Monday, April 28, 2014

Thomas Arnold in Seaside Courier calls for Jerome Stocks to run for mayor

Seriously.

Frankly, we don't think this is a very productive idea for the Stocks camp. If we were Stocks (and we assure you, we're not), we'd settle into a mentor / godfather role, run Gaspar for mayor, and then use the Republican Party establishment to run somebody like Forrester for the open council seat, thus having a serious shot at recapturing the council majority. The Stocks name is too tarnished to win election in Encinitas again... unless no other serious candidates run, which is always a distinct possibility.

Other than the "Run, Jerome, Run" idea, the column has some legitimate points about the current leaderless council running around like five chickens with their heads cut off. We hope Arnold is right that an elected mayor will change all that, but we're not holding our breath.

125 comments:

  1. This is a laughing $tock$ if I've ever heard of one. We sent Jerome packing long ago and we don't want him back. No way, and not in this town.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thomas Arnold and Jerome Stokes has beens

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I liked him as Schwarzenegger's sidekick in True Lies.

      Delete
    2. Tom Arnold and Jerome stocks- has beens that never were-

      Arnold is so meaningless and inconsequential in his town he needs to opine on Encinitas Politics to make himself feel relevant-

      two of kind- pair of loser's

      Delete
  3. Thomas Arnold of Carlsbad?

    ReplyDelete
  4. The same TK Arnold who had the poodle haircut and recorded "Louie Louie" with Hedgecock while working for the LA Times in the 80's and 90's?

    He was a bad music writer and he's even worse as a failed POL. Didn't he already flame out trying to run for council in C-bad?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I don't think Stocks can win, it didn't work for Lou Aspell when she tried to come back. And then you have to consider, how does that tarnish Gaspar and Muir, would they back him? His candidacy would raise more questions than it would answer. Jerome has burned a lot of bridges, and I'm not sure you can come back from that.

    Somebody fresh would be preferable, but I can't believe Gaspar or Muir won't take a shot. Agree with WCV, someone needs to steer the ship. Jerome is not that guy..

    -Mr Green Jeans

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's OK, GJ, you can be absolute and emphatic. Drop the qualifiers.

      There's no way on Earth that Jerome Stocks would be elected mayor of Encinitas. And even he isn't dumb and arrogant enough to think he could be.

      Thomas K. Arnold is a hack. Pay no attention to him.

      Delete
  6. Well what can you expect from this bird cage lining rag? They advertise his lowness' insurance company along with GASpar medical, they wreak of andreens stench and other outside influences that care not a whit about this community's best interests. His bullying ways at closed sessions toward a fellow council member where he couldn't be recorded will relegate him to the trash bin of this towns legacy. The courier is not worth anyones time except to observe the slanted take on every issue we are dealing with thanks to his lowness' influence for those too many years. Ludicrous at the extreme to even consider. He is a sad, sorry joke and deserves everyones disdain.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That "paper" is published by former SD councilmember Jim Maddaffer. It's basically about the ads, and obviously it's the favorite of the Stocks camp. Maddaffer is now a "consultant"..

      http://www.seasidecourier.com/site/about.html

      http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2012/may/23/radar-Madaffers-price-influence/

      Delete
  7. Stocks the public tax payers trader. What a RINO….. I hope he runs so we can remind everyone all the millions of dollars that loser stole from your children's college fund to line the pension pockets at City Hall.

    Crook…. someone call the DA.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I find it totally ironic and laughable that GASpar received an award from the San Diego Republican Committee for local elected official of the year. I gasped! What in the hell has she done for Encinitas and I have to ask if that Committee is that braindead and not paying attention to Wonder Woman's voting record these last few years? They must not have had any worthy candidates to choose from. O MA GOD!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She got the blue ribbon for her first grader rocks and sand analogy.
      She had to pack her head in ice, as that taxed her intellectual limits....

      Delete
  9. I don't read that worthless slime of a paper. Waste of time. Run, Jerome, Run....we dare you. We would love to boot you twice.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The same bunch of crooks and cronies that have destroyed this town. Let $tock$ run - I need to practice my tomato throwing arm.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Have to laugh at this one: the preferred 'leaders' now in power, preferred by this blog, have driven the town into bankruptcy: not that Stocks is welcome, he is not, but you got what you wanted and now, much like Teresa, you refuse to take responsibility for it. This Arnold character is from C'Bad and knows next to nothing about Encinitas.

      Delete
    2. 7:01,

      Disagree. We voted for reform candidates. Once in office they governed like Stocks in drag.

      That's not the public's fault.

