The talk last night that Ms. Gaspar is a financial conservative is not supported by her voting record. Speakers repeating these untruths last night must be either partisan hacks or uninformed. A few facts on Ms. Gaspar-
1. Knowing the city had unfunded projects Gaspar voted to spend $66,000 of taxpayer money on a self-serving survey. Her husband Paul and developer and crony David Meyer then used the survey results to send out promotional mailers to benefit Ms. Gaspar- we the taxpayers went without, the Gaspars and Meyers abused our money (Muir and Barth supported also voted to the same way on this issue)
Knowing the city had failing roads Gaspar (along with Muir and Barth) voted to raid $7M from funded capital improvement projects without a plan to pay it back.
Knowing the city had failing finances Gaspar (along with Barth and Muir) voted to increase the city's debt service rather then use the citizens suggested pay as you go model to start the hall park- now the city is near bankrupt amd there is little room to increase debt in am emergency - Gaspar maxed out the city credit card-
You want more?
4 weeks ago residents exposed the city manager Gus Vina withheld important financial information from the council and the public on the Lew Edwards tax increase survey- Gaspar could have made a motion to hold the city manager accountable for his deceipt and failure to act responsible but instead she sided with the council and sat on her hands. Now Vina has presented a budget- but how can the public trust the budget numbers when Lew Edwards proved Vina withhold's information? The public can't.
Gaspar voted to give ex city manager Phil Cotton and extra paycheck in his final year enabling Cotton to spike his pension- Gaspar followed teh self-serving failed recommendation of City Attorney Sabine and the insider network that claimed there were somehow 54 weeks in that year- an extra pay period. Now Gaspar claims to be a fiscal conservative when she has proven a self serving spender to benefit herself and her cronies
Gaspar also voted to follow the failed recommendation of city attorney Sabine to bury the road report, residents sued and the court ordered the report released- at a cost to taxpayers of about $100K
Gaspar also failed to follow citizens recommendations to file an injunction to compell EUSD to follow the Naylor Act on Pacific View- residents got screwed again.
The list of Gaspar's failures goes on and on. She sided with high density developers on desert rose and put community safety at risk- residents sued and the city lost (again, Muir Barth and the others voted the same way)
I thought having her child speak was inappropriate- as was Kranz making the mean spiritited comment about getting a phone call from family members. But really, needing to trot your kid out?
The bottom line and take away from last night was that the Bonde report and taxpayer recommendation to save money and increase service was ignored.
Not one single council member asked Mr. Bonde about the$300 million in city unfunded debt and liabilities - or about the Bonde Plan to save that money.
Not a single council member asked Mr. Bonde about the 200 unfunded capital projects or about the $7M Gaspar and the council raided.
Instead last night was the all about me show- Shaffer spoke all about herself and her facebook page. Barth spoke about herslef and being passed over, muir about his proposed hiring freeze, Kranz about his midnight call and Gaspar about Gaspar.
I was and am in favor of Gaspar being Mayor, not because of her voting record - which is a failure- but because it was what was agreed to and the city has bigger problems to solve.
If anyone can show me where my facts are wrong I'd gladly accept corrections.
As you have no facts rebut the facts presented you resort to attempting to distract others. Anyone, please show me where my facts on the voting record of Ms. Gaspar are incorrect?
Brian Brady - the self proclaimed Tea Party activist- why do you support an irresposible financial candidate who increases public debt while reducing the city's ability to serve taxpayers? Why do you support a candidate who tells untruths on ballot statements sent to every voter in the city?
Good points. There are plenty of serious issues that they could address without this soap opera. One of the common elements for many of the city problems is Gus Vina. As long as they all support him, we are doomed.
The city council is collectively inept - the City Manager runs Barter Town. Unless and until there is acknowledgement that Vina needs to be replaced, it will be business as usual. Vina knows this and is sitting comfortably.
6:36- Were you and I at the same meeting? All of the information about Gaspar's past votes and/or non-votes may be true, but last night I was there and what I saw was very different, at least after Bob's presentation. And, in that yoga re right. No one asked about important budget issues, instead they said that the county would never give us the right to own our own ambulances, and therefore it could not proceed. However, I don't recall Shaffer saying much of anything, except sit there and pout. I didn't had Tony's comment either and I was in the second row. He looked furious and said nothing except to second Teresa's motion to "listen and do nothing" on Tony and Lisa's ideas. I thought Kristin was articulate and personally I didn't expect her that. As far as her son speaking, what's the problem. He wanted to, and he did it. I see no harm in that. Her mom spoke as well and gave Lisa and Tony a good chewing out. The crowd were mostly Shaffer fans who had come to to show support, as I had predicted they would. Tony and Lisa gave Kristin her Moment, if you will. They should have never put this on the agenda and then Kristin would rise or fall as Mayor for the second half without having half of her support group sitting in Council Chambers and overflow area. They gave her so much support that it is going to be even more difficult to beat her in an election in Nov. That was Tony and Lisa's doing. Gaspar, in this case, defended herself and brought her army with her. Whether one likes her army is another matter. But, they exist and rallied. Blame Tony and Lisa for this one. I don't exactly know how long the whole thing took, but it was time that could have been spent on the budget or more on Bonde. So, in the end, Lisa and Tony looked like spiteful children, Teresa made sure everyone knew how much she had done for all of us, and Kristin came out pretty good. I agree, Vina, has way too much power and wields his sword well. We need Julie and people like her to run at this point. Lisa and Tony are done as soon as Teresa leaves. Catherine, as nice as she is, will not be able to stand up to the big money that was very present last night. I think Julie Graboi is capable of that. People who were not Gaspar fans even spoke against this agenda item. I didn't speak, but all in all I think a deal is a deal. Nothing has changed since Dec. when all 5 voted for the mayoral split. Shaffer never answered why she put it on the agenda, at least on her FB page. I don't think I heard her say one word during these agenda items. In fact, and correct me if I am wrong, I don't think she asked Bob Bonde one question either. Most of the questions asked of Bonde were from Muir. And though they disagreed, they were both polite and civil to one another. That is the way it should be in my opinion. Anyway those are my thoughts about last night.
The information presented about Gaspar's voting record is true.
Gaspar claims to be a family values candidate and has her out of town mother who does not pay taxes here and her child speak to her values- fact- Gaspar gave an unearned exttra paycheck to city manager Phil Cotton enabling Cotton to spike his pension and void his written contractual agreement. Gaspar failed to hold Vina responsible for withholding financial information and estimates from the public and council. Family values my ass. How about the big one- Gaspar lied on a ballot statement that was sent to every voter in the city. Does Gaspar support her kids lying? Will she make amends? Would you?
Gaspar voted to approve wasting $66,000 dollars on a survey residents opposed. Residents said the money could be used to benefit taxpayers. Instead Gaspar's husband Paul and developer crony David Mery used the taxpayer money to produce a mailer to benefit Gaspar. Is this a wise steward of our tax dollars? Should we demand better?
Gaspar voted to raid $7M from funded projects with no plan to pay it back.
Gaspar left the building in 2011 when the public needed her vote on Pacific View- she hid.
Gaspar voted to increase the city's debt service and now there is no money for projects to benefit taxpayers as our tax dollars are going to pay interest to bankers.
I am not a fan of any council members. The whole debacle was farcial and a waste of taxpayer money. All five should be ashamed of themselves-
I disagree, the room was not packed with Shaffer Barth Kranz supporters- those supporters left a long time ago. The room was packed by the Gaspar's with many out of towners. Not surprising as she represents out of towners and special interests.
Sorry 8:55-You are correct. I meant to write Gaspar fans, but I stayed for the whole meeting and am a bit tired. Yes, most of the crowd were GASPAR fans. Thanks for the clarification.
Gaspar lies and apparently her son isn't aware of her lie on Prop. A. ballot. Talk about untruths.
The apple doesn't fall far from the tree which was obvious with her mother's time at the pulpit (blaming every one else except yourself). That is how Gaspar operates. It would have been nice if any one of those speakers would have pointed out that Gaspar does not always tell the truth. Instead, they made her into a "madonna".
Look for more handouts for the developers. Gaspar owes them big time.
Some one please inform Gaspar that the mayor's job is going to be extremely difficult. She will need the help of her husband, her mother, her son, the whole therapy gang and all of her developer and out of town buddies because she will not be able to handle this job on her own. That was obvious at last night's meeting.
Vote out all incumbents. We need a fresh new start.
Muir is the sorriest piece of "A" running a close second with his friend $tock$.
He came across with Bob Bonde as arrogant and tried to ruffle Bonde's feathers. Bob stood his ground and answered his questions in a thoughtul manner.
Bonde gave an excellent presentation with a way to help save the city thousands of dollars. Immediately, Muir dismissed the idea because the county would not go along with it. Muir is not doing his job representing the taxpayers if he is not even willing to try and save money. We get it Muir, you want money for your FF.
Muir needs to go. I suggest he enjoy his retirement while he still is on planet earth.
Why do you support liars? Gaspar lied on a ballot statement sent to every voter in the city. They have a designation for that behavior - it is called Sociopath. Those who support sociopath's are called enablers -
As someone who has trained horses, many of the commenters here have as much sense as a horse and I don't mean the fabled "horse sense". If you spend any time around horses you wonder how that got started.
Horses naturally yield to pressure.......Instinct tells a horse "don't stand there....do something!!" I see very few posters on this blog yielding to any pressure whatsoever.......
Here is the first paragraph. Not sure if I am allowed to publish the whole thing.
Wow - I didn't expect the response I got to the item I put on the May 28 meeting agenda. May 28 was the last meeting before we start the second half of our Council year, and thus the point at which we are scheduled to change mayors from Teresa Barth to Kristin Gaspar, as we agreed last December. Bottom line - the transition is going forward. I never intended to oppose it, but wanted to pause and give Kristin, or anyone else on Council, a chance to talk about it before it happened. Here is some of what I said at the meeting:
"“I liken it to when you buy something online, before you buy you are given the option to review what is in your cart,” Shaffer said after the meeting. “If it wasn’t placed on the agenda, nobody would have a chance to say anything about it.”
Notice Lisa uses an example of a person isolated and most likely alone, interfacing with a machine/technology, Not an interchange between two people: No wonder she is surprised when her ideas and methods are criticized and misinterpreted. Attempting to explain away an emotionally explosive action on her own part by likening it to a 'purchase', just like 'purchasing' PV with money she didn't have. Luckily, the news that the troika has maxed out the city's credit helped spread the word about the Kranz chicanery and the public showed up. The duo on the Agenda last night is a perfect answer to what happens when you have term limits: inexperienced people elected to office.
You reveal yourself not to be concerned with taxpayers but rather getting Gaspar elected.
Gaspar voted to raid $7M from funded projects without a plan to pay it back.
Gaspar voted to increase the city's debt service by $10M resulting in 200 unfunded projects and failing roads in the city.
Gaspar voted to approve up to $135,000 annully for a spin doctor.
Gaspar voted to give ex city manager Cotton and extra paycheck
Gaspar voted to spend $66,000 of taxpayer money on survey that her husband Paul and developer crony David Meyers uswed to promote Gaspar's interests not the publics.
Why do you support Gaspar who is a proven liar? why do you support Gaspar who has increased the city's debt while reducing services and benefits to taxpayers?
I opopse irresponsible leaders like Gaspar, kranz, Shaffer Barth and Muir- you should too.
As Woody Allen said in Annie Hall,"That's great, 11:16, but I am due back on planet earth now..." Whoo whoo, that's a lotta hate.
Anybody hear the one about the CM, Barth, Tony and Shaffer trying to put out a "Request For Proposal' on hiring a group to start an independent ambulance district for Encinitas before any public hearing? Yep, another $100K expenditure Shaffer is willing t spend on a plan that legally isn't likely to proceed because the county has to okay it: and will only do that when incompetent novices fly?
Maybe Shaffer will try to explain this away by saying,"You know, an RFP that the public won't know bout because I'll cause the cursor to click on 'Hide Others'.
why the - well you know- are we paying too much money to the county for crappy failing ambulance times and icnreased tazes and fees?
You and your cronies Muir and Gaspar might support sticking more taxes on the backs of taxpayers but I don't
The Bonde and ETA plan saves taxpayers $7M a year
Muir and Gaspar (along with the others) raided $7M from funded projects, increased debt service and have left the account empty to fund more than 200 projects
Bonde and the taxpayers have a solution - Gaspar and Muir (along with the others) want to keep sticking it too us-
You might support higher taxes and increased fees and reduced services and unfunded projects but don't expect us to join you.
Gaspar, Muir, Kranz, Shaffer and Barth all lied on Prop A and all mismanaged out money- kick them all to the curb.
It's not a done deal that the County would never approve the City's pulling out of the County/City ambulance agreement. Bob Bonde said he'd called up and discussed the possibility; he said he had discussed with a County official what steps could be taken to disengage from the County.
Bonde and Muir did have a civil discussion, and are to continue their conversation, one on one, they both agreed.
Shaffer proposed another dumb idea to overspend on another "independent" consultant. Right, that's what Rutan and Tucker was supposed to be, but we all know that firm was pro-development, and anti the Right to Vote Initiative.
And many feel Council wanted to believe the speculation and conjecture of the Rutan and Tucker report that morphed to the lies of the City Attorney's not impartial and not factual analysis, which was submitted for the sample ballots before Council's ballot arguments against Prop A were created and filed through the Clerk.
But Shaffer, last night, also proposed that the Bonde's matter could come back to a combination of Council and the Traffic and Safety Commission, sitting together for that agenda item, which would then be heard as an action item, not listed as a presentation, which was the case last night, thanks to Barth and Vina. Gaspar had asked six months ago for a regularly agendized item, not a special presentation. Last night Barth attempted to take credit for setting the item on the agenda, too.
What Shaffer could have better suggested was for the agenda item to go back to the Traffic and Safety Commission, for further study, vetting, and careful deliberation, so that those volunteers could become more expert on this subject and make informed recommendations to Council. We should use the expertise in our own community, not hire more and more expensive consultant/contractors.
As a former Commissioner I can tell you that staff does not want Commissioners giving input. It upsets them, as sometimes the commissioners are more intelligent and less invested in the outcome as they are. Ask Dr. Lorri about that if you don't believe me. She may bot be petting an animal right now:) xoxox
I was glad to hear Peter Stern, and agreed with his suggestion. But, in addition, or instead, this should be able to go back to the Traffic and Safety Commission for a real discussion, over more than one commission meeting, if necessary. Lisa Shaffer and Teresa Barth had insisted that we should use the expertise in our community, including through the volunteers that serve on commissions. I agree with 7:02 that staff, including the staff liasons and the City Manager have been working against the idea of citizens giving Council more direct input. But Council should be able to change that, if it wants to!
9:09-Yes, lot's of drama. But, one thing is certain. Gaspar had a big win last night and that is going to be hard to beat. If Lisa and Tony had not out these items on the agenda, she would have been mayor and perhaps stumbled. And we wouldn't have seen her huge fan club. Now, it's going to be even more difficult to keep developers at bay.
9:13 I wouldn't call it a win for Gaspar at all. She was going to be mayor for 6 months without all of this. Shaffer and Kranz were simply pointing out (in a nice way) that she said in a meeting that a council person running for the elected mayor's position should not be mayor at the time. That is a fact.
Gaspar said it and it is in the record. So, please tell us who is the liar.
I didn't vote for Gaspar, but when a new agreement is reached by unanimous vote, it replaces other agreements. I think it was a promise for a promise. Barth said she would go the first half, and Gaspar agreed to the second half of this year. At the time, Barth had proposed the schedule as a way for covering for Gaspar while she was on a family vacation. It seems too late to reconsider this agreement at this late date.
Agree, 5:42. If someone reading and commenting here goes back and listens to Council's conversation on December 10, he'll see and hear exactly what was said, and all the options that were weighed back then.
Tony Kranz made a substitute motion to select Teresa Barth as mayor, but for only six months and then to revisit the conversation when six months was up. No one seconded that motion, so it died. But Tony Kranz by his agenda item, and Lisa Shaffer, by her agenda item, decided they wanted to revisit and reconsider, despite what was unanimously agreed to on December 10.
http://webcasts.encinitasca.gov/ Please check out the webcast for 12/10/13.
on 12/10/13, Council met at 5:00 p.m., but did not conclude all agenda items for the closed session. It was in recess for the second Special Meeting, the open Council Meeting that is the subject of the webcast, to select a new mayor. Barth later states that she wants to conclude the closed session special meeting, and she doesn't want Kristin Gaspar, who was going out of town, the next day for Winter Holidays with her family, to miss her first meeting as Chair of the Council Meeting that was to follow, the next day, December 11.
