place, or whatever the bar is called.

      You better believe they will invoke density bonus to get more units in there.

      -Mr Green Jeans

      Delete
    28. 3:54 PM
      Believe or not, if the density bonus destroys affordable housing, the city can say no to the density bonus.

      Delete
    29. 3:49 PM
      Park La Brea? You are joking. It was monstrous when it was built. A high rise by the tar pits.

      Delete
    30. The neighborhood meeting notice for 119-125 Diana states that four detached condominium residences are proposed to replace the four residences now there. Two stories with two-car attached garages. Zoning is R-11. Density bonus is not mentioned in the notice.

      Delete
    31. When is the Citizen Participation Meeting for this project? Residents of these units should have gotten letters from the city. Please post this information and let us know so that other residents can support you.

      Delete
    32. Property owners within 500 feet get notices. The meeting is at 6 pm April 29 at the Community Center. Oddly, the notice gives only the address, which is 1140 Oakcrest Park Drive, but doesn't say it's the Community Center.

      Delete
    33. Minimum project size for a density bonus project is five units. It cannot be invoked with 4 units or less. Nor would there be any incentives or concessions.

      Delete
    34. The group bought it last October I believe for 1.4 million. They gave us a three month warning and then raised the new mo. to mo. lease $200.00 abd then this week recieved a letter about the pending change in use. Looks like we have 3-6 months to find new places to live. Some have been there for a decade or more, myself just 4 years. It sucks.

      Delete
    35. The lot size is 13,261 sq ft, zoning is R-11 coastal overlay. Could the developer have upped the count to five units and invoked density bonus, thereby upping the count farther?

      Delete
    36. 5:29, the two story units directly east of the museum and the tar pits? Not the high rises, the two story units...

      Delete
    37. Apparently not. That's 0.3 acre. Four units is rounding up from the 3.3 the zoning allows on a lot that size.

      Delete
    38. Regardless of what is actually built the city will fast track this project as they want the alley improvements and the tax base for the new housing.

      Delete
    39. How would anything different from what's stated in the notice be built? The notice is part of the process the developer must go through with the Planning and Building Department. What the developer proposes is the max the zoning allows.

      Delete
    40. End of an era. The house up front on Diana has had some really cool neighborhood parties with some great live music. Dia de muertos last year was awesome.Going to miss that.

      Delete
    41. Will people want to buy expensive condos on an alley with a noisy bar on the corner and a two-story apartment house looming uphill?

      Delete
    42. 7:08 sounds like more affordable housing in Encinitas is being lost to greedy bonus density developers and their self seeking partners- like say high density lawyer cloaking themsevles as environmental attorney's when they are actually selfish money grubbing slugs- sorry to hear of your loss

      Delete
    43. GJ,
      It's now O'Hurley's and before that Uncle Duke's and before that the Boardroom and before that it was two other names I can't remember, but when my dad patronized it, Effie served drinks when it was called the Hoffbrau.

      Delete
    44. 6:16
      And you know what 2 car garages are now right? "Tandem". It's a loophole to meet "parking" requirements. 2 car garages no longer have cars parked side by side, but front to back. What's that mean? That at best one car will ever occupy the garage because its an incredible hassle to move two cars so someone can leave the house. This is what went into every complex next to me. Are the garages used for cars? Seldom. But they make great storage for anything else. Problem is when people don't use their garage for parking the neighborhood parking situation suffers. And there is no law or HOA saying the garages must be used for cars.

      Delete
    45. 8:54
      Sorry to see those people, houses, trees and parties go. My girlfriend rented the 3 bedroom house on the south side for about a year. And the partys at Jay's house were always great!! Same thing is happeing to the house on east Jason St and Vulcan with 4 2 story condos and 4 tandem garages. Everything hinges on the landlord's decision and many of them sell out (er eh, "stakeholders" to be more PC). And I've been to the Planning Commision meetings with others banging pots. That doesn't work, even sometimes when a developer runs roughshod over the Specific Plan. But at least the good news about the Glendalification of Leucadia is the passage of Prop A. It would still suck to see Leucadia all 2 story condos/apartments in 20 years.