      Delete
    3. Sounds like the return of Mike Andreen at 7:01, trying to absolve the long run of Stocks, Bond and their like minded cronies for most of the last 15 years. The Hall Park, the Mossy Yard, the out of town money.

      As a voter, you make your pick based on research and hope for the best. After that, you really have no control, unless you're team Stocks pulling the strings on Gaspar and Danny.

      Delete
    4. Why did Shaffer and Kranz want in? Power, recognition, the key to the executive washroom? The old saying about keeping one's mouth shut to disguise one's ignorance. lest opening it dispels all rumour of same - that applies to these civil service positions too.
      These "reformists" are on Ambien - asleep at the wheel.

      Delete
  11. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Mikey. Now go crawl back under your rock.

      Delete
    2. Jim Kydd settled a civil complaint against him, rather than enduring the drawn-out attorney expenses of a civil trial. His fine was a hand-slap. The complaint against him, by the FPPC, wasn't a criminal complaint, not even a misdemeanor. That hand slap fine saved Kydd's being sued, civilly by Replublican operatives Moser and Eller, who abuse the system using the "Private Attorney General Act." We've got your MO down pat, charlatans. Moser learned all about FPPC complaints when he was sued himself, by the FPPC, and had to pay a much steeper fine, at $7000, which was still cut in half.

      I think 9:16 is "his lowness," $tock$, himself.

      Delete
    3. You're probably right...$tock$ and Mikey are interchangeable in that they both rant, but $tock$ is slightly less coherent than Mikey.

      Delete
    4. I did not see what 9:16 PM wrote but I can just imagine. If FPPC violations were brought in, it was probably from Andreen & its gang!

      Delete
  12. Thomas K. Arnold misses a fundamental point. Yes, Encinitas voters chose to elect mayors for two-year terms. But nobody created a job description and codified it. The mayor does not have defined powers. Encinitas did not create a strong mayor structure of government. The mayor has no more power than any other council member. The mayor is mayor in name only. The city manager still runs the show, supposedly at the pleasure of the City Council. But everybody who watches Encinitas politics knows that's not the reality.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excellent points, 10:30.. Also, in his bogus Seaside Courier commentary, Arnold wrongly states: "Encinitas is no longer the cluster of sleepy coastal villages it was when residents of Cardiff, Encinitas and Leucadia first decided to band together and proceed down the path to cityhood."

      Arnold leaves out Olivenhain, where one of our founders, Marjorie Gaines lived.

      It was Marjorie Gaines who got me involved in the North Coast Coalition to incorporate, when I was co-leader of a Campfire Troop, out in Olivenhain. Bob Bonde brought over an old KayPro computer, to my home, so that I could input a financial report, which we based on Solana Beach's financial report. Solana Beach had incorporated the year before, in 1985.

      Delete
    2. Shaffer sits in her office, fascinated by her spinning chair. Barth looks in the mirror and adjusts her crown. Gaspar is looking for the keys to her invisible jet. Kranz guards the Xerox in the office. And Muir eagerly awaits the opening of In N' Out......

      Delete
    3. Gaines had the chance to lower the train along with Solana Beach and told the parties to be to pound sand. She did this city NO favors. Shame on her for her foolishness.

      Delete
    4. Marjorie Gaines did our city a lot of favors. As far as I knew, the issue of burying the tracks had not come up yet. I know that Christy Guerin let us down on that issue.

      Shame on you, anon 7:15. You come in here, with your anonymous condemnation, and try to put down one of our founders. How many hours did you spend working to get this city incorporated? All you care about are your selfish interests.

      There were no plans to doubletrack the trains back then. You were probably busy buying up property on the Coast, at low prices, so you could charge high rents, in the future, while paying low property taxes, and waiting to cash in with high density mixed use development.

      Delete
    5. Gaines got the boot in '90. Here's the people who were running the city, when Solana Beach stepped to the plate and got federal money to lower the tracks at Lomas Santa Fe..

      NOVEMBER 1990 ELECTION:

      NOTE: Rick Shea did not run and Marjorie Gaines was defeated in the November 1990 election. Maura Wiegand and John Davis were elected.

      1991 Mayor Gail Hano

      1991 Deputy Mayor Maura Wiegand (newly elected; term: Nov. 1990 - 1994)

      Pam Slater

      John Davis (newly elected; term: Nov. 1990 - 1994)

      Anne Omsted

      1992 Mayor Maura Wiegand

      1992 Deputy Mayor John Davis

      Pam Slater

      Anne Omsted

      Gail Hano

      NOVEMBER 1992 ELECTION:

      NOTE: Pam Slater and Anne Omsted did not run in the November 1992 election; Gail Hano was re-elected, and Jim Bond and Chuck DuVivier were elected.