Barth volunteers to continue as mayor for the next six months. Gaspar had twice said she was willing to accept the compromise and the choice of who would hold the office of mayor for the last six months could be done by a coin toss, to take the politics out of the decision. Again, Barth solved the dilemma by saying she would rather continue as mayor for another six months, that Kristin could hold the office of mayor, beginning in June.
What 6:36 fails to realize is that elections are not about the past - they are about the future. Big win for Gaspar last night. Lisa and Tony will certainly be on Gaspar's xmas list this year!! I agree - it's now hers to lose......
Gaspar will be a mayor that will fail to get anything accomplished because the vote of the council will remain with the majority of Barth, Kranz and Shaffer. If you think she spins in her chair now, just wait and watch!
Yup, I didn't think they should have given Gaspar the momentum. This in an off year election, and in such an election, Gaspar has an advantage, because more older, conservative voters have been shown to vote in those elections.
That's Gaspar's base, the older, more conservative people of new Encinitas. That and deverlopers, David Mayer etc. But it doesn't matter, her core doesn't care.
Whoever runs against her better has some serious giddyup. Then again, people may forget by November, after all, it's still May. Still a tactical screw up.
I know the Sculpin already knows this but it bears repeating. All of what he has said above is true. However, when people like and an ordinary citizen cannot obtain information, i.e.: Kevin Cummins-road report- how can we think for ourselves? How do we keep an open mind when Vina won't even give the Council the things they ask for? A healthy skepticism is fine, but sometimes the deck is so stacked that a person is left with more than a health skepticism. We see this all the way from the President to our little local Council.
Sculpin is right. Most of Encinitas voters haven't a clue who stands for what, as they all lie when they do the candidate's forums, and even at those there are very few people over all. Who was there last night tells a lot. Most of her Rotarian friends; most of her family; many of her other supporters. Even Bev Goodman spoke and said a deal is a deal. And, the last time I spoke to Bev I don't think she was a big fan of Gaspar. This really wasn't about Gaspar, and what she will or will not do as mayor. But, it did provide a forum for allowing her developer friends to come out in large numbers to support her. That was a bit overwhelming, at least I thought so. I have never been to a Council meeting where not only were both rooms full, but there was an overflow room with a television. Julie Graboi had to sit in there as she got there on time, at least for most council meetings. Is Encinitas broke? Who knows, as our City manager won't give any of the Council the answers to that question. And, if Council knows, they are sharing all that they know. How could we not be close to being broke? Bob Bonde shared that Encinitas has the highest paid firefighting people and expenses in all of north country cities, including Oceanside, which is a lot larger. And, no one seemed to mind. Go figure.
Gaspar has, and will have a large core group of supporters. Anyone opposing her better have a well thought out, well run campaign that hammers her on her lack of fiscal restraint, and be blameless themselves....
9:47-Agree with you. Anyone who underestimates the support Gaspar has will be very sorry when she and perhaps another person who is politically the same wins.
9:47-Agree. Let's find some people. I know Graboi would be hard hitting and I support her. Catherine may have aligned herself with Teresa and Lisa, and who knows how that will play out. If we could get Graboi and another person like her on the ballot, we would have a chance of getting rid of Vina, who is possibly the greatest problem our city has.
For those of you who think Shaffer's base is still in da house - think again. We're not.
For those of you who think Gaspar has some sort of significant advantage, think again: her fiscal irresponsibility in total is clear and her lies not only on the Prop A ballot statement, but well in advance of the election ("You won't be able to remodel your kitchen"), plus her absurd "We Love Encinitas" mailer will be trotted out and publicized to the hilt, come election time. She cannot wash the stink of Meyer, Stocks, and Andreen off no matter how hard she scrubs.
As long as she remains tied to the developers and her beloved Stocks, she will not garner those votes. There are a lot of people out there that don't want the developers in here destroying out city and Gaspar is their ticket.
You're right, we shouldn't underestimate the depth of your hate or the neurotic strength in your transference of self-hate and loathing onto someone you watch on television every week.
Bet the mail man runs by your driveway doesn't he? Been a while since the paperboy been by to collect? In fact, your old man went out for cigarettes in... 1967 wasn't it? Oh, and, er, a developer probably built your house. What, no? You're right, didn't know you were living in a truck camper in your Mom's driveway: wireless communication is a miracle, isn't it?
This is from Shaffer's newsletter that recapped last night's council meeting:
"The Council chamber was filled with Gaspar supporters and the speakers included Kristin's mother and Kristin's 8-year old son. They had their statements prepared, assuming that I was advocating that Kristin not be allowed to serve as mayor. Despite my opening remarks quoted above, in which I tried to make it clear that I was not proposing to change the "deal" made in December, the public speakers pretty much stuck to their scripts. Almost all of them scolded me, many impugned my character and my integrity. It is their right and privilege to say whatever they want at the podium. As a public official I understand that this is part of the job. That doesn't make it pleasant and it doesn't make their assertions true. But it is clear that this agenda item consumed a lot of time and brought a lot of negative energy into the proceedings, which I regret."
After a long passive-aggressive attack on Gaspar's family and supporters, a long complaint about how she was attacked and her integrity impugned, and a long excuse about why she initiated her agenda item to begin with, she says she regrets the waste of time and the negative energy.
Notice she doesn't take responsibility for the role she played. She doesn't say she made a mistake. She implies that she regrets the attacks against her, the negative energy and all the time that was wasted by others, although she doesn't regret setting an agenda item to reconsider Gaspar's succession to mayor, unanimously agreed upon, after Council discussion, last December.
The Dec. 10 discussion went on for 45 minutes. It included Gaspar's statement in the beginning of the conversation, and the final conclusion, after deliberation and comments by all of Council, to unanimously accept the compromise solution that Muir had proposed.
Do you have an opinion about the fact that Gaspar told the public she did not think it was fair that an appointed Mayor run for Mayor. Gaspar said this. Now Gaspar has been appointed Mayor. If Gaspar runs for Mayor isn't she - Gaspar- going back on her words?
Gaspar said that at the beginning of a very long discussion. By the end of the discussion, Gaspar and everyone else decided that even though Barth and/or Gaspar were likely to run for mayor, it was fine for them to serve as mayor anyway.
Council Members state their opinions, to start the conversation, but can be flexible to change them, especially when a compromise solution has been proposed and unanimously accepted.
I don't see what the problem was, either, with Gaspar's statement, before the fact of the Council's consideration, deliberation and compromise.
I do see a problem with Lisa Shaffer expecting us to swallow her lame excuse that she didn't know what "reconsider" means, until the City Attorney told her. I do see a problem with her and Tony Kranz' proposing identical agenda items for reconsideration, and then Shaffer's saying she only wanted people to have time to express our opinions, then blaming Gaspar and her supporters, including her family, and Shaffer's also blaming neutral observers, like Beverly Goodman, and others who spoke, for wasting the very time she pretended to want us to have to review, discuss and reconsider, also accusing of bringing negative energy to the meeting, those public speakers who dissented with Shaffer's and Kranz' plot.
What in the world did Shaffer, Kranz and Barth expect? This was a lot different than the Pacific View issue, but that was what gave Shaffer, Barth and Kranz their bloated sense of "the all-powerful majority, of might makes right."
The difference is that most people wanted the City to purchase Pacific View, although not at $10 Million. But most people, present or not present, didn't want the three person majority to overrule the previous compromise. If the room had not been full, to overflowing, with people objecting to the majority of Shaffer, Kranz and Barth's scheme, that's exactly what would have happened. Gaspar would have been skipped over as Barth repeatedly was under the old majority.
I see a problem with Lisa Shaffer not taking responsibility for their wasting time, creating ill will, appearing to go back on their unanimous compromise decision, and then saying, well this is because of the Brown Act, when the very fact that two nearly identical agenda items were initiated through the Mayor, City Manager, and Clerk, by Shaffer and Kranz, does implicate them in the appearance of a Brown Act violation.
Also, it seems hypocritical for Tony Kranz to state in the UT article, that he would now accept the position of Deputy Mayor, "so the matter will not have to be "revisited" again. Why did he set his agenda item to begin with? Because he knew with Barth, Shaffer and he had the three person majority to deny Gaspar her turn in the agreed upon rotation. Kranz should have still declined to accept the position next month, but again, he is flp-flopping.
As quoted from the UT:
"Kranz announced last week that he would decline the deputy mayor’s post -- a job he’s to be sworn into June 11 --- because he might run for mayor. On Wednesday night after the council vote to table the issue, he told a reporter that he will take the job afterall, so the council will not have to revisit the issue."
The fact is Gaspar's statement made in December only applied when she thought Barth would be running for mayor, so of course, she did not want Barth to have an advantage over her. But, now that the tied as turned, Gaspar sings a different tune because it benefits her. I see through this and I believe the other council member's saw through it (excluding numb nuts Muir). They wanted to expose Gaspar for who she is --- a flat out LIAR! One has to question her integrity from this point on because once a liar; always a liar.
I agree with WC on this issue. They all came to a new agreement after Gaspar made this statement. It is unfair to rip a comment out of the context of the entire proceeding. Who knows what other council members said? We are not looking back because they came to a complete agreement that replaced what they were debating for almost an hour.
We now have proof that sharing the mayor's seat is not the best decision this council has made. When they did it, I knew that there would be future problems and here we are.
From this point on I believe the council will be even more divided than it has been. The members have been a little more civil, but you can not ignore the divisiveness that has been demonstrated by this entire council. This is what is so sad about politics. It is becoming more and more about the individual than doing what they were elected to do, and that is to represent the people who elected them. The rotational system was the fair way to do it, but we all know who screwed that up. What a shame.
After reviewing the webcast for December 10, I see no inconsistency in Gaspar's statements on December 10. I see inconsistency in Lisa Shaffer's and Tony Kranz' current explanations and statements concerning their agenda items.
On December 10, Lisa Shaffer nominated Teresa Barth to be mayor for another year. She wanted, back then, to skip Kristin Gaspar's turn in the rotation. Shaffer said she supported the rotational system, but "we don't have a rotational system anymore." She drones on about how wonderful Barth's leadership has been.
No one seconded Shaffer's motion. Barth said it died for lack of a second. Mark Muir's motion for Kristin Gaspar to be mayor, to get her turn in the rotation also dies for a lack of second.
Lisa Shaffer then repeats her motion to have Teresa Barth be mayor for two years, to give the voters the opportunity for a two year term mayor, before we expected it, she said. Her motion again dies for lack of a second.
Gaspar says the elephant in the room is the election in 2014.
Kranz starts talking about how the voters did decide on a two year term. But contrary to his reasoning, we voted for an elected mayor, to serve a two year term, not for a two year mayor appointed by a majority on Council.
Teresa states she wouldn't run for Council but hadn't decided whether or not she'd run for mayor.
Mark Muir finally comes up with the compromise of two six month terms. Teresa Barth says that's how it has been done in Solana Beach. Gaspar seconds Muir's motion for two six month terms. Lisa Shaffer objects that the problem remains with determining which mayor would be in office before immediately before the election. Shaffer then moves that Kranz be mayor, because she says she doesn't think he is running for mayor.
Tony immediately states he won't second Shaffer's motion. Kranz then makes another substitute motion that Mayor Barth be appointed for another six months, and then Council would revisit the appointment in June of 2014. Shaffer seconds.
Gaspar states that wouldn't solve the problem, because the same political issues would come up in six months. She states again (she offered before, when Muir made the compromise suggestion, before he turned his suggestion into a motion) that she would be willing to decide who could serve the first six months, as mayor, between her and Teresa Barth, by a coin toss.
After advise from Glenn Sabine, and Teresa Barth's statement that this is open government "warts and all," Shaffer withdraws her second to Kranz' motion.
Muir suggests, again, the "sitting mayor" could decide to go first or second for either of the two six month terms. Barth says to Gaspar, "you don't want to be absent for your first chair, and you're going out of town tomorrow." Barth also states she wants to conclude the closed session special meeting then in recess, as mayor. So, with Muir's urging "let the mayor decide," Barth chooses to be the mayor for another six months, from December to June.
Tony suggests he would team up with Kristin and Mark could team up with Teresa as deputy mayor. In retrospect, Kranz wanted to be deputy mayor for the second six months.
Teresa seemed a little surprised, and I remember I was too, at the time, that the split deputy mayor position was counterintuitive, with Barth/Muir, and Gaspar/Kranz. It did seem like a civil compromise on the part of Council, at the time, and a mutual and unanimous expression of goodwill.
But it will be ironic if both Kristin Gaspar and Tony Kranz, as sitting mayor and sitting deputy mayor, both run for the first elected mayorship.
This is a perfect example of when a "fact" may be a "fact" but is completely irrelevant to the discussion. 7:24 believes this is "called saying one thing, and doing another", but more rational people would refer to it as "forming an opinion through thought and discussion.
right, thanks for clearing that up for us 8:39, Disregard the facts. Nothing to see here folks - please move along. This fact doesn't concern you, this fact is irrelevant.
What 8:39 is trying to tell you is that all the near normal people here on this blog recognize that you are a couple beers short of a six pack and that no one is taking your argument seriously. but continue to harp on it, anything that keeps in the house and not driving on the street: children are playing.
A speaker at the meeting last evening suggested that the term "mayor" be changed to reflect what the job actually entails and that is "council chairperson". I think this is a wonderful suggestion and would alleviate future problems for this city and the council. Since the mayor holds no more weight than the rest of the council, this would be an appropriate solution since there have been numerous problems with this "mayor" issue.
Perhaps a council person could suggest putting this on an agenda for discussion at an appropriate time. It does deserve some discussion and consideration.
11:29. No I am not stupid. I thought the suggestion by one of the speakers last night was a clever suggestion. I'm not for exploring it now because we wouldn't want to upset the princess, but a discussion somewhere down the road might be good. I do pay attention by the way. Thanks for your input.
When the citizens of Encinitas voted for an elected mayor, they meant Mayor, not "chairperson". Council cannot go back and say we will call the elected Mayor the "chairperson." The term Mayor was the language used in the ballot, and we are "stuck" with it, like it or not. You want to change to "chairperson" it has to go back to the ballot box. That is called democracy.
8:52 I wasn't suggesting that it be done now. Would not want to upset the princess and it couldn't be done now. I am talking about in the future. I think it would be a great way to solve the "mayor" problem since some think it is such a coveted position, when in all actuality, it is on the same level as the other council members. Just a thought for the future. Nothing more; nothing less. It wasn't my idea, but one of the speakers brought it up the other night. I thought it was a good suggestion.
9:59 AM Unfortunately, the mayor position isn't on a level with the other council members. This council voted to give a salary increase of $100 month to anyone holding the elected title of mayor.
The $100 was talked about for extra gas money because the mayor would cut more ribbons somewhere. I suggest you look up on the web site and you will see the mayor carries no more weight than the other council members. Those words are clear and precise.
Council Members get $350 month car allowance. City attorney gets $500 per month because he lives in La Mesa. So does his partner, does he get $500 per month car allowance, too?
The mayor already gets up to $800 per month extra for her or his ceremonial duties. Kristin Gaspar has consistently voted against giving the mayor an additional $100 per month, and I concur. It's unnecessary.
An elected mayor is defined and regulated by California Government Code. Specific duties are not. But we could not change the name to Chairperson or President, because of that statutory code.
Our mayor, with the City Manager, can set agendas. That is an enormous power to me. Other Council Members can ask for future agenda items, but it is the Mayor and City Manager who determine when they are heard. I am not sure how it works for a single council member initiated item. Those seem to come forward more quickly than agenda items requested by two council members, as the Bob Bonde presentation was. But that had been requested to be set as a regular agenda item at least six months ago, by Kristin Gaspar; I can't remember who supported her request; but it deserved a staff report. It also deserved to go back to the Traffic and Safety Commission, for further study, deliberation, and recommendations to Council.