      Delete
    46. No, 3:17, what you stated in your first paragraph is not 2:48's conclusion. 2:48 stated the cold, hard facts of the matter. You stated your presumption.

      Delete
  21. PS-

    We have over exceeded our water for the southwest, so why more development to make the situation worse.


    That like a smoker finding out they have cancer and decide they have to cut back from 2 packs a day to one pack a day. I am know healthy right?

    ReplyDelete
  22. I think that at some point there will be water wars in the Southwest. It is not only So. Cal that is built up. Add Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, etc. and at some point there will be critical mass. There are many things humans and animals can live without, but water is not one of them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yup… watch or read:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_Desert

      this is not a new issue.

      the southwest is way over developed. any decision maker approving more dwelling units in this area is a fool. Point blank.

      Delete
    2. Perhaps one or both of you should move away, leaving more water for the rest of us.

      Delete
    3. 11:57, they are correct, and the water wars have already started over the Colorado. Another great book is Robert Glennon's "Unqunchable".

      Perhaps 11:57 should shut off the mouth and the sprinklers...

      http://rglennon.com/books/unquenchable/

      Delete
    4. We have a microcosm of the West's problem in Borrego Springs. The aquifer in the valley is being drained faster than it's being replenished. At some point in the not-too-distant future, Borrego Springs will go effectively dry.

      Delete
  23. 9:55-Thanks for the link. I think that we could make a case for future development using water, or lack thereof, as a reason for no new huge development.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That never works in Encinitas. Money is stronger than water

      Delete
    2. Look at the battle north of Los Angeles with the enormous Newhall Ranch development with 20,000 houses on 12,000 Acres. Now that's a true question of impact on water, resources, traffic and obviously sustainability.

      http://articles.latimes.com/2014/mar/06/local/la-me-newhall-20140307

      http://www.fscr.org/html/newhall.html

      Delete
    3. 3:59
      Wow. And the EPA told em "There's lots of water, come on down!"? Biggest single development I ever heard of. If it sails through, maybe the state will ease up on our affordable housing a little. Naw.

      Delete
  24. Tried for years. Never seems to stick. Developers put that money into politics.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Peg Gaspar and Muir. They're both paid for by the developers and the union.

    ReplyDelete
  26. At least Gaspar and Muir are casting financially responsible votes, whoever supports them. The city can not afford $10 mil for PV.
    The other three (Shaffer, Kranz, Barth) are sending taxpayer money down the sewer and are all grossly irresponsible.

    ReplyDelete
  27. 11:38 As has been pointed out in many posts, Gaspar's voting record is not as clean as you think. Please refer to Andrew Audet's post and you will see that she has voted to spend millions of our tax dollars down the sewer, which is grossly irresponsible.

    ReplyDelete
  28. 12:50 Everything in Audet's list may be completely accurate.
    It won't matter, no matter how you want it to or really really think it should. Her two more recent votes against the proposed sales tax increase and against overpaying $10 mil for PV will be all that matters to the vast majority of voters who will only check in to the election a few weeks before, or when their mail-in ballot arrives. At that time, Gaspar's campaign will be overloading us with reminders of her two financially responsible votes that distinguish her from the Barth/Shaffer/Kranz axis.
    Just watch.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good call 7:43. If she runs for mayor or council, her opponents' work is cut out for them.

      Delete
    2. 7:43 You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time. Just watch.

      Delete
    3. Gaspar can not wave her magic wand or perform fancy magic tricks to solve the problems at city hall. She does not have the guts to take on the city manager or city attorney. We all know that. She may get re=elected, but she will be closely scrutinized for the next four years. I hope she has an iron stomach because she will need it. Maybe her Wonder Woman outfit will save the day. Her prior voting record is well known. GASPAR IS PART OF THE PROBLEM AT CITY HALL IN WASTING OUR TAX DOLLARS.

      Delete
    4. As long as Gaspar is tied to Stocks, she will not go over well with the voters. Stocks thought he had it all wrapped up and won, but big surprise, huh?

      Delete
    5. 7:43- you are msistaken. Gaspar's record of failure and reckless spending will be on full for all to see at every venue thru out town this fall. SHe can't hide from her long trail of destructive spending- she is teh poster child for all that ails the city, no amount of rotary or round-about spin can help her.