      1993 Mayor John Davis

      1993 Deputy Mayor Gail Hano (re-elected; term: Nov. 1992 - 1996)

      Maura Wiegand

      Jim Bond (newly elected; term: Nov. 1992 - 1996)

      Chuck DuVivier (newly elected; term: Nov 1992 - 1996)

      1994 Mayor Gail Hano

      1994 Deputy Mayor Chuck DuVivier

      Jim Bond

      John Davis

      Maura Wiegand

      NOVEMBER 1994 ELECTION:

      NOTE: Maura Wiegand did not run in November 1994. Lou Aspell was elected and John Davis re-elected in November 1994.

      1995 Mayor Chuck DuVivier

      1995 Deputy Mayor Jim Bond

      Lou Aspell (newly elected; term: Nov. 1994 - 1998)

      John Davis (re-elected; term Nov. 1994 - 1998)

      Gail Hano

      1996 Mayor Jim Bond

      1996 Deputy Mayor John Davis

      Chuck DuVivier

      Lou Aspell

      Gail Hano

      Delete
    6. I clearly remember Jerry Steele being on council. I don't see his name listed.

      Delete
    7. P.S. He could have been on council prior to these dates. Sorry.

      Delete
    8. Bottom line, Solana Beach was ready, Encinitas wasn't. 25 years later they have lowered tracks and we don't

      Delete
    9. We have had many councils since incorporation and Marjorie Gaines and it is now 2014. Why are the tracks not lowered? Why has this not been a priority? Why can't we get a council that gets something done?

      Delete
    10. As I remember, the lowered tracks was a condition by Solana Beach to take the new train station as Del Mar didn't want to upgrade theirs for Coaster service. Solana Beach was worried, with good reason, that trains stopped in the station would tie up traffic on Lomas Santa Fe Drive. They found Federal money to make it happen. I don't remember Encinitas being in a similar situation. They certainly wouldn't have tried to do both projects at once and the Federal money dried up after the Solana Beach project.

      Delete
    11. 11:54 You mean the council member who cried all the time and ran out of the room? Oh right, that was bossy pants Guerin. What a bimbo.

      Delete
    12. When Marjorie Gaines was not re-elected, was exactly when development interests began exercising their spending power, and their money, successfully installing their candidates into office.

      Gaines was one of our founders. I respect her and Bob Bonde, tremendously.

      Delete
  13. The mayor is nothing more than a glorified ribbon cutter. Not sure if GASpar can handle that responsibility. For sure $tock$ couldn't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I watched him open (ribbon cut) a new building of an organization in town - he was ill-prepared, botched his speech with inaccuracies about the organization and generally appeared as tho he didn't want to be there. Probably recovering from his Executive night on the town, as usual. He was a political disaster for this town.

      Delete
    2. We need a mayor that says no to ribbon cutting and says yes to cutting staff....

      Delete
    3. Maybe the Gaspar campaign can be based on rocks and sand! Rocks in one's head to vote for her and sand as the foundation of her fiscal policies.

      Delete
  14. You said it all - Jim Kidd admitted breaking the law, so that he could mis-use his paper for political purposes. Did I miss something?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Yes, you missed that Jim Kydd, not Jim Kidd did NOT admit to breaking the law. He settled a civil lawsuit, for a hand-slap fine of $1000, rather than fighting the charges, dragging out the case, and incurring prohibitive legal fees.

    There were no criminal charges, only a civil complaint, against Jim Kydd. The FPPC complaint and fine prevented further civil action against Kydd for the same charges by Ken Moser and Harry Eiler, who have abused the legal system in attempts to squelch freedom of assembly and freedom of speech.

    Because financial disclosure requirements are so complicated, many, including Ken Moser, have not fulfilled them adequately. Moser, himself, "learned the ropes" when the FPPC filed a complaint against him. Moser, before, settled his FPPC civil charges for a fine of $7000.

    Moser went on to file FPPC complaints against several respected members of our community, always those he disagreed with politically, including Maggie Houlihan, but of course NOT Jerome Stocks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If Jerome would of done this you would of called him a crook!

      Delete
    2. No, he's a slimeball. Dallager was the crook....

      Delete
  16. Thomas Arnold has always been a booster for Jerome Stocks. I never figured out why. Do they share the same questionable proclivities? During the long delay to build the Hall property park due to an inadequate EIR and unmitigated contamination, this Carlsbad resident wrote commentaries for the North County Times about how wonderful this regional sports facility would be. To promote Stocks he overlooked the $80 million black hole the project became.