Instead, our outgoing mayor took credit for setting it on the agenda as a presentation. Lisa Shaffer recommended hiring another expensive, supposedly "independent" consultant.
12:02 Setting agendas is an enormous power to you? Oh please stop me from laughing. At the age of 17 I was setting agendas for high powered meetings and was not even a mayor. Let's get real.
Also, each city has its own ordinances and can be rewritten, redone, abolished, etc. at any time. Every California city may enact and enforce within its limits local ordinances not in conflict with general laws. We have seen this time and again with the council over the years, and that would apply to changing the name of Mayor to Council Chairperson. Of course, it all has to go through the proper steps and proper channels, but it can be done.
It is time to boot all incumbents. Encinitas can do better than these clowns.
Lets get some council members will some integrity that will stand up to the little weasel Vina. Firing Vina should be our City Council's highest priority.
Shaffer finally has recognized that she is not a political savy person, something many of us have seen from the beginning of her term. So what is she doing in politics?
So we have 3 dumb shit non savvy locals telling an incompetent weasel City Manager he is doing a good job.
"I will ask my Cabinet to establish a intent motion to table later this year so we can discuss it in my work plan that we will develop over the next two years to allow us to complete a two year city budget." - watch Tony, Lisa, and Teresa's eyes all glaze over and say at the same time- " Thank you City Manager- Continue with this excellent Strategic Planning"
meanwhile nothing gets done in the City except pay raises and more retirements.
Having your San Marcos Mom come and tell how great your daughter is and how Encinitas should run its business is classic. Maybe Gaspar would fit better in San Marcos.
Then to have stoop to using your own 8 year old in your political ploys- All I can say is great Mom Gaspar. Better start saving for some Shrink costs for all your kids later on. Geez!
From watching the mom, I can see the San Marcos rotten apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
I wonder if Gaspar or the other council members will go to the elementary schools and apologize to the kids for lying on the Prop A ballot statement not once but twice ?
Nothing wrong with San Marcos speakers at City Hall. Lots of out of Encinitas bicyclists spoke at the Council Meeting on January 30, 2013.
No reason to be hateful about Gaspar's family supporters. The family aspect was appreciated by many, on both sides of the political spectrum, at the meeting, and by many watching from home.
Gaspar's mother standing up to Shaffer, Kranz and Barth was appreciated by mothers and others, as were the brief comments from her eight year old son. I know that I am grateful for my family's support, and I've been very happy to have family members present with me at some Council Meetings.
As Encinitas taxpayers pay the bills only Encinitas taxpayers should speak at our city hall - unless it is a matter concerning the region.
Trotting out your kid is a political ploy in attempt to silence others- after all who would speak against a child \ Truth is Gaspar lied, lied, lied, on the Prop A ballot statement. You along with Gaspar's mother, child and husband may support liar's - I don't.
Truth is Gaspar took $66,000 from taxpayers so her husband could use bogus survey results to benefit his crony David Meyer and benefit his wife- not taxpayers. You may support this abuse and waste of taxpayer money, I don't.
Truth is Gaspar appointed Mark Muir, who violated city ethic codes to an open seat over qualified candidates who had not violated codes because it benefited Gaspar, Meyer and her hsuband- not the community.
So there you have it. You are entitled to support a liar , and a fiscal spendthrift and self seeking politician, don't ask us to join you.
Of course the question remains. Now that Gaspar is appointed Mayor, will she honor her words and not run for elected Mayor as she has as she stated an unfair advantage? Or will she again put the public good aside to benefit her and her crony developer friends?
Facts, they can not be denied. That is where facts are different than opinions.
Fact Thrower - I'm afraid you have painted yourself into a box. If, as you state, you do not support liars, then if follows that you can not support yourself! You have repeatedly been challenged by many on this blog for your somewhat bizarre linear logic, and the conclusions that are drawn from it. Because the process is flawed, the conclusions are illogical, and because you knowingly continue to repeat them they turn to "untruths" (gawd I hate that term), and we all know that another name for "untruth" is a lie.
9:20 - I really don't care, but I'm willing to give Fact Thrower an opportunity to make their case in a public setting - $100 should get it started. Are you going to join me, or will you stay on the sidelines........looking forward to your response.
Fact Thrower is throwing REAL facts out there. All one has to do is check the voting of Gaspar. These facts can not be denied. They are all in the record. If one chooses to ignore the facts, that is their choice.
I am with Fact Thrower and do not support liars. She will not have my vote.
It's funny reading all these comments here and on previous topics about voter betrayal. None of the council members are worthy but the ones supported here in the last election are especially vile. They're traitors to the cause. They are not pure. Also, many here believe they have become spellbound to a svengali city manager. It's us against them. And yet we should trust their judgement?
Why are some people so biased against family members appearing at Council Meetings? I thought Gaspar's mother spoke powerfully. Although Gaspar did vote for the defunding of committed funds, which Gus Vina now calls "scrubbing," she was the only Council Member to question the financial plan to do so, on July 11, 2011. Outgoing Mayor Barth did not question it. Jerome Stocks laughed at Gaspar and ignored her questions and concerns, and all the public speakers' questions and concerns.
Lisa Shaffer and Tony Kranz were not then on Council, yet. But they did not question hiring the communications director; they did not strongly question the exorbitant minimum bid required by Tim Baird for Pacific View, and along with Barth, voted to pay $500K more, at $10 Million.
Muir and Gaspar did not propose to eliminate time donations, as Shaffer and Barth did.
Muir and Gaspar had not signed Right to Vote petitions as Shaffer and Kranz had.
Muir and Gaspar did not vote to have more secret ad hoc subcommittee meetings, which led to the City's overpayment for Pacific View, and is leading to our failure to get better terms of purchase, now. Kranz, Barth, and Shaffer did.
Muir and Gaspar did not campaign on trust and transparency, on a promise to enact a local Sunshine Ordinance, Teresa and Tony did.
12:18 nice job deflecting away from a review of Gaspar's voting record by blaming others.
Gaspar voted to waste up to $135,000 on a spin doctor
Gaspar voted to raid $7M from projects with no plan to pay it back
Gaspar voted to increase debt by $10M and annual debt service by $500,000 a year with no plan to make up for short falls
Gaspar voted to waste $66,000 on surveys her husband used to benefit his crony developer friend
Gaspar voted to bury the road report costing taxpayers $100,000 grand when the city lost
Gaspar enabled Vina to was 50K onRutanand Tucker, $1.3M on MIG, 9K on Peak Democracy and looked the other way when the public exposed that Vina withheld important financial information from the public and council.
Gaspar lied on the Prop A ballot statement
Gaspar failed to recommend an injunction to compell EUSD to follow the Naylor Act for a possible better price
Gaspar failed to vote on Pacific View in 2011- running from the building and hiding from the challenge
Gaspar's opponent if she runs for council or mayor isn't her opponent it is her record. It is a record of failure and mismanagement coupled with selfish self -seeking (see survey, see extra pyacheck, see hiding from pacific view)
Why do self proclaimed tea party candidates like Brian Brady and self proclaimed GOP people like Hodges support Gaspar? She has proven a fiscal spendthrift who has increased debt, reduced services and increased fees- hardly conservative principles. Perhaps Brady and Hodges have none.
Wow fact thrower, your sister got home from work and you had her back you up on this blog. You see, family counts. You two can go out in grandma's back yard now and turn the hose on the ants and gophers.
You go Fact Thrower. Everything you have pointed out about Gaspar's voting record is spot on. It's a shame people can't see beyond her teeth to see the truth about this. It is my hope they will finally come to realize this during her reign of princess. The other three will definitely be highlighting her weaknesses.
I meant to say that KG was the only one that questioned the financial plan to defund the Open Space and habitat acquisition fund and the flooding fund, and all the other funds, although she did end up going along with the unanimous vote, including Barth and Muir, on 7/11/12, not 2011, that was a typo.
That was the Special Council Meeting held at the Community Center.
1:08 are you actually saying Gaspar should not be held accountable for raiding $7M from funded projects, increasing annual debt service by $500,000, increasing city debt by $10M and leaving more than 200 projects unfunded in her 4 short years in office because she asked a question before voting yes to screw taxpayers?
Gaspar owns her record of financial mismanagement, spend-aholic decisions, untruths on Prop A and dereliction of duty-
Let's not forget, when residents needed Gaspar to vote on Pacifiuc View in 2011 she ran from the building like a frightened child and made another untrue excuse for shirking her responsiblity to the public and benefitting herself.
Fact Thrower - You need to let go. You are deeper in the minority than you can probably imagine. I am sure that will get you all riled up, and you will come back with a strong, hateful message aimed at me and Gaspar (and probably will do that several times to make it look like you are not alone). No politician is perfect, and they have to live with all their past statements for us to wallow in, and selectively make the points we want to make. Gaspar is not as evil and incompetent as you think. She showed a lot of class on Wednesday in the midst of a difficult situation for her.
8:45 -let go? Because youa re will to accept lies, mismagement and incompetence doesn't mean the rest of taxpayers should.
Gaspar is competent? - Gaspar has increased our debt service by $10M while reducing our services adn increasing our fees. We have 200 unfunded projects thanks to her mismanagement. However her buddy ex-city manager Cotton did get an extra paycheck and spiked pension thanks to Gaspar.
Gaspar showed class? Gaspar said it was her position that she did not favor an appointed mayor running for elected office as it provided an unfair advantage - until that position benefited her. What you call class others call hypocrisy.
Hateful? Facts are never hateful, they are simply inconvenient to spin doctors and political operatives who would prefer the public be kept in the dark.
Riled up? Reciting facts are simply that, reciting facts. They are what they are. Gaspar's record of imcompetenece -increased debt, mismamangement- Rutan and Tucker, lies- Prop A, and hypocrisy speak for themselves.
Any well rounded 8 year old can tell a lie from a lie - provided of course they are first told the facts.
Gaspar may not be incompetent, but she hasn't shown much competency either.
We know why she's on the council, and who backs her, and what she's said in the past. Those reasons are enough for me not to back her ever. She's a put up from the developer interests in this town that don't give a rats rump for our community or its character.
Add to that embarrassing stuff like her magic act, her prepped notes that sound like something from 9th grade and her association with Stocks and Mayer, and you should have all you need.
The Fact Thrower is right, run down her pluses and minuses, and it's mostly minuses.
Personally, I don't care about the mayor's thing, it's predictably looney, the kind of crap that has distracted us for far to long. If she runs fine, we'll see who runs against her. Neither She nor Tony are ready for the job.
We don't need people like Gaspar on our council. I say sweep her out, let Teresa leave, have Lisa leave after one term and then we'll see where we're at.
Right now, I'm liking Julie Graboi more and more...
I think the Sculpin needs to let go and stop challenging Fact Thrower who is stating facts. If The Sculpin disagrees, fine, but let's see your facts Mr. Sculpin. You never have any.
10:38 - I'm the voter, remember? I don't need to proffer up facts. Until I know who is running and understand their positions, I'm not going to make any decisions about where I place my vote. Got it?
10:51 We get it Sculpin. You just like to throw daggers at people and demean them for their thoughts and facts.
In case you are unaware, we are all voters and pay taxes. You don't get to claim that total privilege.
Frankly, I don't care who you vote for. You never have to state that or tell any one. That is not our interest. We are only interested in who we choose to vote for.
Not really - but using your terminology I guess what I'm really doing is throwing daggers back at the dagger throwers.....it's all a bit of fun isn't it? Putting a mirror up to those who take themselves too seriously? Ahh yes.....what's that phrase again? Looking forward to your response........
Oh grow up. Whether it's true or not, Fact Thrower, your comments give one the image of someone out of work, sitting in their bathrobe, throwing verbal bricks. It's people like you that made me stop listening to sports talk radio, believing that talking smack is somehow equivalent to being an athlete. I'm sure this description is unfair but that is image you conjure.
Do you have any facts to support your claims or to rebut the facts presented that Gaspar raided funds with no plan to pay them back (as did the council) that Gaspar lied on the Prop A statements (as did the council) that Gaspar awarded an ex city manager an extray paycheck (as did the council) that Gaspar wasted $66,000 on bogus surveys her husband then used to promote his crony friends and wife?
These facts are not smack, they simply are what they are. Smakc is personal attacks.
Gaspar alone is responsibe for her voting record. In a democracy and free society pointing out a voting record is a good thing.
Dear Graboi backer. We've been over this, Julie might have opened a campaign account, but papers cannot be taken out to run for Mayor until mid-July; so, as usual, you are wrong. Have another beer.
I guess maturity isn't your strong suit. The council, and only the council, have the authority to manage the budget and move money in and out of accounts as they see fit as long as they observe any restrictions on the funds, state and federal guidelines, etc. To say they raided funds is nonsensical. You may not agree with the action but saying they raided funds is hyperbole.
That a council person voted with the majority doesn't single them out. The bogus survey, as you describe it, is your opinion which doesn't make it true. Only that there was a survey done is a fact. The bogus part is your opinion. I could go on but I actually have things to do.
You support sending $66,000 on survey's that benefit council elites and their cronies - I don't
You hold only your political adversaries accountable- I hold all accountable
You believe Gaspar can hide her record- her record is on display for all to see.
Gaspar raided $7M from funded projects that remain unfunded.
The survey benefitted only Gaspar's husabnd Paul, Gaspar herself and then council members Bond and code violater and election rules breaker Jerome Stocks
I could go on, but the factual record of the incompetence and mismanagment of the council's of the past 10 years is lengthy.
Hyperbole and facts are two different things. If you could share facts to rebut the disaserous record of the council past and present I am sure you would - but sadly you can't.
Interesting - Jerome Stocks, the ex mayor who recklessly mismanaged the city finances, used to push for 5-0 council votes. Stocks knew he could hide his failures by claiming everyone else voted for it.
ah 3:50 it is a fact that the survey was used by Gaspar's husband Paul and high density developer David Meyer to send out election like mailers promoting Gaspar and the election code breakers Muir and Stocks- for some reason Barth was left off the mailer.
2:53- Pray tell what has Catherine had 2 meet and greets already if she hasn't filed? Kind of strange. Don't believe me, go to her FB page as she posted it there. Julie is running and getting support as I write. She will tell us more when she ready. All I will say is she has an awesome campaign manager with lots of political experience and capital to get votes.
9:07-Get over it. It's over. Now let's figure out if this City has any money to keep its commitments. Seems like a better way to spend our time and efforts.
I think that is the point of sharing facts. The city does not have the money to keep it's committments. The facts are the councils have run up the credit card, increased debt service, increased fees, reduced services, failed to fund projects and has no plan.
The council has looked the other way at Gus Vina withholding important financial information from the public and council, voted to give ex-city managers extra paychecks and wasted money on needless survey's and consultants.
I don't care who does or does not have class. I do care who does or does not have common sense.
All five council members have put themselves before the public good. All five need to be run out of office.
Of course the alternative is we disregard these facts.
9:13 I saw the post by $tock$ and the comments by Ms. Lorri Greene. I clearly remember her telling us on this blog how much of a despicable person $tock$ was and how he came on to her at a party in a drunken state. I was shocked to see her words to him on SD Rostra that she liked him. My head is spinning. There sure is a lot of lying going on in this town.
You know what folks. I believe that it is possible and practical to not burn bridges. Yes, I posted for the first time on SD Rostra. Actually on the second of posts on the council meeting, Jerome actually said he was embarrassed. Have I gone over to the "right". No, but to me this is about what is good for our city. If we cannot even talk to others, who we may very much differ with, then nothing will get done. I will post whenever and wherever I can. I thought Kristin did a good job the other night, and I stick with that. I really don't care whether anyone on this, or any other blog, likes it. Does it mean I am going to become a Republican-NO. But, it does mean that if I find someone, who just happens to be a Republican, and I see they are doing a good job, in my opinion only, then I will say it. Best I know the only person who can throw me off this blog is the blog owner. So far, he or she has not done that, and so far I have not had to sit in the penalty booth. I will be watching Kristin and how she operates as mayor. However, right now, I am more disappointed in Lisa, Tony and Teresa as far as how this went down.
Adding to that I am also supporting Julie Graboi for Council after she announces. In fact, I will be holding a meet and greet for her, so anyone that might be interested can contact me via Facebook under Lorri Greene, or email: lgreene98@aol.com
Right, but Jerome said he was embarrassed about not remembering Muir being on the council, not about the way he acted in the past towards constituents.