      Delete
    6. Everything in Audet's list is accurate because Gaspar's record is just that - her record. She can't run from it.

      Delete
    7. 9:55 You're dreaming how you want it to be.
      How will that long list be "for all to see" at every venue? The list is too long and too complicated (even if true) to be used often. It will become fuzzy background when compared to the simple one-two punch that her campaign will focus on again and again that she voted against a sales tax increase and against the overpayment of $10 mil for PV. Simple messages are the most powerful during a political campaign. Audet's list, even if 100% accurate, is too complex. Voters may hear about it, but they will also hear again and again of her two financially responsible votes here in 2014. If necessary, she can claim to have new awareness of the fiscal issues in the city. And she can accurately point out how not all council members (Shaffer/Barth/Kranz) get it. She will be able to claim she is one of the adults in the room. I know you won't agree with this, but that is what is going to happen. And who is anyone else going to vote for?

      Delete
    8. 10:56 you're forgetting at least two things:

      It's April. The filing deadline is mid-July to mid-August. We don't know who will run. We don't even know what Gaspar will run for.

      From sometime in June till the election in November, Gaspar will be selected mayor. She might do well, she might totally blow it.

      It's too early and there are too many unknowns to make accurate predictions.

      Delete
    9. 10:56. You sound like her campaign manager and have it all figured out. You have no clue what the opposite side has planned so you are quite premature in your assumptions. I'd try a different strategy if I were you. By the way, get Stocks involved in her campaign...it worked out well for Bilbray, or do you forget already?

      Delete
    10. Two little votes in 2014 does not guarantee her a seat. There were bigger financial issues that a Gaspar voted on that ran the city into the tank. She owns that and no matter how she tries to spin it, that is her record. A "no" vote to raise the mayor's pay by $100 is insignificant. The major in Encinitas wanted the city to purchase PV. Gaspar's "no" vote on that does not bode well with us. Bad mistake on her part.

      Delete
    11. That should read "the majority in Encinitas wanted the city to purchase PV"

      Delete
    12. The accuracy of my predictions, or those of anyone else, can only be know in November. I am aware of that.
      I am not voting for Gaspar. But don't underestimate her potential to win. I write these things because I read so much vilification of her by so many on this blog, which takes on the shape that if you only talk to your friends who agree with you that you end up believing your self-congratulatory perspective is held by everyone else outside your bubble, like this blog. Then you end up like Mitt Romney and his wife who reportedly were shell-shocked on election night, because the Romney bubble told them that he was going to win. I see the same thing potentially happening with regard to Gaspar's prospects on this blog. So many of the posters (if it is really "many" and not jut the same few posting again and again) are ready to write Gaspar off. I am just saying that her success is going to surprise you. And you're afraid I am right.

      Delete
    13. 750 whining people does not represent the majority of Encinitas. It is about 1.5%.

      Delete
    14. Her failures do not amount to success. In other words, she has failed in politics. Maybe she should have been a magician. At least you are not voting for her, so have to give you credit for that.

      Delete
    15. The new council person will more than likely hold the 3-2 council vote as we have now. That will put Gaspar and Muir in the same position...on the losing end.

      Delete
    16. 11:28. There is salvation and that is you are not voting for Gaspar. I give you credit for that. My prediction will be with the new council person there will be a 3-2 vote just as there is now with Gaspar and Muir in the minority.

      Delete
    17. The posts at 11:43, 11:48 and 12:10 are all by me. I thought my computer messed up and they didn't show up. Sorry for the duplication.

      Delete
    18. You are purposely omitting a fact: Muir and Gaspar also wanted the City to purchase PV: but at an adult's price: $4 mil: don't be running around like a chicken with your head cut off screaming that Muir and Gaspar didn't want to buy PV because they did: they just didn't want to spend Other People's Money recklessly: there's the difference.

      As for 12:10 am's prediction: I predict Obama will give us all free ice cream: that prediction is just as likely to occur as yours.

      This is the end result of campaigning for people who are not leaders: and Audet can cry about Gaspar all he wants, she has a resume for leadership and Tony/Lisa do not. Cameron may be the only chance the overspending/tax-increasing side has to win the Mayor's Seat.