    This fatuous commentary of Arnold appears to be a trial balloon for a Stocks candidacy for mayor of Encinitas. One has to ask the question of how much Arnold was paid to write this. It doesn't appear that he did it because of his heartfelt concern about what happens in Encinitas.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. TK Arnold is an alleged born again Republican, after partying down with the usual shenanigans of the 80's, he's trying to be reborn as a pseudo fiscal conservative and operative.

      I guess now that Jack Orr is gone, someone has to step in a promote Stocks. Arnold is a joke, bad music writer, bad paid for shill of a writer.

      Yawn....

      -Mr Green Jeans

      Delete
    2. You are the company you keep.

      Delete
  17. Blakespear is having a 5 de Mayo party in Cardiff. Everyone go and ask her how she's going to address the cities problems of street maintenance, wild salaries and pensions, bloated staff, out of control spending on trophy projects, etc etc etc. Make her answer the hard questions, non of this nonsense about preserving and enhancing Encinitas. Such malarkey !!!
    She thinks she's going to waltz into a council seat.... She 's backed by Shaffer a woman that can't find her ass with two hands.
    Lord help us.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Funny comment about Shaffer - typical academic - all theory and no action. She is worthless. Whomever she endorses, don't vote for.....

      Delete
    2. How about the streetscape and noise downtown. What are her solutions?? Or does she want to maintain the status quo??

      Delete
    3. Typical academic, not a broad brush there.....lol

      Delete
    4. Sounds like you have to throw a party so you can get endorsements. It amazes me how people get used and don't even know they are.

      Delete
    5. The cover charge is. $25.

      Delete
    6. I wouldn't pay a penny!

      Delete
    7. Free to stand on the street out front and ask questions with a bullhorn.

      Delete
    8. Bang pots will get her attention....

      Delete
    9. I think the people that you think are there to get used are there to do the using. People don't generally give money for nothing.

      Delete
    10. With Barth and Shaffer whispering in Blakespear's ear, the supporters will be hard to produce after being burned by Tony/Lisa/Shaffer. The base has left the building.

      Delete
    11. Ha, make that Tony/Lisa/Teresa...all are rather interchangeable, I'm afraid.

      Delete
    12. 12:32 PM I worked at a university for 30 years - trust me, it is not as "broad" as you might think.....

      Delete
    13. 5:49 PM

      Gee, academics sniping at each other. Good thing there aren't petty politics in academia.

      Delete
  18. Blakespear won't answer the tough questions, I've tried.

    The trust me, won't work for me this time!

    ReplyDelete
  19. I think the "bang your pots" obcessor is the cymbal monkey - you know, the one you wind up and it clangs its hand held cymbals. Dressed in a circus outfit too. (Maybe it is alcoholic monkey Stocks?)

    ReplyDelete
  20. Jerome Stocks has said he isn't interested in running so why bother? Do you have to keep everyone's blood pressure up so they keep coming back to the blog? Just another chance to trash the politicians, staff, etc. Your readers are so much smarter then their targets. I'm sure that most of them will be filing their election papers to jump into the fray and demonstrate their superiority.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. right - Stocks isn't going to run, Barth isn't going to run

      Hey- didn't Jimmy Bond say he wasn't going to run, then in August decided he would run - yeah, that's right that's the ticket

      Delete
    2. So how does ranting about it now make any difference except to keep your veins bulging? This is Fox News SOP. Keep the troops riled or you might lose them.

      Delete
    3. Um... we weren't the ones who suggested Stocks should run.

      If you want to accuse someone of trolling for blood pressure, try the Seaside Courier.

      Delete
    4. 8:49 PM

      Nice try deflecting responsibility. Arnold & the Seaside Courier made me do it!

      Delete
  21. This bang your pots is sooooo tiring. How about just once you take your own suggestion and have the courage if you really had any and show up at an appropriate occasion and prove to yourself and us that you have a backbone? Until that happens nothing you have offered here amounts to more than zero. Do you have the courage to commit to an action you repeatedly suggest others do for you? My bet there is nothing more than bluster possible from you. baaaakk baaaaak baaaack says the chicken and not much else. The cymbal monkey is dead on, only this one doesn't have the wind up dial to permit any real action.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You know I've decided that you are correct. Pot banging in this hippie town will only cause LSD flashbacks.. I propose strongly worded letters to the management. I'm sure all the problems downtown will abate overnight.....

      Delete
    2. 9:13
      The pen is mightier than the pot. Or something like that....

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

      Delete
  22. Stocks the rhino is so cooked

    ReplyDelete
  23. I prefer Stocks over the Tax and Spend candidates (Tony and Lisa) I voted for last election. I never thought I would say this!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'd never vote for any of those candidates. Next!