He was still going at with people on there just like old times, as they called him out as a RINO and a pension raiser. Glad to see some things haven't changed.
Sadly, all the current shenanigans leave us where Jerome left us, with pension issues, questionable streets and unfinished projects. I know we love all the back and forth on the mayor, but when you look at where we are, it's pretty sad. Hopefully Julie Graboi will prove a tonic, and someone sensible will jump in for mayor.
Otherwise, Vina and Sabine aren't going anywhere...
Dr. Lorri, your creditability stinks! How many times have you said you will not post again on a blog and then go against your statement. Too Funny…. I guess you believe "its a Women's propagative to change her mind." --- I call it flip flopping and flakey.
"Say what you mean and do what you say" -- Is my motto.
10:15-Ah, but I have been invited. What is the old saying "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer". I posted to La Rostra for a reason. And there is no need to share it. And 9:15- I am not afraid to say when I change my mind, when new information is presented. Call it floppy/floppy. or whatever else you may want to call it. Jerome will never get elected again in this city, so if I can learn the "game" over there, who knows what information I might did up. I already have found things I didn't know. If you remember only one thing about me, it should be this: There is always a method to my madness. I am a pretty good chess player as well as poker player. So, what I post on any blog may or may not be what I really think. It could possibly be a distraction from something else. One thing about being a "shrink" for so long is that if you are any good you get pretty good at reading people. And, whether you think it or not, I am a damn good "shrink". And, I would make a lousy politician. As Clint says "A man, or in my case a woman" has to know his or her limitations. Mine would be trusting people before they have earned my trust. I am working on that one. Lorri
Stop attacking someone with the courage to share her name, 11:58. Lorri, most of us appreciate your perseverance, dedication, and periodic participation, here.
Please ignore the bullying troll that gets so much satisfaction out of targeting select commenters, usually select women, on this blog.
I don't find it bullying; I call it telling the truth and some people don't like to hear the truth. This particle article has been about lies told by the Council (including Gaspar). No one minds when we call them liars, but sounds like someone else can't take it when they are less than truthful. You know who you are.
11:28 Some may be impressed, but I am one who is not. I prefer a person who doesn't use people or trick them into saying things and then use it against them. I'm surprised that you don't feel the same because you have made comments about our council members being less than truthful by calling them liars, but you pick and choose which ones those are. Interesting.
On another front - Marlena Medford, the city's hired communications officer, can't get her facts straight. Yesterday afternoon two unconscious swimmers were pulled from the water at Moonlight Beach. Her brief account of the story doesn't credit the students from Santa Fe Christian school as the rescuers.
Seems as though our outgoing mayor had to get in a few early licks before flying off to Sydney, Australia. Teresa's comments posted through her latest newsletter, sent a day early, appear to be bitter when she says:
"I want to clarify that my comments were NOT a criticism of Council members Shaffer and Kranz in any way. I thought many of the public speakers made inflammatory and false statements against Shaffer and Kranz in the same manner as I had been treated by the previous council majority."
Before that, she had stated:
"It was an interesting evening to say the least. In fact it seemed like I was in the Twilight Zone hearing people talk about supporting the rotation, taking turns to serve as Mayor, etc. All the same arguments that were used to support me in past Mayoral rotations. Arguments the previous council majority, including Muir & Gaspar, ignored. As I said at the council meeting, when I was finally selected to serve as Mayor, in spite of past behaviors, I choose not to retaliate. It is equally unfortunate that council members Shaffer & Kranz were accused of unethical behavior. There is nothing unethical about asking to have a discussion in public. Especially since conditions have changed...I am not running for Mayor and Gaspar is and does that really make a difference? . . ."
Wow. Right off the bat I think of the comment someone else made on one of WC's previous threads on EU: Two wrongs don't make a right. We were taught that lesson as children.
Methinks our outgoing mayor doth protest too much. She is protesting about members of the public protesting, just as we protested previous Council's unfair treatment of her.
Council, including the mayor are held accountable for their public comments, including in newsletters. As public officials, they should set a standard of ethics, not blame the public for calling them out, when they don't uphold the public's trust.
It has nothing to do with rotation or selection. It has everything to do about making a promise and then changing it. Like, Prop A., Desert Rose, Road Improvements, etc, etc, etc...
The choice will be Gaspar vs Kranz for mayor. Can you really imagine Kranz as mayor? Fumbling through meeting after meeting? You can keep shouting about how bad Gaspar and the rest of the incumbents are. But it will come down to Gaspar or Kranz. Gaspar doesn't lose that choice. Especially not now that Shaffer and Kranze made Gaspar a more sympathetic figure due to "reconsider"-gate.
"Gaspar doesn't lose that choice" Meaning that she is the only choice? I'll write in the Kook. Kranz would offer comedic aspects - you'd see him morph into Dalager Dumb. He could ramble on about the best Xerox copiers that he ever saw - the height of his expertise. Encinitas is doing the Titanic at the moment and the band plays on . . .
Not much new info the past couple of days, still the same council, still the same infighting. Not much of a choice for mayor. How about if Neither Tony or Kristen ran, and Jim Bond comes out of retirement to face Sheila Cameron.
If it came down to the two I would vote Gaspar over Kranz.
Kranz supports putting the City further in DEBT for a $3 million Life Guard Tower of Power and a $20,000,000.00 new coastal Art Center for the unemployed!
Do we really want the Gross overspending that was done on the fire stations to continue on by polluting our beach with a $3 million dollar monstrosity?
Which Council Members supports such a waste of money?
Since the beaches are just now gearing up for summer, there were probably no lifeguards on duty outside of Moonlight. If there had been, there's a good chance a lifeguard would have spotted the two swimmers in distress and gone out to check on them. Good thing the kids happened upon them. The U-T article said both had no pulse when they discovered them.
Lifeguards are required to make contact (i.e. swim out to) anyone who appears in distress Depending on the size of crowds, that can be frequent.. Often they find that the swimmer is having a little trouble but not yet in real danger. They advise the swimmer to move closer to shore.
I too want to know why the new tower is so expensive but that doesn't mean I'm going to trash the lifeguards. For comparison, Del Mar recently rebuilt their lifeguard tower which is a little larger (2,840 sq. ft.) then the proposed Encinitas tower and they spent around $2.6M.
Upgrade the current lifeguard tower - $3 million is an extravagance for something that isn't really needed. I suppose the tower doesn't have WiFi for their entertainment - just contract the High School kids from Rancho Santa Fe Christian school to guard the beaches. And how many motorized devices do these guys need? A good portion of the beach is coned off for their raceway - I've seen mothers corral their kids as these guys race around. City officvials - watch BayWatch - they used their legs to get to the water, not the latest 4 wheeler toy. More waste in the public sector....
Santa Fe Christian is in Solana Beach. Sorry, it's an unfair comparison. I'm sure the guards do a good job, and yes I get that a new tower won't make them better swimmers.
The issue is the tower is too expensive, not that lifeguards aren't doing their jobs.
Julie Graboi is the one to vote for. I have watched her before the city and Encinitas is buzzing with support for her! Finally a solid candidate for the people!
What is her position on : Salaries?? Pensions?? Roads?? Trophy projects?? Leucadia streetscape ?? Roundabouts?? Etc etc etc... Your blanket approval sounds similar to those that supported Shaffer, Kranz, Barth, Muir, Gaspar. Without knowing her positions you are fooling to support anyone....
I'm sure you'll have an opportunity to ask Julie Graboi her positions at meet and greets or at candidate forums, 7:48.
Why don't you tell us your position on all those questions? I venture you say no to high salaries, pensions, and "trophy projects," but you say yes to roads and roundabouts? And you don't consider roundabouts a trophy project, right?
Man, you are grasping: you are not going to outwit everyone, son. Its called the 'Wisdom of the Crowd', Neizche... any chance you were born in Belgium?
Just for the sake of argument: your three candidates that you've been behind until they were elected to council didn't raise that much, are they any better or more honest for having raised less? They are equally imperfect as we all are. With hope, you put as much work and zeal into improving yourself and those around you, as you do trying to perfect Kristin.
I'd respond to you as 2:49, but I have a sneaking suspicion 5150 is more your style.
It's less about the amount, it's where the campaign money comes from. Gaspar is developer-funded, period. Meyer, Stocks, Andreen all firmly at her back. The others, while disappointing, were supported at the grass-roots level, by average citizens.
If you want the BIA running your council person, by all means give your vote to Gaspar.
Follow the money, it's not given by out of state interests, physical therapists and retirement homes for nothing. If there's nothing wrong with it, why do they hide behind some many different organizations, names and shell corporations.
The influence of money on politics, specifically our Encinitas politics is a legit issue. Whether the grass roots candidates are any better, effective or morally superior is a different argument, but if you don't completely have your head in the sand, you need to look at the money flowing into Gaspar, the info will be out there...
Once again, a moving target for your argument. First it was $80K, then its who put up the money: then, where does that money come from, who are the parents of the donors, you cannot just come out and tell everyone on this blog that you are just hateful and you've chosen Kristin to be your target, rather than take any responsibility for your immediate world. This 'legit' issue of money, exactly what happened politically that was caused by Kristin getting donations from her sorority sisters?
How 'bout attempting to help and assist our leaders in solving some of the problems you see, rather than live to criticize?
8:40, you're obfuscating by claiming moving targets. I'm 7:29 and don't care about the $80K. What I do care about is where it came from and to whom the candidate is beholden.
I like honesty and I think 7:43 has good points. Your actions have consequences and people should know who has alliances. Since Gaspar is BIA bought and paid for, she will never be my candidate.
Vote out all the incumbents. Just like last time, I will not vote for any incumbents in this next election. I may just cast one vote, but its better than voting in losers.
I'm with 7:43 on this issue as well. The question needs to be asked why most of Gaspar's contributors have been from out of town. Maybe she should move to those cities that support her. Obviously, she doesn't get much from Encinitas. I smell developer's lurking and waiting to plunge in on our city and our fairy princess is in the right seat to make that happen. Follow the money.
I will be voting for no incumbents. They all support the loser Vina.
ReplyDeleteVina and City Councils ignorance is our biggest enemies.
The talk last night that Ms. Gaspar is a financial conservative is not supported by her voting record. Speakers repeating these untruths last night must be either partisan hacks or uninformed. A few facts on Ms. Gaspar-
ReplyDelete1. Knowing the city had unfunded projects Gaspar voted to spend $66,000 of taxpayer money on a self-serving survey. Her husband Paul and developer and crony David Meyer then used the survey results to send out promotional mailers to benefit Ms. Gaspar- we the taxpayers went without, the Gaspars and Meyers abused our money (Muir and Barth supported also voted to the same way on this issue)
Knowing the city had failing roads Gaspar (along with Muir and Barth) voted to raid $7M from funded capital improvement projects without a plan to pay it back.
Knowing the city had failing finances Gaspar (along with Barth and Muir) voted to increase the city's debt service rather then use the citizens suggested pay as you go model to start the hall park- now the city is near bankrupt amd there is little room to increase debt in am emergency - Gaspar maxed out the city credit card-
You want more?
4 weeks ago residents exposed the city manager Gus Vina withheld important financial information from the council and the public on the Lew Edwards tax increase survey- Gaspar could have made a motion to hold the city manager accountable for his deceipt and failure to act responsible but instead she sided with the council and sat on her hands. Now Vina has presented a budget- but how can the public trust the budget numbers when Lew Edwards proved Vina withhold's information? The public can't.
Gaspar voted to give ex city manager Phil Cotton and extra paycheck in his final year enabling Cotton to spike his pension- Gaspar followed teh self-serving failed recommendation of City Attorney Sabine and the insider network that claimed there were somehow 54 weeks in that year- an extra pay period. Now Gaspar claims to be a fiscal conservative when she has proven a self serving spender to benefit herself and her cronies
Gaspar also voted to follow the failed recommendation of city attorney Sabine to bury the road report, residents sued and the court ordered the report released- at a cost to taxpayers of about $100K
Gaspar also failed to follow citizens recommendations to file an injunction to compell EUSD to follow the Naylor Act on Pacific View- residents got screwed again.
The list of Gaspar's failures goes on and on. She sided with high density developers on desert rose and put community safety at risk- residents sued and the city lost (again, Muir Barth and the others voted the same way)
I thought having her child speak was inappropriate- as was Kranz making the mean spiritited comment about getting a phone call from family members. But really, needing to trot your kid out?
The bottom line and take away from last night was that the Bonde report and taxpayer recommendation to save money and increase service was ignored.
Not one single council member asked Mr. Bonde about the$300 million in city unfunded debt and liabilities - or about the Bonde Plan to save that money.
Not a single council member asked Mr. Bonde about the 200 unfunded capital projects or about the $7M Gaspar and the council raided.
Instead last night was the all about me show- Shaffer spoke all about herself and her facebook page. Barth spoke about herslef and being passed over, muir about his proposed hiring freeze, Kranz about his midnight call and Gaspar about Gaspar.
I was and am in favor of Gaspar being Mayor, not because of her voting record - which is a failure- but because it was what was agreed to and the city has bigger problems to solve.
If anyone can show me where my facts are wrong I'd gladly accept corrections.
Fact Thrower
Who would waste their time and energy to correct someone whose mind is so obviously made up? Get a life, please.
Delete9:08
DeleteAs you have no facts rebut the facts presented you resort to attempting to distract others. Anyone, please show me where my facts on the voting record of Ms. Gaspar are incorrect?
Brian Brady - the self proclaimed Tea Party activist- why do you support an irresposible financial candidate who increases public debt while reducing the city's ability to serve taxpayers? Why do you support a candidate who tells untruths on ballot statements sent to every voter in the city?
Are these your values? They are not mine.
Fact thrower
Cool, the Fact Thrower is calling out Tea Party Operative Brady. For once, we're on the same page!
Delete-Son of Roadside Bum
Good points. There are plenty of serious issues that they could address without this soap opera. One of the common elements for many of the city problems is Gus Vina. As long as they all support him, we are doomed.
ReplyDeleteThe city council is collectively inept - the City Manager runs Barter Town. Unless and until there is acknowledgement that Vina needs to be replaced, it will be business as usual. Vina knows this and is sitting comfortably.
ReplyDelete6:36- Were you and I at the same meeting? All of the information about Gaspar's past votes and/or non-votes may be true, but last night I was there and what I saw was very different, at least after Bob's presentation. And, in that yoga re right. No one asked about important budget issues, instead they said that the county would never give us the right to own our own ambulances, and therefore it could not proceed. However, I don't recall Shaffer saying much of anything, except sit there and pout. I didn't had Tony's comment either and I was in the second row. He looked furious and said nothing except to second Teresa's motion to "listen and do nothing" on Tony and Lisa's ideas. I thought Kristin was articulate and personally I didn't expect her that. As far as her son speaking, what's the problem. He wanted to, and he did it. I see no harm in that. Her mom spoke as well and gave Lisa and Tony a good chewing out. The crowd were mostly Shaffer fans who had come to to show support, as I had predicted they would. Tony and Lisa gave Kristin her Moment, if you will. They should have never put this on the agenda and then Kristin would rise or fall as Mayor for the second half without having half of her support group sitting in Council Chambers and overflow area. They gave her so much support that it is going to be even more difficult to beat her in an election in Nov. That was Tony and Lisa's doing. Gaspar, in this case, defended herself and brought her army with her. Whether one likes her army is another matter. But, they exist and rallied. Blame Tony and Lisa for this one. I don't exactly know how long the whole thing took, but it was time that could have been spent on the budget or more on Bonde. So, in the end, Lisa and Tony looked like spiteful children, Teresa made sure everyone knew how much she had done for all of us, and Kristin came out pretty good. I agree, Vina, has way too much power and wields his sword well. We need Julie and people like her to run at this point. Lisa and Tony are done as soon as Teresa leaves. Catherine, as nice as she is, will not be able to stand up to the big money that was very present last night. I think Julie Graboi is capable of that. People who were not Gaspar fans even spoke against this agenda item. I didn't speak, but all in all I think a deal is a deal. Nothing has changed since Dec. when all 5 voted for the mayoral split. Shaffer never answered why she put it on the agenda, at least on her FB page. I don't think I heard her say one word during these agenda items. In fact, and correct me if I am wrong, I don't think she asked Bob Bonde one question either. Most of the questions asked of Bonde were from Muir. And though they disagreed, they were both polite and civil to one another. That is the way it should be in my opinion. Anyway those are my thoughts about last night.