      In 2012 you were hellbent to elect Tony/Lisa and now they've driven the family wagon off a cliff and their driver's training officer, Barth is standing by the side of the road with her thumb out. Complained bitterly for years about not being Mayor and now she is saying that allowing Gaspar to be Mayor in June (Remember, Gaspar stepped aside to allow Barth to take Gaspar's turn) isn't fair because the kitchen got too hot for her when she realized the public was not behind her on spending the city into bankruptcy: imagine that?

      The Over-spenders/tax-increasers want the minority on the council to stop talking about PV, but how can they: all spending leading up to the CIP in June is affected by it?The Majority is mad a Muir and Gaspar, but the real culprit is Baird and those 3 folks in the mirror.

      And really!? Barth putting her dad up as a beard in the CN?

      Delete
    19. 7:14 you reveal you are a partisan ideoglue- that is ok. Gaspar is your candidate despite her record of failure and financial irresposiblity.

      Others hold all 5 council members responsible and unlike you don't play favorites.

      The family wagon was drivien of the financial cliff with Gaspar both driving and riding shotgun-

      Gaspar voted to steal $7M from funded projects with no plan to pay it back

      Gaspar voted to go $8M in debt increasing debt service so teh city now spends more money than it takes in- called a deficit

      Gaspar voted to approve $135,000 for the spin Doctor we didn;t need

      Gaspar voted to spend $66,000 for the useless survey her husband and david meyer's used to send electioneering like materials

      Gaspar voted to bury the road report in 2011 showing the liabilities are huge hoping to hoodwink the public

      It is ok that Gaspar is your candidate

      I will be taking my recommendations from people who vote on principles and performance. As you can see from above, Gaspar's performance is as bad as Barth's- I am thankful to the people willing to point that out.

      Delete
    20. 10:56 really- complicated?

      IT's bullets-

      Gaspasr voted to steal $7M that was to be used for quality of lfie improvements without a plan to pay it back

      The city has gone from running a surplus in 2010 to running a $2M deficit in 4 short years

      As Deputy Mayor Gaspar raided $66,000 that could ahve went to reisdents and spent it on surveys her husband used for political reasons-

      there is no money for residents and Gaspar is to blame

      even low information voters will get that

      Delete
    21. If the true majority didn't want PV, where was their effort to oppose it? The representatives of the majority stepped up to support the purchase — although not at $10 million — but the opponents were so few they did next to nothing.

      Regarding the local November elections: Where is Nate Silver when we need him?

      Delete
    22. No one could imagine the cast of fools on council would pay $10 mil, $500K above the asking price and several times the appraisals the city had received. The $10 mil came unexpectedly out of the blue.
      Most objections now are about the amount paid, not that the city was interested to buy the property.
      As one of the screaming kids, I hope you enjoyed your ice cream that the city can not afford.

      Delete
    23. Ms. Gaspar's dereliction of duty in 2011 regarding Pacific View is shameful. Rather than responsibly represent residents and lead on Pacific View she cowasrdly left the building and recused herself from voting - the result of her failures, no money for taxpayers

      the citizens of Encinitas might offer to buy Ms. gaspar a clue- but sadly she spent all our money on spin doctors and survey's to benefit her husband and developer cronies

      Delete
    24. Ms. Gaspar has messed up, just like the rest of Council.

      She did question Jerome Stocks when he decided to raid all those funds at the Council Meeting in July of 2012, and float another lease revenue bond without a revenue stream. Ms. Gaspar questioned; Stocks laughed at her. She messed up by going along with Barth, Muir, and Bond, in her vote. But she was the only one to question Stocks' raiding of the Open Space and Habitat Aquisition Fund, and to question building the lifeguard garage on the bluffs on Moonlight, which is unnecessary with the public works yard so close nearby.

      Ms. Gaspar messed up in recusing herself re Pacific View when she had no stated conflict of interest. She was new when she started doing that. To me, her recusal was preferable to her going along with Stocks and Bond, which would have been the likely alternative. However, Glenn Sabine, our City Attorney, whom Barth had promised to replace, should have advised Gaspar that her recusal was inappropriate. He's the lawyer, not Gaspar.