      I may not be voting next election. Is it going to be as bad as who are my choices Bush or Obama? Puke - two peas in a pod. Same result- different color party.

      Delete
    2. Um, the choice was never Bush or Obama. It was McCain or Obama, then it was Romney or Obama. And the electorate, in its collective wisdom, made the better choice twice.

      Since Bush invaded Iraq, crashed the global economy, let 9-11 happen on his watch and totally screwed up the federal response to Katrina, you have to conclude that even if Obama achieved nothing in eight years, he'd still be a better president than Bush.

      Delete
    3. The partisanship is strong in this one.

      Delete
    4. OK Bush screw things up royally. Most the the real destruction from the 9-11 and finical collapse happened under Clinton rein. With that said Obama has done nothing except bring us a failed bigger Government system and supports keeping more Americans dependent on the tit which removes freedoms.

      We need some real change, we need Paul or someone who will buck the current corrupt systems.

      Delete
    5. Um, 9-11 happened under Bush's watch. Rice had explicit warnings and ignored them.

      The financial collapse happened seven years into Bush's presidency. Clinton can't be held to blame.

      I assume you're joking about Paul, whether you mean Rand or Ron. Neither has the capacity to be president.

      9:48, you're confusing partisanship with objectivity. Facts are facts.

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

      Delete
  24. 8:31 Laughable. Stocks spent a lot of our money, especially for his nice pension for he and his cronnies. Perhaps you have had to0 much to drink. Think again tomorrow when your head might be more clear. While you are at it, look up Stock's voting record over his 12 year reign of arrogance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 8:31 is most likely $tock$ or a shill.

      Delete
    2. I actually posted a comment on the Seaside Courier article, linked here, by WC. My post hasn't been removed, yet, although my comments have been removed, in the past. Arnold starts out by talking about the waste of $10 Million for a "vacant school." So I responded to that, and his endorsement's of Stocks running for reelection, of course:
      ***********************
      The public wanted to purchase Pacific View. The City could still pressure Encinitas Union School District to carry a 30 year loan at zero percent interest, because the purchase price is outrageous, and EUSD has long insisted the property was to be exchanged, not sold, for a commercial property with a revenue stream. Citizens of Encinitas favor a true community art and learning center. Specific plans and suggestions are being offered. Over 750 letters supporting the surplus school site's purchase were sent to the EUSD Board of Trustees and Encinitas City Council. Many of the plans proposed involve a non-profit's foundation's leasing the site, providing a revenue stream to help repay the debt, rehabbing and maintaining existing classrooms, in the process. Pacific View is NOT vacant.

      Jerome Stocks could run again, but he would not win. His reputation has been tarnished. Too many who have been aware of his past tactics see him as a bully, and someone who, in 2005, hurt our budget, terribly, by increasing salaries and pensions to an unsustainable level. We are still trying to deal with unfunded pension liabilities, and the aftermath of what we see as Jerome Stocks' failed leadership. When it comes to city government spending, Stocks was Republican in Name Only. The former Hall Property Park cost millions more than it should have to purchase, because of the contaminated soil, from former greenhouses. Counting debt service, cost of purchase, cost of construction, and maintenance, the interregional sports complex, incorrectly named (according to the definitions in our General Plan) Encinitas Community Park, has also had a tremendous negative impact on our City budget, draining city coffers far in excess of $60 Million.

      Delete
  25. 80F in my house, just turned on the A/C. Niiiiccceee.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Not I… outside is 65. Opened the windows…. Nice!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Lynn - R U say'n that you would of paid 10 million for PV - yes or no? Don't try to be a politician and say I would of told them to finance the deal and they would of said, of course.

    ReplyDelete
  28. If I were on Council, I would have used threats of litigation, as EUSD (incorrectly) used against Encinitas, which pressure of potential litigation, I'd want the City to back up, invoking both the Naylor Act and Eminent Domain.

    The cost of litigation would have been far less than the extra $4 million we are paying. Tony Kranz has said, "litigation would have been expensive," but it would not have required us to pay $10 million, total, INCLUDING the costs of litigation. Council wasn't willing, for what reasons I can't fathom, to stand up to Superintendent Baird and the Board of Trustee, and past Superintendents' and Boards' shenanigans. Probably because past City Council members, including Teresa Barth, were part of secret development deals between the City and EUSD for future rezoning of parts of Ocean Knoll, the Quail Gardens school site, and all of Pacific View.

    In fact, even including the cost of legal counsel (and we couldn't use Glenn Sabine; I'd recommend Everett DeLano or Felix Tinkov) we could and should have paid no more than $6 or $6.5 million, instead of the bloated $10 Million.