ReplyDelete8:25
DeleteThe information presented about Gaspar's voting record is true.
Gaspar claims to be a family values candidate and has her out of town mother who does not pay taxes here and her child speak to her values- fact- Gaspar gave an unearned exttra paycheck to city manager Phil Cotton enabling Cotton to spike his pension and void his written contractual agreement. Gaspar failed to hold Vina responsible for withholding financial information and estimates from the public and council. Family values my ass. How about the big one- Gaspar lied on a ballot statement that was sent to every voter in the city. Does Gaspar support her kids lying? Will she make amends? Would you?
Gaspar voted to approve wasting $66,000 dollars on a survey residents opposed. Residents said the money could be used to benefit taxpayers. Instead Gaspar's husband Paul and developer crony David Mery used the taxpayer money to produce a mailer to benefit Gaspar. Is this a wise steward of our tax dollars? Should we demand better?
Gaspar voted to raid $7M from funded projects with no plan to pay it back.
Gaspar left the building in 2011 when the public needed her vote on Pacific View- she hid.
Gaspar voted to increase the city's debt service and now there is no money for projects to benefit taxpayers as our tax dollars are going to pay interest to bankers.
I am not a fan of any council members. The whole debacle was farcial and a waste of taxpayer money. All five should be ashamed of themselves-
I disagree, the room was not packed with Shaffer Barth Kranz supporters- those supporters left a long time ago. The room was packed by the Gaspar's with many out of towners. Not surprising as she represents out of towners and special interests.
Sorry 8:55-You are correct. I meant to write Gaspar fans, but I stayed for the whole meeting and am a bit tired. Yes, most of the crowd were GASPAR fans. Thanks for the clarification.
DeleteWhat is Muir's answer to the $300M in debt and liabilities the city has?
DeleteWhat is Muir's answer to the 200 unfunded projects the city has?
Bonde has an anwer and a solution. Muir has excuses and a $175,000 a year taxpayer funded pension.
Muir and his family get to live a life opf luxury and leisure on the back of taxpayers - the taxpayers get screwed.
Gaspar lies and apparently her son isn't aware of her lie on Prop. A. ballot. Talk about untruths.
DeleteThe apple doesn't fall far from the tree which was obvious with her mother's time at the pulpit (blaming every one else except yourself). That is how Gaspar operates. It would have been nice if any one of those speakers would have pointed out that Gaspar does not always tell the truth. Instead, they made her into a "madonna".
Look for more handouts for the developers. Gaspar owes them big time.
Some one please inform Gaspar that the mayor's job is going to be extremely difficult. She will need the help of her husband, her mother, her son, the whole therapy gang and all of her developer and out of town buddies because she will not be able to handle this job on her own. That was obvious at last night's meeting.
Vote out all incumbents. We need a fresh new start.
9:06 am, please call Dr. Lorri or any therapist, you need help, in the worst way.
DeleteDr. Lorri is still too tired after last night to take on anyone. Signed, Dr. Lorri
DeleteMuir is the sorriest piece of "A" running a close second with his friend $tock$.
DeleteHe came across with Bob Bonde as arrogant and tried to ruffle Bonde's feathers. Bob stood his ground and answered his questions in a thoughtul manner.
Bonde gave an excellent presentation with a way to help save the city thousands of dollars. Immediately, Muir dismissed the idea because the county would not go along with it. Muir is not doing his job representing the taxpayers if he is not even willing to try and save money. We get it Muir, you want money for your FF.
Muir needs to go. I suggest he enjoy his retirement while he still is on planet earth.
9:12-
DeleteWhy do you support liars? Gaspar lied on a ballot statement sent to every voter in the city. They have a designation for that behavior - it is called Sociopath. Those who support sociopath's are called enablers -
Fact Thrower
9:12 Dr. Lorri would be the last person I would want advice from, but thanks for the suggestion. I'm sure she's busy with her animal friends.
DeleteYes, loving my animal friends, who are sometimes more loyal than human friends. Whatever you say I will just agree with so go for it. Lorri
Delete9:37 At least animals can't argue with you. I bet you have more furries than humans.
Delete10:36 has never ridden a horse!!! They have more opinions than an EU blog string!!!
Delete- The Sculpin
oops - 10:35 - not 10:36
Delete- The Sculpin's Horse.......
10:45 Oh, but I have and even owned a few.
DeleteSculpin:
DeleteAs someone who has trained horses, many of the commenters here have as much sense as a horse and I don't mean the fabled "horse sense". If you spend any time around horses you wonder how that got started.
Horses naturally yield to pressure.......Instinct tells a horse "don't stand there....do something!!" I see very few posters on this blog yielding to any pressure whatsoever.......
Delete- The Sculpin
Lisa has her newsletter out for those who get it. Quite a spin she puts on it. Poor, poor, Lisa. She is so misunderstood.
ReplyDeleteHere is the first paragraph. Not sure if I am allowed to publish the whole thing.
ReplyDeleteWow - I didn't expect the response I got to the item I put on the May 28 meeting agenda. May 28 was the last meeting before we start the second half of our Council year, and thus the point at which we are scheduled to change mayors from Teresa Barth to Kristin Gaspar, as we agreed last December. Bottom line - the transition is going forward. I never intended to oppose it, but wanted to pause and give Kristin, or anyone else on Council, a chance to talk about it before it happened. Here is some of what I said at the meeting:
Wow, doesn't lie very well, does she?
DeleteLisa's Agenda...
DeleteExcerpt from Coast News Story Today
"“I liken it to when you buy something online, before you buy you are given the option to review what is in your cart,” Shaffer said after the meeting. “If it wasn’t placed on the agenda, nobody would have a chance to say anything about it.”
Notice Lisa uses an example of a person isolated and most likely alone, interfacing with a machine/technology, Not an interchange between two people: No wonder she is surprised when her ideas and methods are criticized and misinterpreted. Attempting to explain away an emotionally explosive action on her own part by likening it to a 'purchase', just like 'purchasing' PV with money she didn't have. Luckily, the news that the troika has maxed out the city's credit helped spread the word about the Kranz chicanery and the public showed up. The duo on the Agenda last night is a perfect answer to what happens when you have term limits: inexperienced people elected to office.
Disagree on that term limits thing.
DeleteFirst, these inexperienced people were elected without term limits.
Second, I'd take incompetent novices over entrenched politicians every time.
11:16
DeleteYou reveal yourself not to be concerned with taxpayers but rather getting Gaspar elected.
Gaspar voted to raid $7M from funded projects without a plan to pay it back.
Gaspar voted to increase the city's debt service by $10M resulting in 200 unfunded projects and failing roads in the city.
Gaspar voted to approve up to $135,000 annully for a spin doctor.
Gaspar voted to give ex city manager Cotton and extra paycheck
Gaspar voted to spend $66,000 of taxpayer money on survey that her husband Paul and developer crony David Meyers uswed to promote Gaspar's interests not the publics.
Why do you support Gaspar who is a proven liar? why do you support Gaspar who has increased the city's debt while reducing services and benefits to taxpayers?
I opopse irresponsible leaders like Gaspar, kranz, Shaffer Barth and Muir- you should too.
Sounds like you are a Gaspar crony-
As Woody Allen said in Annie Hall,"That's great, 11:16, but I am due back on planet earth now..." Whoo whoo, that's a lotta hate.
DeleteAnybody hear the one about the CM, Barth, Tony and Shaffer trying to put out a "Request For Proposal' on hiring a group to start an independent ambulance district for Encinitas before any public hearing? Yep, another $100K expenditure Shaffer is willing t spend on a plan that legally isn't likely to proceed because the county has to okay it: and will only do that when incompetent novices fly?
Maybe Shaffer will try to explain this away by saying,"You know, an RFP that the public won't know bout because I'll cause the cursor to click on 'Hide Others'.
12:15
Deletewhy the - well you know- are we paying too much money to the county for crappy failing ambulance times and icnreased tazes and fees?
You and your cronies Muir and Gaspar might support sticking more taxes on the backs of taxpayers but I don't
The Bonde and ETA plan saves taxpayers $7M a year
Muir and Gaspar (along with the others) raided $7M from funded projects, increased debt service and have left the account empty to fund more than 200 projects
Bonde and the taxpayers have a solution - Gaspar and Muir (along with the others) want to keep sticking it too us-
You might support higher taxes and increased fees and reduced services and unfunded projects but don't expect us to join you.
Gaspar, Muir, Kranz, Shaffer and Barth all lied on Prop A and all mismanaged out money- kick them all to the curb.
It's not a done deal that the County would never approve the City's pulling out of the County/City ambulance agreement. Bob Bonde said he'd called up and discussed the possibility; he said he had discussed with a County official what steps could be taken to disengage from the County.
DeleteBonde and Muir did have a civil discussion, and are to continue their conversation, one on one, they both agreed.
Shaffer proposed another dumb idea to overspend on another "independent" consultant. Right, that's what Rutan and Tucker was supposed to be, but we all know that firm was pro-development, and anti the Right to Vote Initiative.
And many feel Council wanted to believe the speculation and conjecture of the Rutan and Tucker report that morphed to the lies of the City Attorney's not impartial and not factual analysis, which was submitted for the sample ballots before Council's ballot arguments against Prop A were created and filed through the Clerk.
But Shaffer, last night, also proposed that the Bonde's matter could come back to a combination of Council and the Traffic and Safety Commission, sitting together for that agenda item, which would then be heard as an action item, not listed as a presentation, which was the case last night, thanks to Barth and Vina. Gaspar had asked six months ago for a regularly agendized item, not a special presentation. Last night Barth attempted to take credit for setting the item on the agenda, too.
What Shaffer could have better suggested was for the agenda item to go back to the Traffic and Safety Commission, for further study, vetting, and careful deliberation, so that those volunteers could become more expert on this subject and make informed recommendations to Council. We should use the expertise in our own community, not hire more and more expensive consultant/contractors.
I thought Peter Stern sumed it up quite nicely. A citizen led ad hock committee to vet Bob's plan. Muir can't be trusted with this issue.
DeleteAs a former Commissioner I can tell you that staff does not want Commissioners giving input. It upsets them, as sometimes the commissioners are more intelligent and less invested in the outcome as they are. Ask Dr. Lorri about that if you don't believe me. She may bot be petting an animal right now:) xoxox
DeleteI was glad to hear Peter Stern, and agreed with his suggestion. But, in addition, or instead, this should be able to go back to the Traffic and Safety Commission for a real discussion, over more than one commission meeting, if necessary. Lisa Shaffer and Teresa Barth had insisted that we should use the expertise in our community, including through the volunteers that serve on commissions. I agree with 7:02 that staff, including the staff liasons and the City Manager have been working against the idea of citizens giving Council more direct input. But Council should be able to change that, if it wants to!
DeleteHer email also stated she didn't know there was a difference between "reconsider" and "discuss". A Ph.D. is seemingly not what it appears to be.
ReplyDeleteGASPAR =DRAMA DRAMA DRAMA and the sit com continues
ReplyDeleteAll drama and lies.
Delete9:09-Yes, lot's of drama. But, one thing is certain. Gaspar had a big win last night and that is going to be hard to beat. If Lisa and Tony had not out these items on the agenda, she would have been mayor and perhaps stumbled. And we wouldn't have seen her huge fan club. Now, it's going to be even more difficult to keep developers at bay.
ReplyDelete9:13 I wouldn't call it a win for Gaspar at all. She was going to be mayor for 6 months without all of this. Shaffer and Kranz were simply pointing out (in a nice way) that she said in a meeting that a council person running for the elected mayor's position should not be mayor at the time. That is a fact.
DeleteGaspar said it and it is in the record. So, please tell us who is the liar.
I didn't vote for Gaspar, but when a new agreement is reached by unanimous vote, it replaces other agreements. I think it was a promise for a promise. Barth said she would go the first half, and Gaspar agreed to the second half of this year. At the time, Barth had proposed the schedule as a way for covering for Gaspar while she was on a family vacation. It seems too late to reconsider this agreement at this late date.
DeleteAgree, 5:42. If someone reading and commenting here goes back and listens to Council's conversation on December 10, he'll see and hear exactly what was said, and all the options that were weighed back then.
DeleteTony Kranz made a substitute motion to select Teresa Barth as mayor, but for only six months and then to revisit the conversation when six months was up. No one seconded that motion, so it died. But Tony Kranz by his agenda item, and Lisa Shaffer, by her agenda item, decided they wanted to revisit and reconsider, despite what was unanimously agreed to on December 10.
http://webcasts.encinitasca.gov/ Please check out the webcast for 12/10/13.
on 12/10/13, Council met at 5:00 p.m., but did not conclude all agenda items for the closed session. It was in recess for the second Special Meeting, the open Council Meeting that is the subject of the webcast, to select a new mayor. Barth later states that she wants to conclude the closed session special meeting, and she doesn't want Kristin Gaspar, who was going out of town, the next day for Winter Holidays with her family, to miss her first meeting as Chair of the Council Meeting that was to follow, the next day, December 11.
DeleteBarth volunteers to continue as mayor for the next six months. Gaspar had twice said she was willing to accept the compromise and the choice of who would hold the office of mayor for the last six months could be done by a coin toss, to take the politics out of the decision. Again, Barth solved the dilemma by saying she would rather continue as mayor for another six months, that Kristin could hold the office of mayor, beginning in June.
What 6:36 fails to realize is that elections are not about the past - they are about the future. Big win for Gaspar last night. Lisa and Tony will certainly be on Gaspar's xmas list this year!! I agree - it's now hers to lose......
ReplyDelete- The Sculpin
Gaspar will be a mayor that will fail to get anything accomplished because the vote of the council will remain with the majority of Barth, Kranz and Shaffer. If you think she spins in her chair now, just wait and watch!
DeleteYup, I didn't think they should have given Gaspar the momentum. This in an off year election, and in such an election, Gaspar has an advantage, because more older, conservative voters have been shown to vote in those elections.
DeleteThat's Gaspar's base, the older, more conservative people of new Encinitas. That and deverlopers, David Mayer etc. But it doesn't matter, her core doesn't care.
Whoever runs against her better has some serious giddyup. Then again, people may forget by November, after all, it's still May. Still a tactical screw up.
-MGJ
The Sculpin would have us ignore voting records. Past actions predict future results. Encinitas is broke, Gaspar is to blame. (and the other 4)
ReplyDeleteThe Sculpin would have you think for yourselves, keeping an open mind while retaining a healthy skepticism.......
Delete- The Sculpin
I know the Sculpin already knows this but it bears repeating. All of what he has said above is true. However, when people like and an ordinary citizen cannot obtain information, i.e.: Kevin Cummins-road report- how can we think for ourselves? How do we keep an open mind when Vina won't even give the Council the things they ask for? A healthy skepticism is fine, but sometimes the deck is so stacked that a person is left with more than a health skepticism. We see this all the way from the President to our little local Council.
DeleteSculpin is right. Most of Encinitas voters haven't a clue who stands for what, as they all lie when they do the candidate's forums, and even at those there are very few people over all. Who was there last night tells a lot. Most of her Rotarian friends; most of her family; many of her other supporters. Even Bev Goodman spoke and said a deal is a deal. And, the last time I spoke to Bev I don't think she was a big fan of Gaspar. This really wasn't about Gaspar, and what she will or will not do as mayor. But, it did provide a forum for allowing her developer friends to come out in large numbers to support her. That was a bit overwhelming, at least I thought so. I have never been to a Council meeting where not only were both rooms full, but there was an overflow room with a television. Julie Graboi had to sit in there as she got there on time, at least for most council meetings. Is Encinitas broke? Who knows, as our City manager won't give any of the Council the answers to that question. And, if Council knows, they are sharing all that they know. How could we not be close to being broke? Bob Bonde shared that Encinitas has the highest paid firefighting people and expenses in all of north country cities, including Oceanside, which is a lot larger. And, no one seemed to mind. Go figure.
ReplyDeleteShould have said "not sharing" regarding council and budget.
DeleteGaspar has, and will have a large core group of supporters. Anyone opposing her better have a well thought out, well run campaign that hammers her on her lack of fiscal restraint, and be blameless themselves....