      Delete
    25. Andrew Audet's points are all correct, though, all of Council voted wrongly on Desert Rose; they all voted wrongly on raiding earmarked funds and floating another bogus lease revenue bond, with no lease revenue stream available after construction, they all signed their names to untrue ballot arguments and an untruthful, not impartial but so-called "impartial analysis" written by Glenn Sabine, published at taxpayers' expense, in the sample ballots.

      Sabine's ballot statement took the conjecture and speculation of the Rutan and Tucker report, to the level of outright lies.

      Delete
  29. From the City's budget docs:

    Communications Specialist
    Fiscal impact 2013-14: $136,700
    Fiscal impact 2014-15: $130,400

    FY2013-14 Proposed Budget
    City attorney: $308,500
    FY2012-13: $323,500

    ReplyDelete
  30. Double that for Vinas retirement every year .

    No wonder there is no money for Pw projects.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 7:48-You forgot to add his other compensation through his firm Morrison and Sabine.

      Delete
  31. More nonsense....
    Earlier this evening I read the Coast News letter " Why I'm running for Enc Council by Catherine Blakespear Esq." in which she boasts about being an attorney, that is clearly evident by her 17 paragraphs that say nothing. As do most attorneys Ms. Blakespear gets paid by the word for saying next to nothing.
    No where do she address any of the issue facing the city... Does she mention the noise for downtown bars?? Nope. Outrageous pensions?? Nope. Over the top salaries?? Naaah. Don't go looking for her ideas or opinions about the Leucadia streetscape, not a word written. Certainly you say she must be concerned about the underfunded pension liabilities the city faces.... Again, no. Not one word. Well how about the deteriorating roads?? Mmmmm, give me a minute to Reread her letter ahhhh, NO. Ok, ok, ok you say... She a big vision person- someone that understands RR grade separation and I-5 expansion, again you won't find any of that info to satisfy your couriosity.
    No, Ms. Blakespear tell us of her deep city roots and her desire to " protect the essence of Encinitas ". So I ask you, is this the best we can do?? Someone that says a lot without saying anything. Isn't that what we have on the council now?? 5 get along go along amigos that don't want to rock the boat??
    Is Ms. Blakespear isn't willing to address the issues in her letter don't expect her to tackle them if elected.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wolf is sheep's clothing - an attorney.

      Delete
  32. Got it now? In her newsletter, Barth says she's not running. Confirmed and correct!

    ReplyDelete
  33. Barth will be gone. Now is time to get rid of Gaspar not four years from now where she can do more damage to this city. We have had enough of $tock$ and company (Gaspar and Muir). People know it and they will vote accordingly. We need a majority of council who will not be afraid to tackle the city manager and city attorney.

    Gaspar's voting record speaks for itself. What is so wonderful about her resume? She is CFO of her husband's company. I doubt she would be CFO of any other company. Her fiscal conservative crap is just that --- CRAP.

    ReplyDelete
  34. At least Gaspar didn't vote to spend 10 million on a site that is in such disrepair that it will take decades to get into any kind of revenue producing stream.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 11:37

      With all respect Kristin Gaspar had :

      1. An opportunity in 2011 to vote to buy PV at a lower price or use legal action as recommended by residents and taxpayers- instead Gaspar left the building and refused to vote. Her dereliction of duty stuck it to taxpayers

      2. Ms. Gaspar could have followed the recommendations of residents at teh march 12, 2014 meeting on PV and made a motion to direct the city to engage an attorney to pursue an injunction to save taxpayers money and secure PV- she instead chose to remain silent.

      These are the facts of Ms. Gaspars lack of action on PV and her sticking it to taxpayers.

      Delete
    2. Right, where was Gaspar in 2011 when PV could have been purchased at a much lower price? She believes that people won't remember what she did, but alas, we have good memories.

      She is as slick as her buddy $tock$, but it will catch up with her like it did with him.

      Delete
  35. I have an answer Showmanship instead of leadership. =. KRISTIN GASPAR

    ReplyDelete
  36. Dump Muir - he is a hog at the public trough.

    ReplyDelete