    My thought was, and remains, now that the auction has been officially and unanimously cancelled, by EUSD's Board of Trustees, the City could still use its leverage to "man and woman up," apply pressure to the School District, so that the Board of Trustees will see the wisdom in agreeing to carry the $10 Million loan for 30 years, at zero percent interest. It would only take Lisa Shaffer's seeing the wisdom of insisting on these terms, as Muir and Gaspar would support the City's "laying down the law," when it comes to better terms of purchase.

    Barth and Kranz are unlikely to change their minds, and act with financial prudence; they are too enamored of the power they are feeling, as the "controlling" Council Members through their bogus ad hoc secret closed session Council Meetings, which they held with Marla Strich and Carol Skiljan. Please, never vote for Strich and Skiljan again.

    Those secret subcommittee were NOT successful in keeping the price down. Barth/ Kranz is probably the worst possible combination. Plus, despite our new city policy, Council never made a finding of any compelling need to have secret meetings. Secrecy is needed in closed session negotiations for real property ONLY to keep the purchase price down, for the potential purchaser.

    We are not even noticed of these secret ad hoc subcommittee meetings, until after the fact. The promises and agreements made within them have not been honored by Baird, who violated the Brown Act by releasing the City's CONFIDENTIAL, closed session opening bid of $4.3 Million, which was one million dollars more than the only relevant appraisal, using local comps. The higher appraisal's numbers WEREN"T based on "ocean views" as wrongly alleged by Gus Vina at open Council Meetings. Instead the curve was thrown off using Los Angeles Comps, including overpriced comps on Wilshire Blvd.

    Also, the EUSD/City joint subcommittee meeting agreements re giving Encinitas six months of rights to EXCLUSIVE negotiations, with an option to renew, and a negotiated right of first refusal, should the property be put up for sale, on the open market, were not kept. So what was the advantage to the secrecy? It worked to further corrupt Barth/Kranz and to cause the taxpayers to be forced to overpay.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Our city's not having to pay interest over thirty years, would make it as though we had actually negotiated a reasonable price, to begin with. EUSD had long maintained that the Naylor Act didn't apply because PV was to be exchanged, NOT sold, for a commercial property with a REVENUE STREAM. The Naylor Act still applies, because it tolls from when the Board of Trustees initially LEASED the former school site to the City of Encinitas, effective 12/1/2003, but with the Board signifying approval with Superintendent Doug DeVore's approval, on 2/2/04. Eight years before that approval, Pacific View was used for play grounds and fields. So 30% of it should have been offered to the City and other public agencies, BEFORE the open space was disposed of, effective with the first lease agreement.

      $10 Million is over three times the amount of the only independent appraisal done in the current zoning, the current timeframe, using local comps. Council allowed itself to be bamboozled. It should now do damage control, and be very firm about negotiating terms of purchase, to compensate for the errors of Barth, Kranz and Shaffer.

      Also, since terms of 0% interest over 30 years should be given in recognition of the Naylor Act, and the City's ability to take the land, through eminent domain, paying fair market value, but with 30%, or .846 acre being actually valued at 25% of fair market value, the following conditions should be added to a supplementary Memo of Understanding:

      1. EUSD, in order to receive its long desired ongoing revenue stream, shall agree to carry the $10 Million loan over thirty (30) years at zero percent interest.

      2. Our historic Old Schoolhouse will remain on the site of Pacific View, in perpetuity.

      3. The zoning for Pacific View, which is donated land, and part of our heritage, will remain public/semi public, in perpetuity, so that it remains, forever, in the public domain.

      4. 30% of the 2.82 acres site of Pacific View, or .846 acre, shall remain, in perpetuity, as public open space, which can include fields, areas planted with trees, and community gardens, but according to the definitions of California Education Code, shall not include parking areas.

      Delete
    2. Lynn, the interest free thing is just not going to work. First, there is nothing the city can do to compel EUSD to re-trade. They don't have to sell, they want to sell. Big difference. Second, if you had a deal with a buyer to buy your house for, say, $1M, but and then they come back and say, "will you float us an interest free loan for 30 years?", what would you say? You would say, "NO, we have a deal!!". If you did agree to float that loan, then someone like me would knock on your door and say "Don't sell your house to that guy - sell it to me today for $500K cash. That way you're getting your $400K(present value of $1M for 30yrs) you have to wait 30 years for today (that you can invest for 30 years and maybe make more), and another $100K today to do whatever you want with."

      - The Sculpin

      Delete
  29. But we are talking about public land being transferred between two public agencies. It's not the same as renegotiating the sale of a home between private buyers.

    Also, terms are open to renegotiation. As far as I know, Escrow has not been entered? But sometimes, even during escrow, terms are changed.