Delete9:47-Agree with you. Anyone who underestimates the support Gaspar has will be very sorry when she and perhaps another person who is politically the same wins.
Delete9:47-Agree. Let's find some people. I know Graboi would be hard hitting and I support her. Catherine may have aligned herself with Teresa and Lisa, and who knows how that will play out. If we could get Graboi and another person like her on the ballot, we would have a chance of getting rid of Vina, who is possibly the greatest problem our city has.
ReplyDeleteREmember, you will need 3 votes to have the majority. Dumping Vina will not be easy.
DeleteBut I agree, who in the Prop A crowd will run with Julie....
For those of you who think Shaffer's base is still in da house - think again. We're not.
ReplyDeleteFor those of you who think Gaspar has some sort of significant advantage, think again: her fiscal irresponsibility in total is clear and her lies not only on the Prop A ballot statement, but well in advance of the election ("You won't be able to remodel your kitchen"), plus her absurd "We Love Encinitas" mailer will be trotted out and publicized to the hilt, come election time. She cannot wash the stink of Meyer, Stocks, and Andreen off no matter how hard she scrubs.
As long as she remains tied to the developers and her beloved Stocks, she will not garner those votes. There are a lot of people out there that don't want the developers in here destroying out city and Gaspar is their ticket.
DeleteNo thanks.
You're right, we shouldn't underestimate the depth of your hate or the neurotic strength in your transference of self-hate and loathing onto someone you watch on television every week.
DeleteBet the mail man runs by your driveway doesn't he? Been a while since the paperboy been by to collect? In fact, your old man went out for cigarettes in... 1967 wasn't it? Oh, and, er, a developer probably built your house. What, no? You're right, didn't know you were living in a truck camper in your Mom's driveway: wireless communication is a miracle, isn't it?
LOL, back in yer hole....
DeleteThis is from Shaffer's newsletter that recapped last night's council meeting:
ReplyDelete"The Council chamber was filled with Gaspar supporters and the speakers included Kristin's mother and Kristin's 8-year old son. They had their statements prepared, assuming that I was advocating that Kristin not be allowed to serve as mayor. Despite my opening remarks quoted above, in which I tried to make it clear that I was not proposing to change the "deal" made in December, the public speakers pretty much stuck to their scripts. Almost all of them scolded me, many impugned my character and my integrity. It is their right and privilege to say whatever they want at the podium. As a public official I understand that this is part of the job. That doesn't make it pleasant and it doesn't make their assertions true. But it is clear that this agenda item consumed a lot of time and brought a lot of negative energy into the proceedings, which I regret."
After a long passive-aggressive attack on Gaspar's family and supporters, a long complaint about how she was attacked and her integrity impugned, and a long excuse about why she initiated her agenda item to begin with, she says she regrets the waste of time and the negative energy.
Notice she doesn't take responsibility for the role she played. She doesn't say she made a mistake. She implies that she regrets the attacks against her, the negative energy and all the time that was wasted by others, although she doesn't regret setting an agenda item to reconsider Gaspar's succession to mayor, unanimously agreed upon, after Council discussion, last December.
The Dec. 10 discussion went on for 45 minutes. It included Gaspar's statement in the beginning of the conversation, and the final conclusion, after deliberation and comments by all of Council, to unanimously accept the compromise solution that Muir had proposed.
4:05
DeleteDo you have an opinion about the fact that Gaspar told the public she did not think it was fair that an appointed Mayor run for Mayor. Gaspar said this. Now Gaspar has been appointed Mayor. If Gaspar runs for Mayor isn't she - Gaspar- going back on her words?
What is your opinion 4:05?
I have an opinion on that one.
DeleteGaspar said that at the beginning of a very long discussion. By the end of the discussion, Gaspar and everyone else decided that even though Barth and/or Gaspar were likely to run for mayor, it was fine for them to serve as mayor anyway.
What's the problem?
That's my opinion, too, EU.
DeleteCouncil Members state their opinions, to start the conversation, but can be flexible to change them, especially when a compromise solution has been proposed and unanimously accepted.
I don't see what the problem was, either, with Gaspar's statement, before the fact of the Council's consideration, deliberation and compromise.
I do see a problem with Lisa Shaffer expecting us to swallow her lame excuse that she didn't know what "reconsider" means, until the City Attorney told her. I do see a problem with her and Tony Kranz' proposing identical agenda items for reconsideration, and then Shaffer's saying she only wanted people to have time to express our opinions, then blaming Gaspar and her supporters, including her family, and Shaffer's also blaming neutral observers, like Beverly Goodman, and others who spoke, for wasting the very time she pretended to want us to have to review, discuss and reconsider, also accusing of bringing negative energy to the meeting, those public speakers who dissented with Shaffer's and Kranz' plot.
What in the world did Shaffer, Kranz and Barth expect? This was a lot different than the Pacific View issue, but that was what gave Shaffer, Barth and Kranz their bloated sense of "the all-powerful majority, of might makes right."
The difference is that most people wanted the City to purchase Pacific View, although not at $10 Million. But most people, present or not present, didn't want the three person majority to overrule the previous compromise. If the room had not been full, to overflowing, with people objecting to the majority of Shaffer, Kranz and Barth's scheme, that's exactly what would have happened. Gaspar would have been skipped over as Barth repeatedly was under the old majority.
I see a problem with Lisa Shaffer not taking responsibility for their wasting time, creating ill will, appearing to go back on their unanimous compromise decision, and then saying, well this is because of the Brown Act, when the very fact that two nearly identical agenda items were initiated through the Mayor, City Manager, and Clerk, by Shaffer and Kranz, does implicate them in the appearance of a Brown Act violation.
Also, it seems hypocritical for Tony Kranz to state in the UT article, that he would now accept the position of Deputy Mayor, "so the matter will not have to be "revisited" again. Why did he set his agenda item to begin with? Because he knew with Barth, Shaffer and he had the three person majority to deny Gaspar her turn in the agreed upon rotation. Kranz should have still declined to accept the position next month, but again, he is flp-flopping.
As quoted from the UT:
"Kranz announced last week that he would decline the deputy mayor’s post -- a job he’s to be sworn into June 11 --- because he might run for mayor. On Wednesday night after the council vote to table the issue, he told a reporter that he will take the job afterall, so the council will not have to revisit the issue."
http://m.utsandiego.com/news/2014/may/28/encinitas-council-honors-deal-to-make-gaspar-mayor/
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteTaunting. 15-yard penalty.
DeleteLove it EU. Now that is what I call a class removal. 15 yards seems fair, because I have a feeling that 7:34 wasn't just saying hi to Lynn. Hat tip.
DeleteEU misunderstood my statement. Similar to the situation we have had with Gaspar. Some misunderstood her statement and a war began.
DeleteThe fact is Gaspar's statement made in December only applied when she thought Barth would be running for mayor, so of course, she did not want Barth to have an advantage over her. But, now that the tied as turned, Gaspar sings a different tune because it benefits her. I see through this and I believe the other council member's saw through it (excluding numb nuts Muir). They wanted to expose Gaspar for who she is --- a flat out LIAR! One has to question her integrity from this point on because once a liar; always a liar.
ReplyDeleteI agree with WC on this issue. They all came to a new agreement after Gaspar made this statement. It is unfair to rip a comment out of the context of the entire proceeding. Who knows what other council members said? We are not looking back because they came to a complete agreement that replaced what they were debating for almost an hour.
DeleteWe now have proof that sharing the mayor's seat is not the best decision this council has made. When they did it, I knew that there would be future problems and here we are.
DeleteFrom this point on I believe the council will be even more divided than it has been. The members have been a little more civil, but you can not ignore the divisiveness that has been demonstrated by this entire council. This is what is so sad about politics. It is becoming more and more about the individual than doing what they were elected to do, and that is to represent the people who elected them. The rotational system was the fair way to do it, but we all know who screwed that up. What a shame.
After reviewing the webcast for December 10, I see no inconsistency in Gaspar's statements on December 10. I see inconsistency in Lisa Shaffer's and Tony Kranz' current explanations and statements concerning their agenda items.
DeleteOn December 10, Lisa Shaffer nominated Teresa Barth to be mayor for another year. She wanted, back then, to skip Kristin Gaspar's turn in the rotation. Shaffer said she supported the rotational system, but "we don't have a rotational system anymore." She drones on about how wonderful Barth's leadership has been.
No one seconded Shaffer's motion. Barth said it died for lack of a second. Mark Muir's motion for Kristin Gaspar to be mayor, to get her turn in the rotation also dies for a lack of second.
Lisa Shaffer then repeats her motion to have Teresa Barth be mayor for two years, to give the voters the opportunity for a two year term mayor, before we expected it, she said. Her motion again dies for lack of a second.
Gaspar says the elephant in the room is the election in 2014.
Kranz starts talking about how the voters did decide on a two year term. But contrary to his reasoning, we voted for an elected mayor, to serve a two year term, not for a two year mayor appointed by a majority on Council.
Teresa states she wouldn't run for Council but hadn't decided whether or not she'd run for mayor.
Mark Muir finally comes up with the compromise of two six month terms. Teresa Barth says that's how it has been done in Solana Beach. Gaspar seconds Muir's motion for two six month terms. Lisa Shaffer objects that the problem remains with determining which mayor would be in office before immediately before the election. Shaffer then moves that Kranz be mayor, because she says she doesn't think he is running for mayor.
Tony immediately states he won't second Shaffer's motion. Kranz then makes another substitute motion that Mayor Barth be appointed for another six months, and then Council would revisit the appointment in June of 2014. Shaffer seconds.
Gaspar states that wouldn't solve the problem, because the same political issues would come up in six months. She states again (she offered before, when Muir made the compromise suggestion, before he turned his suggestion into a motion) that she would be willing to decide who could serve the first six months, as mayor, between her and Teresa Barth, by a coin toss.
After advise from Glenn Sabine, and Teresa Barth's statement that this is open government "warts and all," Shaffer withdraws her second to Kranz' motion.
Muir suggests, again, the "sitting mayor" could decide to go first or second for either of the two six month terms. Barth says to Gaspar, "you don't want to be absent for your first chair, and you're going out of town tomorrow." Barth also states she wants to conclude the closed session special meeting then in recess, as mayor. So, with Muir's urging "let the mayor decide," Barth chooses to be the mayor for another six months, from December to June.
Tony suggests he would team up with Kristin and Mark could team up with Teresa as deputy mayor. In retrospect, Kranz wanted to be deputy mayor for the second six months.
Teresa seemed a little surprised, and I remember I was too, at the time, that the split deputy mayor position was counterintuitive, with Barth/Muir, and Gaspar/Kranz. It did seem like a civil compromise on the part of Council, at the time, and a mutual and unanimous expression of goodwill.
But it will be ironic if both Kristin Gaspar and Tony Kranz, as sitting mayor and sitting deputy mayor, both run for the first elected mayorship.
4
Delete4:56
As you can't see Gaspar's hypocrisy let me enlighten you.
Gaspar said an appointed sitting mayor has an unfair advantage running for elected mayor and she could not support that.
Now Gaspar is the appointed Mayor - who if she runs for elected Mayor- will have an unfair advanatge that benefits her, not teh community.
This is called saying one thing, and doing another.
This is a perfect example of when a "fact" may be a "fact" but is completely irrelevant to the discussion. 7:24 believes this is "called saying one thing, and doing another", but more rational people would refer to it as "forming an opinion through thought and discussion.
Delete- The Sculpin
right, thanks for clearing that up for us 8:39, Disregard the facts. Nothing to see here folks - please move along. This fact doesn't concern you, this fact is irrelevant.
DeleteWhat 8:39 is trying to tell you is that all the near normal people here on this blog recognize that you are a couple beers short of a six pack and that no one is taking your argument seriously. but continue to harp on it, anything that keeps in the house and not driving on the street: children are playing.
DeleteA speaker at the meeting last evening suggested that the term "mayor" be changed to reflect what the job actually entails and that is "council chairperson". I think this is a wonderful suggestion and would alleviate future problems for this city and the council. Since the mayor holds no more weight than the rest of the council, this would be an appropriate solution since there have been numerous problems with this "mayor" issue.
ReplyDeletePerhaps a council person could suggest putting this on an agenda for discussion at an appropriate time. It does deserve some discussion and consideration.
They could "reconsider" the use of the term mayor.
Delete8:49 Are you actually that stupid! The city decided to elect a Mayor. Pay attention!!!
Delete11:29. No I am not stupid. I thought the suggestion by one of the speakers last night was a clever suggestion. I'm not for exploring it now because we wouldn't want to upset the princess, but a discussion somewhere down the road might be good. I do pay attention by the way. Thanks for your input.
DeleteWhen the citizens of Encinitas voted for an elected mayor, they meant Mayor, not "chairperson". Council cannot go back and say we will call the elected Mayor the "chairperson." The term Mayor was the language used in the ballot, and we are "stuck" with it, like it or not. You want to change to "chairperson" it has to go back to the ballot box. That is called democracy.
Delete8:52 I wasn't suggesting that it be done now. Would not want to upset the princess and it couldn't be done now. I am talking about in the future. I think it would be a great way to solve the "mayor" problem since some think it is such a coveted position, when in all actuality, it is on the same level as the other council members. Just a thought for the future. Nothing more; nothing less. It wasn't my idea, but one of the speakers brought it up the other night. I thought it was a good suggestion.
Delete9:59 AM
DeleteUnfortunately, the mayor position isn't on a level with the other council members. This council voted to give a salary increase of $100 month to anyone holding the elected title of mayor.
The $100 was talked about for extra gas money because the mayor would cut more ribbons somewhere. I suggest you look up on the web site and you will see the mayor carries no more weight than the other council members. Those words are clear and precise.
Deletewhy are the council members getting extra money for gas and $500 dollar a month car allowances?
DeleteI thought these council members were all about riding bikes for "sustainability" "Walkability" and the "Environment" ?
Fact Thrower
Good point Fact Thrower. I would really like an answer to that question and why are they not taking public transportation or riding their bikes?
Delete$500 a month for car allowance is excessive when most of their meetings are local or at least not that far. Yes, gas is expensive, but c'mon.
Council Members get $350 month car allowance. City attorney gets $500 per month because he lives in La Mesa. So does his partner, does he get $500 per month car allowance, too?
DeleteThe mayor already gets up to $800 per month extra for her or his ceremonial duties. Kristin Gaspar has consistently voted against giving the mayor an additional $100 per month, and I concur. It's unnecessary.
An elected mayor is defined and regulated by California Government Code. Specific duties are not. But we could not change the name to Chairperson or President, because of that statutory code.
Our mayor, with the City Manager, can set agendas. That is an enormous power to me. Other Council Members can ask for future agenda items, but it is the Mayor and City Manager who determine when they are heard. I am not sure how it works for a single council member initiated item. Those seem to come forward more quickly than agenda items requested by two council members, as the Bob Bonde presentation was. But that had been requested to be set as a regular agenda item at least six months ago, by Kristin Gaspar; I can't remember who supported her request; but it deserved a staff report. It also deserved to go back to the Traffic and Safety Commission, for further study, deliberation, and recommendations to Council.
Instead, our outgoing mayor took credit for setting it on the agenda as a presentation. Lisa Shaffer recommended hiring another expensive, supposedly "independent" consultant.
12:02 Setting agendas is an enormous power to you? Oh please stop me from laughing. At the age of 17 I was setting agendas for high powered meetings and was not even a mayor. Let's get real.
DeleteAlso, each city has its own ordinances and can be rewritten, redone, abolished, etc. at any time. Every California city may enact and enforce within its limits local ordinances not in conflict with general laws. We have seen this time and again with the council over the years, and that would apply to changing the name of Mayor to Council Chairperson. Of course, it all has to go through the proper steps and proper channels, but it can be done.
It is time to boot all incumbents. Encinitas can do better than these clowns.
ReplyDeleteLets get some council members will some integrity that will stand up to the little weasel Vina. Firing Vina should be our City Council's highest priority.
I agree. Boot all incumbents for dereliction of duty.
DeleteShaffer finally has recognized that she is not a political savy person, something many of us have seen from the beginning of her term.
ReplyDeleteSo what is she doing in politics?
So we have 3 dumb shit non savvy locals telling an incompetent weasel City Manager he is doing a good job.