    What makes my proposal reasonable is that EUSD, through Baird, negotiated in bad faith, and through Baird and past Superintendents didn't honor statutory law, by their not abiding by Education Code, including the Naylor Act. There are mitigating legal questions, including that EUSD has long insisted it wants an ongoing revenue stream, that would make it in the best interests of both the City and EUSD to agree to renegotiating the terms.

    Baird pulled NUMEROUS baits and switches. He has violated the Brown Act; he has not honored Education Code.

    EUSD CANNOT, legally, invest the money, over 30 years. If any money could go into its General Fund, according to Education Code, as verified to me, the City, and EUSD, by the State Allocation Board, that would have to be for a ONE TIME PURPOSE. But money cannot go into the General Fund if the "district has not anticipated need for additional sites or building construction for the ten-year period following the sale." The Encinitas Ranch site has not been declared surplus, and has no permanent structures. At various public school sites, EUSD has numerous temporary portable classrooms.

    Also, money cannot go into EUSD's general fund if unless the School District can certify that it has "no major deferred maintenance requirements not covered by existing capital outlay resources." Baird led the public, Council and the Boars of Trustees to believe, in speaking at public meetings, that money could go into the General Fund and could possibly go toward teachers' salaries, which were just increased this year.

    According to Coast News from the March 21, 2014 edition: "2.5% pay increase approved for teachers, management at EUSD." https://thecoastnews.com/2014/03/2-5-pay-increase-approved-for-teachers-management-at-eusd/ :

    "All 545 EUSD (Encinitas Union School District) employees received a 2.5 percent raise — retroactive to July 2013 — as part of a three-year contract…
    EUSD’s general fund this year calls for $47.8 million in revenue and $51.8 million in expenses, with nearly $10.3 million in reserves.

    As recently as two years ago, EUSD considered laying off 36 teachers. But it ultimately decided not to go through with it, largely due to the passage of Proposition 30. Ultimately, the measure translated into the district keeping funds that would have otherwise gone to the state."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. According to a California website that tracks Prop 30 funding, for the period of 2012-2013 EUSD's data shows:

      http://trackprop30.ca.gov/K12Lea.aspx?id=7337&year=2012

      "2012-13 Prop. 30 Funding
      Amount delivered to this entity
      $1,060,556

      This district has not provided a spending plan.

      Total Revenue $47.5
      Total Expenses $45.9"

      According to the numbers provided, please notice that although last year, EUSD's budget was balanced, with more revenues than expenses, the opposite is true this year. Unexplained by EUSD is why expenses in one year increased by nearly $6 Million, an increase of $5.9 Million! Because revenues are not balanced, and because monies are being spent for I-Pads and I-Pad apps and technology, which must be replaced or updated at least every five years, as part of facilities improvement funding, and because of the Encinitas Ranch School site which is vacant of permanent structures, as well because of all the temporary classrooms, it's highly unlikely that EUSD could certify it has "no major deferred maintenance requirements not covered by existing capital outlay resources."

      It's almost impossible that money could go into EUSD's general fund. If any did, there would have to be a plan for a "one time purpose," of the funds, such that the "school district at a regularly scheduled meeting shall present a plan for expending one-time resources … [and] describe the reasons why the expenditure will not result in ongoing financial obligations for the school district."

      Delete
    2. 4:29 should read, in part: But money cannot go into the General Fund unless the School district can certify to the State Allocation Board that it "has no anticipated need for additional sites or building construction for the ten-year period following the sale."

      Delete
  30. Long story, short - The school district would say NO to Lynn's suggestions and Lynn would then say NO to buying Pacific View for 10 million.

    See, that wasn't that difficult was it.

    ReplyDelete
  31. The Sculpin is correct. The 30 year thing isn't going to happen. What you would like and the realities of the real world are two different things.

    -Mr Green Loan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No changes to the corruption of the City's and School District's dealings can ever be made if no one ASKS, and demands, because of the corruption, changes MUST be made.

      No one is holding Baird accountable for his misrepresentations, bad faith and failure to abide by statutory law.

      Just because you think it won't happen, doesn't mean that it couldn't. With your "can't do" or "won't work" attitude, this nation could never have been founded. We would never have become the United States of America, or incorporated as the City of Encinitas. Plus, the Historic Old Schoolhouse would never have been built on land donated to the early settlers for the children, back in 1883.

      I won't stop asking and urging, offering a way to mitigate the outrageous purchase price of $10 Million.

      Delete
  32. I hope Lynn wasn't one that signed the pledge to support buying PV without finding out what the deal was all about.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We all supported buying Pacific View. We never imagined that the Kranz and Barth would be bamboozled, and persuade Shaffer to buy into the bait; hook, line and sinker. We supported buying Pacific View, but we can still mitigate the excessive price by the terms I've outlined above. Don't give up on integrity.

      Delete
    2. By "we all supported buying Pacific View," I was answering the comment at 4:49, re the 750 letters to the Board of Trustees and Council in support of purchasing Pacific View, sent through the SavePacificView.org web site.

      I meant all of us who wrote letters of support, supported the purchase, but not at any price.

      Delete
    3. Lynn,

      Please try and write more clearly. Your vague and false accusations weaken your credibility.

      Delete
    4. It's pretty sad when you won't take responsibility for your actions. Unless the petition laid out the conditions that were acceptable, you bear some responsibility. Sorry. You can't claim after the fact that you didn't expect stupidity. If you apply pressure to act then you are part of the action. I'm not saying you're wholly responsible, the majority of which does lie with the council, but you do share part of it.

      Delete
  33. Then you are such a liar. We all don't support buying Pv.

    I know a bunch of other people do not want to buy PV

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please see my comment above. I wasn't referring to you. I was referring to those of us who wrote letters supporting the purchase of PV through SavePacificView.org.

      Delete
    2. Please try to read my comments with comprehension, rather than a closed mind, 6:42. Stop calling me a liar, when you won't even own your own comments! Post under your own name, if you want to call me out. Name one person, including yourself, other than development interests, who didn't want to preserve Pacific View in the public domain.

      Many didn't want to buy at $10 Million, including many of us who wrote letters of support of purchase through SavePacificView.ocm.

      Delete
    3. whatever Lynn. Its not about you. The issue is PV is a bad call for Encinitas. A trophy project the City can not and should not afford.

      Delete
  34. I agree with 6:42! Lynn, please speak for yourself!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Leave my name out of it. I am speaking for myself and all those who wrote e-mails and letters in support of purchasing Pacific View.

      Delete
    2. Lynn..... You should leave ur name out of it.... Ego has no place on a blog....

      If u don't like others to respond to ur posts and use ur name, don't use ur name. It's that simple.

      Delete
    3. 11:30 "Ego has no place on a blog" LOL.

      Damn, it's way too late for me n' Lynn! If we went anonymous, everyone would still know who we were! Interesting concept though, everyone ditching their name. Might eliminate identity theft. Naw, too Orwellian.

      Delete
  35. Lynn - you are not as loved as you think you are , not as hated as you wish. Stop obviating about PV, the deal stinks for the taxpayers regardless of the terms .
    Roundabouts work.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  36. Yeah Lynn - Take an ethics and logic course. And get some fresh air. It can only help.

    - Roundabouts save time and lives.

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

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here's something to consider....PV stinks for taxpayers and roundabouts work.

      Delete
  38. Why don't you quit posting your unfounded insulting posts. Then we will not need to respond with facts. Believe me, we do not enjoy seeing your posts. Its like reading the Enquirer.

    Here is a solution. Learn how to yield and quit posting so many mistruths so often.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Lynn just doesn't like it when someone doesn't agree with her. Too bad she doesn't like things often.

    - and then you call me a bully

    ReplyDelete
  40. Sadly, what I've observed about Lynn's positions is while she will acknowledge small errors, once she has taken a position, which often happens quickly, she won't, in effect, reconsider it. She just keeps digging, mistaking quantity for quality.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You won't even acknowledge your name; oh that's right, you did, Crappy Marvy. You are a bully, and you twist the truth.

      You don't want a public vote because you put your egotistical desires and selfish interests above what the community actually wants and needs. If you honestly think only 3% of the public would vote against roundabouts, then you should be lining up, asking Council for a public vote.

      Delete
  41. I don't get why someone posting doesn't comment about the topic, here, "Thomas Arnold in Seaside Courier calls for Jerome Stocks to run for mayor," instead of diverting the conversation?

    I read in that article by Arnold where he claims Council agreedl "to plunk down $10 million in money the city doesn’t have to buy a vacant school site, with no idea about what to do with it."

    It looks to me as though someone has been addressing that part of Arnold's commentary. I agree the City is paying too much. Also, I agree plans for using the property have been put forward, and are still being suggested, by members of the public.

    But what is the big fixation on Lynn and not the topic WC posted, here? Geez.

    We can learn more and have more fun participating, if we all play nice in the sandbox, and don't confuse this area with kitty litter.

    ReplyDelete
  42. The discussion on the topic ran its course and petered out long before we got to 120-something comments. Since there was nothing more to say about the topic, people reverted to grinding old axes.

    ReplyDelete