ReplyDelete"I will ask my Cabinet to establish a intent motion to table later this year so we can discuss it in my work plan that we will develop over the next two years to allow us to complete a two year city budget." - watch Tony, Lisa, and Teresa's eyes all glaze over and say at the same time- " Thank you City Manager- Continue with this excellent Strategic Planning"
meanwhile nothing gets done in the City except pay raises and more retirements.
Gaspar groupy's were pathetic -
ReplyDeleteHaving your San Marcos Mom come and tell how great your daughter is and how Encinitas should run its business is classic. Maybe Gaspar would fit better in San Marcos.
Then to have stoop to using your own 8 year old in your political ploys- All I can say is great Mom Gaspar. Better start saving for some Shrink costs for all your kids later on. Geez!
From watching the mom, I can see the San Marcos rotten apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
True, 6:42, no one would wish a child to turn out like you. Hopefully you smoke and drink. Bon Voyage.
DeleteI wonder if Gaspar or the other council members will go to the elementary schools and apologize to the kids for lying on the Prop A ballot statement not once but twice ?
DeleteNothing wrong with San Marcos speakers at City Hall. Lots of out of Encinitas bicyclists spoke at the Council Meeting on January 30, 2013.
ReplyDeleteNo reason to be hateful about Gaspar's family supporters. The family aspect was appreciated by many, on both sides of the political spectrum, at the meeting, and by many watching from home.
Gaspar's mother standing up to Shaffer, Kranz and Barth was appreciated by mothers and others, as were the brief comments from her eight year old son. I know that I am grateful for my family's support, and I've been very happy to have family members present with me at some Council Meetings.
7:13 you are entitled to your opinion.
DeleteAs Encinitas taxpayers pay the bills only Encinitas taxpayers should speak at our city hall - unless it is a matter concerning the region.
Trotting out your kid is a political ploy in attempt to silence others- after all who would speak against a child
\
Truth is Gaspar lied, lied, lied, on the Prop A ballot statement. You along with Gaspar's mother, child and husband may support liar's - I don't.
Truth is Gaspar took $66,000 from taxpayers so her husband could use bogus survey results to benefit his crony David Meyer and benefit his wife- not taxpayers. You may support this abuse and waste of taxpayer money, I don't.
Truth is Gaspar appointed Mark Muir, who violated city ethic codes to an open seat over qualified candidates who had not violated codes because it benefited Gaspar, Meyer and her hsuband- not the community.
So there you have it. You are entitled to support a liar , and a fiscal spendthrift and self seeking politician, don't ask us to join you.
Of course the question remains. Now that Gaspar is appointed Mayor, will she honor her words and not run for elected Mayor as she has as she stated an unfair advantage? Or will she again put the public good aside to benefit her and her crony developer friends?
Facts, they can not be denied. That is where facts are different than opinions.
Fact Thrower
Fact Thrower - I'm afraid you have painted yourself into a box. If, as you state, you do not support liars, then if follows that you can not support yourself! You have repeatedly been challenged by many on this blog for your somewhat bizarre linear logic, and the conclusions that are drawn from it. Because the process is flawed, the conclusions are illogical, and because you knowingly continue to repeat them they turn to "untruths" (gawd I hate that term), and we all know that another name for "untruth" is a lie.
Delete- The Sculpin
Please provide a fact to rebut the facts presented. I have an open mind. Perhaps I am missing something.
DeleteDid Gaspar vote to award ex-city manager an extra paycheck?
Did Gaspar vote to spend $66,000 or surveys that her husband then used to send mailers?
Did Gaspar vote to raid $7 million from funded projects with no plan to pay it back?
Did Gaspar vote to increase debt service by $10M leaving more than 200 projects unfunded?
Did Gaspar sign her name to the Prop A ballot statement lie?
Looking forward to your response. Perhaps you can help set teh record straight as they say.
All true.
DeleteBut there's nothing we can do about it unless someone runs against her who didn't also do all that.
Any volunteers?
I will donate $100 to Fact Throwers campaign fund for a city council seat.....even though he is a liar......anyone want to join me?
Delete- The Sculpin
9:12
Deleteplease show a fact to rebut a fact. Name calling benefits no one.
Looking forward to your response.
9:20 - I really don't care, but I'm willing to give Fact Thrower an opportunity to make their case in a public setting - $100 should get it started. Are you going to join me, or will you stay on the sidelines........looking forward to your response.
Delete- The Sculpin
Fact Thrower is throwing REAL facts out there. All one has to do is check the voting of Gaspar. These facts can not be denied. They are all in the record. If one chooses to ignore the facts, that is their choice.
DeleteI am with Fact Thrower and do not support liars. She will not have my vote.
I would die a thousand deaths if at the age of 30 something I had my "mommy" trying to defend me in a public venue. God help us all.
DeleteIt's funny reading all these comments here and on previous topics about voter betrayal. None of the council members are worthy but the ones supported here in the last election are especially vile. They're traitors to the cause. They are not pure. Also, many here believe they have become spellbound to a svengali city manager. It's us against them. And yet we should trust their judgement?
DeleteVote all incumbents out of office. They are not worthy of occupying the swivel chair.
DeleteWhy are some people so biased against family members appearing at Council Meetings? I thought Gaspar's mother spoke powerfully. Although Gaspar did vote for the defunding of committed funds, which Gus Vina now calls "scrubbing," she was the only Council Member to question the financial plan to do so, on July 11, 2011. Outgoing Mayor Barth did not question it. Jerome Stocks laughed at Gaspar and ignored her questions and concerns, and all the public speakers' questions and concerns.
DeleteLisa Shaffer and Tony Kranz were not then on Council, yet. But they did not question hiring the communications director; they did not strongly question the exorbitant minimum bid required by Tim Baird for Pacific View, and along with Barth, voted to pay $500K more, at $10 Million.
Muir and Gaspar did not propose to eliminate time donations, as Shaffer and Barth did.
Muir and Gaspar had not signed Right to Vote petitions as Shaffer and Kranz had.
Muir and Gaspar did not vote to have more secret ad hoc subcommittee meetings, which led to the City's overpayment for Pacific View, and is leading to our failure to get better terms of purchase, now. Kranz, Barth, and Shaffer did.
Muir and Gaspar did not campaign on trust and transparency, on a promise to enact a local Sunshine Ordinance, Teresa and Tony did.
12:18 nice job deflecting away from a review of Gaspar's voting record by blaming others.
DeleteGaspar voted to waste up to $135,000 on a spin doctor
Gaspar voted to raid $7M from projects with no plan to pay it back
Gaspar voted to increase debt by $10M and annual debt service by $500,000 a year with no plan to make up for short falls
Gaspar voted to waste $66,000 on surveys her husband used to benefit his crony developer friend
Gaspar voted to bury the road report costing taxpayers $100,000 grand when the city lost
Gaspar enabled Vina to was 50K onRutanand Tucker, $1.3M on MIG, 9K on Peak Democracy and looked the other way when the public exposed that Vina withheld important financial information from the public and council.
Gaspar lied on the Prop A ballot statement
Gaspar failed to recommend an injunction to compell EUSD to follow the Naylor Act for a possible better price
Gaspar failed to vote on Pacific View in 2011- running from the building and hiding from the challenge
Gaspar's opponent if she runs for council or mayor isn't her opponent it is her record. It is a record of failure and mismanagement coupled with selfish self -seeking (see survey, see extra pyacheck, see hiding from pacific view)
Why do self proclaimed tea party candidates like Brian Brady and self proclaimed GOP people like Hodges support Gaspar? She has proven a fiscal spendthrift who has increased debt, reduced services and increased fees- hardly conservative principles. Perhaps Brady and Hodges have none.
Fact Thrower
Wow fact thrower, your sister got home from work and you had her back you up on this blog. You see, family counts. You two can go out in grandma's back yard now and turn the hose on the ants and gophers.
Deletewow- 2:50 can't refute the facts or present facts - name calling benefits no one
DeleteYou go Fact Thrower. Everything you have pointed out about Gaspar's voting record is spot on. It's a shame people can't see beyond her teeth to see the truth about this. It is my hope they will finally come to realize this during her reign of princess. The other three will definitely be highlighting her weaknesses.
DeleteI meant to say that KG was the only one that questioned the financial plan to defund the Open Space and habitat acquisition fund and the flooding fund, and all the other funds, although she did end up going along with the unanimous vote, including Barth and Muir, on 7/11/12, not 2011, that was a typo.
DeleteThat was the Special Council Meeting held at the Community Center.
1:08 are you actually saying Gaspar should not be held accountable for raiding $7M from funded projects, increasing annual debt service by $500,000, increasing city debt by $10M and leaving more than 200 projects unfunded in her 4 short years in office because she asked a question before voting yes to screw taxpayers?
DeleteGaspar owns her record of financial mismanagement, spend-aholic decisions, untruths on Prop A and dereliction of duty-
Let's not forget, when residents needed Gaspar to vote on Pacifiuc View in 2011 she ran from the building like a frightened child and made another untrue excuse for shirking her responsiblity to the public and benefitting herself.
Fact thrower
Fact Thrower - You need to let go.
ReplyDeleteYou are deeper in the minority than you can probably imagine.
I am sure that will get you all riled up, and you will come back with a strong, hateful message aimed at me and Gaspar (and probably will do that several times to make it look like you are not alone).
No politician is perfect, and they have to live with all their past statements for us to wallow in, and selectively make the points we want to make.
Gaspar is not as evil and incompetent as you think. She showed a lot of class on Wednesday in the midst of a difficult situation for her.
8:45 -let go? Because youa re will to accept lies, mismagement and incompetence doesn't mean the rest of taxpayers should.
DeleteGaspar is competent? - Gaspar has increased our debt service by $10M while reducing our services adn increasing our fees. We have 200 unfunded projects thanks to her mismanagement. However her buddy ex-city manager Cotton did get an extra paycheck and spiked pension thanks to Gaspar.
Gaspar showed class? Gaspar said it was her position that she did not favor an appointed mayor running for elected office as it provided an unfair advantage - until that position benefited her. What you call class others call hypocrisy.
Hateful? Facts are never hateful, they are simply inconvenient to spin doctors and political operatives who would prefer the public be kept in the dark.
Riled up? Reciting facts are simply that, reciting facts. They are what they are. Gaspar's record of imcompetenece -increased debt, mismamangement- Rutan and Tucker, lies- Prop A, and hypocrisy speak for themselves.
Any well rounded 8 year old can tell a lie from a lie - provided of course they are first told the facts.
Fact Thrower
Gaspar may not be incompetent, but she hasn't shown much competency either.
DeleteWe know why she's on the council, and who backs her, and what she's said in the past. Those reasons are enough for me not to back her ever. She's a put up from the developer interests in this town that don't give a rats rump for our community or its character.
Add to that embarrassing stuff like her magic act, her prepped notes that sound like something from 9th grade and her association with Stocks and Mayer, and you should have all you need.
The Fact Thrower is right, run down her pluses and minuses, and it's mostly minuses.
Personally, I don't care about the mayor's thing, it's predictably looney, the kind of crap that has distracted us for far to long. If she runs fine, we'll see who runs against her. Neither She nor Tony are ready for the job.
We don't need people like Gaspar on our council. I say sweep her out, let Teresa leave, have Lisa leave after one term and then we'll see where we're at.
Right now, I'm liking Julie Graboi more and more...
Until Julie Graboi makes her presence, and intentions, known to the public, she's a non-issue.
Delete- The Sculpin
I think Julie put in her papers. I know I have already spoken with her and she is running.
DeleteI hope Julie runs. She has my vote.
DeleteWhere was Gaspar when she and her band of merry men did the same thing to Barth?
DeleteWhere was Gaspar's class at that time? That's right -- she doesn't have any class because she voted to skip over Barth.
Shame on Gaspar. She brings in her troops when it only affects her. Self grandizing comes to mind.
I think the Sculpin needs to let go and stop challenging Fact Thrower who is stating facts. If The Sculpin disagrees, fine, but let's see your facts Mr. Sculpin. You never have any.
Delete10:38 - I'm the voter, remember? I don't need to proffer up facts. Until I know who is running and understand their positions, I'm not going to make any decisions about where I place my vote. Got it?
Delete- The Sculpin
10:51 We get it Sculpin. You just like to throw daggers at people and demean them for their thoughts and facts.
DeleteIn case you are unaware, we are all voters and pay taxes. You don't get to claim that total privilege.
Frankly, I don't care who you vote for. You never have to state that or tell any one. That is not our interest. We are only interested in who we choose to vote for.
Get it?
Not really - but using your terminology I guess what I'm really doing is throwing daggers back at the dagger throwers.....it's all a bit of fun isn't it? Putting a mirror up to those who take themselves too seriously? Ahh yes.....what's that phrase again? Looking forward to your response........
Delete- The Sculpin
The reflection you see in your mirror isn't very pretty I'm sure.
Delete12:05 PM
DeleteOh grow up. Whether it's true or not, Fact Thrower, your comments give one the image of someone out of work, sitting in their bathrobe, throwing verbal bricks. It's people like you that made me stop listening to sports talk radio, believing that talking smack is somehow equivalent to being an athlete. I'm sure this description is unfair but that is image you conjure.
1:31
DeleteDo you have any facts to support your claims or to rebut the facts presented that Gaspar raided funds with no plan to pay them back (as did the council) that Gaspar lied on the Prop A statements (as did the council) that Gaspar awarded an ex city manager an extray paycheck (as did the council) that Gaspar wasted $66,000 on bogus surveys her husband then used to promote his crony friends and wife?
These facts are not smack, they simply are what they are. Smakc is personal attacks.
Gaspar alone is responsibe for her voting record. In a democracy and free society pointing out a voting record is a good thing.
Dear Graboi backer. We've been over this, Julie might have opened a campaign account, but papers cannot be taken out to run for Mayor until mid-July; so, as usual, you are wrong. Have another beer.
Delete2:40 PM
DeleteI guess maturity isn't your strong suit. The council, and only the council, have the authority to manage the budget and move money in and out of accounts as they see fit as long as they observe any restrictions on the funds, state and federal guidelines, etc. To say they raided funds is nonsensical. You may not agree with the action but saying they raided funds is hyperbole.
That a council person voted with the majority doesn't single them out. The bogus survey, as you describe it, is your opinion which doesn't make it true. Only that there was a survey done is a fact. The bogus part is your opinion. I could go on but I actually have things to do.
3:50
DeleteYou support irresponsible spending- I don't.
You support sending $66,000 on survey's that benefit council elites and their cronies - I don't
You hold only your political adversaries accountable- I hold all accountable
You believe Gaspar can hide her record- her record is on display for all to see.
Gaspar raided $7M from funded projects that remain unfunded.
The survey benefitted only Gaspar's husabnd Paul, Gaspar herself and then council members Bond and code violater and election rules breaker Jerome Stocks
I could go on, but the factual record of the incompetence and mismanagment of the council's of the past 10 years is lengthy.
Fact thrower
4:12 PM
DeleteYou actually have no idea what I do and don't support except one thing. I don't support hyperbole.
4:44
DeleteHyperbole and facts are two different things. If you could share facts to rebut the disaserous record of the council past and present I am sure you would - but sadly you can't.
Interesting - Jerome Stocks, the ex mayor who recklessly mismanaged the city finances, used to push for 5-0 council votes. Stocks knew he could hide his failures by claiming everyone else voted for it.
ah 3:50 it is a fact that the survey was used by Gaspar's husband Paul and high density developer David Meyer to send out election like mailers promoting Gaspar and the election code breakers Muir and Stocks- for some reason Barth was left off the mailer.
DeleteSee how Gaspar works? - I do.
2:53- Pray tell what has Catherine had 2 meet and greets already if she hasn't filed? Kind of strange. Don't believe me, go to her FB page as she posted it there. Julie is running and getting support as I write. She will tell us more when she ready. All I will say is she has an awesome campaign manager with lots of political experience and capital to get votes.
Deleteshould have said "why has Catherine" Sorry for the typos.
Delete8:45- I have never been a Gaspar fan. But, in my opinion, she showed a hell of a lot more class the other night than her colleagues.
ReplyDelete8:55
DeleteGaspar is on record saying that an appointed mayor running for an elected mayor would have an unfair advantage.
I agree with her.
However, not that she is an appointed Mayor it seems she plans to use that unfair advantage to her benefit- rather than honor her statements.
Please share with me where I am wrong?
thank you
I would say class is immaterial, everyone is jockeying for position against one another, politics as usual.....
DeleteIt was well rehearsed. Anything well rehearsed looks good....similar to a reality tv show. Get it?
DeleteIn what way? having her San Marcos Mom come crying over what a good girl she is… and playing her 8 year old boy- Thats Pathetic not class.
Delete9:07-Get over it. It's over. Now let's figure out if this City has any money to keep its commitments. Seems like a better way to spend our time and efforts.
ReplyDeleteum 9:11
DeleteI think that is the point of sharing facts. The city does not have the money to keep it's committments. The facts are the councils have run up the credit card, increased debt service, increased fees, reduced services, failed to fund projects and has no plan.
The council has looked the other way at Gus Vina withholding important financial information from the public and council, voted to give ex-city managers extra paychecks and wasted money on needless survey's and consultants.
I don't care who does or does not have class. I do care who does or does not have common sense.
All five council members have put themselves before the public good. All five need to be run out of office.
Of course the alternative is we disregard these facts.
If anyone wants a laugh go over to our friends at SD Rostra and see Jerome's comments. Lorri has also posted there as well.
ReplyDelete9:13 I saw the post by $tock$ and the comments by Ms. Lorri Greene. I clearly remember her telling us on this blog how much of a despicable person $tock$ was and how he came on to her at a party in a drunken state. I was shocked to see her words to him on SD Rostra that she liked him. My head is spinning. There sure is a lot of lying going on in this town.
DeleteThat was strange, but a few of the other comments held Stocks' feet to the fire on pensions, while he rambled on....
DeleteYou know what folks. I believe that it is possible and practical to not burn bridges. Yes, I posted for the first time on SD Rostra. Actually on the second of posts on the council meeting, Jerome actually said he was embarrassed. Have I gone over to the "right". No, but to me this is about what is good for our city. If we cannot even talk to others, who we may very much differ with, then nothing will get done. I will post whenever and wherever I can. I thought Kristin did a good job the other night, and I stick with that. I really don't care whether anyone on this, or any other blog, likes it. Does it mean I am going to become a Republican-NO. But, it does mean that if I find someone, who just happens to be a Republican, and I see they are doing a good job, in my opinion only, then I will say it. Best I know the only person who can throw me off this blog is the blog owner. So far, he or she has not done that, and so far I have not had to sit in the penalty booth. I will be watching Kristin and how she operates as mayor. However, right now, I am more disappointed in Lisa, Tony and Teresa as far as how this went down.
DeleteAdding to that I am also supporting Julie Graboi for Council after she announces. In fact, I will be holding a meet and greet for her, so anyone that might be interested can contact me via Facebook under Lorri Greene, or email: lgreene98@aol.com
Delete
DeleteRight, but Jerome said he was embarrassed about not remembering Muir being on the council, not about the way he acted in the past towards constituents.
He was still going at with people on there just like old times, as they called him out as a RINO and a pension raiser. Glad to see some things haven't changed.
Sadly, all the current shenanigans leave us where Jerome left us, with pension issues, questionable streets and unfinished projects. I know we love all the back and forth on the mayor, but when you look at where we are, it's pretty sad. Hopefully Julie Graboi will prove a tonic, and someone sensible will jump in for mayor.
Otherwise, Vina and Sabine aren't going anywhere...
-MGJ
Good post MGJ.
DeleteDr. Lorri, your creditability stinks! How many times have you said you will not post again on a blog and then go against your statement. Too Funny…. I guess you believe "its a Women's propagative to change her mind." --- I call it flip flopping and flakey.
"Say what you mean and do what you say" -- Is my motto.
-- U Crack Me Up!!!
10:15-Ah, but I have been invited. What is the old saying "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer". I posted to La Rostra for a reason. And there is no need to share it. And 9:15- I am not afraid to say when I change my mind, when new information is presented. Call it floppy/floppy. or whatever else you may want to call it. Jerome will never get elected again in this city, so if I can learn the "game" over there, who knows what information I might did up. I already have found things I didn't know. If you remember only one thing about me, it should be this: There is always a method to my madness. I am a pretty good chess player as well as poker player. So, what I post on any blog may or may not be what I really think. It could possibly be a distraction from something else. One thing about being a "shrink" for so long is that if you are any good you get pretty good at reading people. And, whether you think it or not, I am a damn good "shrink". And, I would make a lousy politician. As Clint says "A man, or in my case a woman" has to know his or her limitations. Mine would be trusting people before they have earned my trust. I am working on that one. Lorri
DeleteStop attacking someone with the courage to share her name, 11:58. Lorri, most of us appreciate your perseverance, dedication, and periodic participation, here.
DeletePlease ignore the bullying troll that gets so much satisfaction out of targeting select commenters, usually select women, on this blog.
I don't find it bullying; I call it telling the truth and some people don't like to hear the truth. This particle article has been about lies told by the Council (including Gaspar). No one minds when we call them liars, but sounds like someone else can't take it when they are less than truthful. You know who you are.
Delete11:28 Some may be impressed, but I am one who is not. I prefer a person who doesn't use people or trick them into saying things and then use it against them. I'm surprised that you don't feel the same because you have made comments about our council members being less than truthful by calling them liars, but you pick and choose which ones those are. Interesting.
DeleteLooks like $tock$ has a new friend. I'm sure he is watching his back. Be careful who your friends are. O MA GOD!
DeleteOn another front -
ReplyDeleteMarlena Medford, the city's hired communications officer, can't get her facts straight. Yesterday afternoon two unconscious swimmers were pulled from the water at Moonlight Beach. Her brief account of the story doesn't credit the students from Santa Fe Christian school as the rescuers.
Worthless and unnecessary position.
DeleteAgreed. that is $135,000/yr. that could be going towards needed projects.
DeleteAgain, it isnt' $135k per yr, that's what was approved. She probably makes 70-80k per year + benefits. Still, we don't need the position.
Delete7:50 AM
DeleteThe salary can go up to $135,000 a year if Vina wants to give it to her. The council approved it. We don't need the position.
what and where is Medford communicating this story?
ReplyDeleteMoreover- the public and council were told by Vina the Spin Doctor role was to better get input from the public on city matters-
Guess this proves the $135,000 approved position by Barth and Gaspar was to benefit the council - not the taxpayers
City website under news.
DeleteShe thinks she still is on Patch.
DeleteSeems as though our outgoing mayor had to get in a few early licks before flying off to Sydney, Australia. Teresa's comments posted through her latest newsletter, sent a day early, appear to be bitter when she says:
ReplyDelete"I want to clarify that my comments were NOT a criticism of Council members Shaffer and Kranz in any way. I thought many of the public speakers made inflammatory and false statements against Shaffer and Kranz in the same manner as I had been treated by the previous council majority."
Before that, she had stated:
"It was an interesting evening to say the least. In fact it seemed like I was in the Twilight Zone hearing people talk about supporting the rotation, taking turns to serve as Mayor, etc. All the same arguments that were used to support me in past Mayoral rotations. Arguments the previous council majority, including Muir & Gaspar, ignored. As I said at the council meeting, when I was finally selected to serve as Mayor, in spite of past behaviors, I choose not to retaliate. It is equally unfortunate that council members Shaffer & Kranz were accused of unethical behavior. There is nothing unethical about asking to have a discussion in public. Especially since conditions have changed...I am not running for Mayor and Gaspar is and does that really make a difference? . . ."
Wow. Right off the bat I think of the comment someone else made on one of WC's previous threads on EU: Two wrongs don't make a right. We were taught that lesson as children.
Methinks our outgoing mayor doth protest too much. She is protesting about members of the public protesting, just as we protested previous Council's unfair treatment of her.
Aren't you people aware that a lot of this crap reflects badly on you and not your targets? Just saying.
DeleteBarth has accomplished nothing - she is insignificance personified.
DeleteCouncil, including the mayor are held accountable for their public comments, including in newsletters. As public officials, they should set a standard of ethics, not blame the public for calling them out, when they don't uphold the public's trust.
DeleteBy the same token, a right can undo a wrong.
ReplyDeleteSTILL DON"T GET IT!
ReplyDeleteIt has nothing to do with rotation or selection. It has everything to do about making a promise and then changing it. Like, Prop A., Desert Rose, Road Improvements, etc, etc, etc...
The choice will be Gaspar vs Kranz for mayor.
ReplyDeleteCan you really imagine Kranz as mayor? Fumbling through meeting after meeting?
You can keep shouting about how bad Gaspar and the rest of the incumbents are.
But it will come down to Gaspar or Kranz.
Gaspar doesn't lose that choice.
Especially not now that Shaffer and Kranze made Gaspar a more sympathetic figure due to "reconsider"-gate.
"Gaspar doesn't lose that choice" Meaning that she is the only choice? I'll write in the Kook.
ReplyDeleteKranz would offer comedic aspects - you'd see him morph into Dalager Dumb. He could ramble on about the best Xerox copiers that he ever saw - the height of his expertise.
Encinitas is doing the Titanic at the moment and the band plays on . . .
If she is the only choice writing in the kook is a good idea.
ReplyDeleteAs Falls Encinitas Council Falls So Falls Encinitas.
Deletehttp://www.seasidecourier.com/opinion/cartoons/editorial-cartoon/image_5252eaaa-e857-11e3-bc2a-0017a43b2370.html?mode=nogs
From the same cartoonist that brought you Martians Stealing Tony's Campaign Signs and Putting Them Out Prior To 2012 Election.
You guys actually read the Seaside Courier?
DeleteNot much new info the past couple of days, still the same council, still the same infighting. Not much of a choice for mayor. How about if Neither Tony or Kristen ran, and Jim Bond comes out of retirement to face Sheila Cameron.
Now that would be exciting...
-MGJ
My vote is for the kook.
DeleteSeaside Courier = waste of time.
DeleteKranz and Gaspar are equal to the Kook.
DeleteI also would prefer a fairy statue over someone who makes bad decisions as Mayor.
Kook for Mayor!
Jim Bond come out of retirement??? More like coming out of an Alzheimer's fog.... the guy is senile....
DeleteIf it came down to the two I would vote Gaspar over Kranz.
ReplyDeleteKranz supports putting the City further in DEBT for a $3 million Life Guard Tower of Power and a $20,000,000.00 new coastal Art Center for the unemployed!
What choice are we left?
Fancy Bitchen Luxury Gold Plated $3,000,000.00 Life Guard Tower will not do shit to save more lives at Beach--
ReplyDeleteWhat really helps? Informed and good citizens- Watch the real truth
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Students-Rescue-Moonlight-Beach-Victims-261250221.html
Do we really want the Gross overspending that was done on the fire stations to continue on by polluting our beach with a $3 million dollar monstrosity?
Which Council Members supports such a waste of money?
interesting the city spin doctor wrote of the rescue at the beach - could it be to try and hoodwink the public regarding the obscene waste of $3M ?
DeleteFact thrower
I think you're giving her too much credit, FT.....
Delete-MGJ
Since the beaches are just now gearing up for summer, there were probably no lifeguards on duty outside of Moonlight. If there had been, there's a good chance a lifeguard would have spotted the two swimmers in distress and gone out to check on them. Good thing the kids happened upon them. The U-T article said both had no pulse when they discovered them.
DeleteLifeguards are required to make contact (i.e. swim out to) anyone who appears in distress Depending on the size of crowds, that can be frequent.. Often they find that the swimmer is having a little trouble but not yet in real danger. They advise the swimmer to move closer to shore.
I too want to know why the new tower is so expensive but that doesn't mean I'm going to trash the lifeguards. For comparison, Del Mar recently rebuilt their lifeguard tower which is a little larger (2,840 sq. ft.) then the proposed Encinitas tower and they spent around $2.6M.
Upgrade the current lifeguard tower - $3 million is an extravagance for something that isn't really needed. I suppose the tower doesn't have WiFi for their entertainment - just contract the High School kids from Rancho Santa Fe Christian school to guard the beaches. And how many motorized devices do these guys need? A good portion of the beach is coned off for their raceway - I've seen mothers corral their kids as these guys race around. City officvials - watch BayWatch - they used their legs to get to the water, not the latest 4 wheeler toy. More waste in the public sector....
ReplyDeleteSanta Fe Christian is in Solana Beach. Sorry, it's an unfair comparison. I'm sure the guards do a good job, and yes I get that a new tower won't make them better swimmers.
DeleteThe issue is the tower is too expensive, not that lifeguards aren't doing their jobs.
-MGJ
Totally. And going to $13 million debt for these useless facilities. These councilmembers need to be fired. Along with incompetent city manager!
ReplyDeleteThe new McMansion lifeguard tower sounds like some of the fire stations.
ReplyDeleteJulie Graboi is the one to vote for. I have watched her before the city and Encinitas is buzzing with support for her! Finally a solid candidate for the people!
ReplyDeleteWhat is her position on :
DeleteSalaries??
Pensions??
Roads??
Trophy projects??
Leucadia streetscape ??
Roundabouts??
Etc etc etc...
Your blanket approval sounds similar to those that supported Shaffer, Kranz, Barth, Muir, Gaspar.
Without knowing her positions you are fooling to support anyone....
I'm sure you'll have an opportunity to ask Julie Graboi her positions at meet and greets or at candidate forums, 7:48.
DeleteWhy don't you tell us your position on all those questions? I venture you say no to high salaries, pensions, and "trophy projects," but you say yes to roads and roundabouts? And you don't consider roundabouts a trophy project, right?
Totally agree with you 2:10.
ReplyDeleteFACT
ReplyDeleteKristin Gaspen and friends spent $80,000 dollars on her last campaign for Council.DID SHE BUY THIS SEAT?
Man, you are grasping: you are not going to outwit everyone, son. Its called the 'Wisdom of the Crowd', Neizche... any chance you were born in Belgium?
DeleteJust for the sake of argument: your three candidates that you've been behind until they were elected to council didn't raise that much, are they any better or more honest for having raised less? They are equally imperfect as we all are. With hope, you put as much work and zeal into improving yourself and those around you, as you do trying to perfect Kristin.
I'd respond to you as 2:49, but I have a sneaking suspicion 5150 is more your style.
It's less about the amount, it's where the campaign money comes from. Gaspar is developer-funded, period. Meyer, Stocks, Andreen all firmly at her back. The others, while disappointing, were supported at the grass-roots level, by average citizens.
DeleteIf you want the BIA running your council person, by all means give your vote to Gaspar.
Follow the money, it's not given by out of state interests, physical therapists and retirement homes for nothing. If there's nothing wrong with it, why do they hide behind some many different organizations, names and shell corporations.
DeleteThe influence of money on politics, specifically our Encinitas politics is a legit issue. Whether the grass roots candidates are any better, effective or morally superior is a different argument, but if you don't completely have your head in the sand, you need to look at the money flowing into Gaspar, the info will be out there...
Once again, a moving target for your argument. First it was $80K, then its who put up the money: then, where does that money come from, who are the parents of the donors, you cannot just come out and tell everyone on this blog that you are just hateful and you've chosen Kristin to be your target, rather than take any responsibility for your immediate world. This 'legit' issue of money, exactly what happened politically that was caused by Kristin getting donations from her sorority sisters?
DeleteHow 'bout attempting to help and assist our leaders in solving some of the problems you see, rather than live to criticize?
8:40, you're obfuscating by claiming moving targets. I'm 7:29 and don't care about the $80K. What I do care about is where it came from and to whom the candidate is beholden.
DeleteI like honesty and I think 7:43 has good points. Your actions have consequences and people should know who has alliances. Since Gaspar is BIA bought and paid for, she will never be my candidate.
ReplyDeleteVote out all the incumbents. Just like last time, I will not vote for any incumbents in this next election. I may just cast one vote, but its better than voting in losers.
I'm with 7:43 on this issue as well. The question needs to be asked why most of Gaspar's contributors have been from out of town. Maybe she should move to those cities that support her. Obviously, she doesn't get much from Encinitas. I smell developer's lurking and waiting to plunge in on our city and our fairy princess is in the right seat to make that happen. Follow the money.
ReplyDeleteShe has a lot of support in Encinitas, too. That was obvious last Wednesday night.
Delete