Andrew Audet writing at Encinitas Beacon:
At the [March 12 City Council] meeting Mr. Vina invited the tax-raising specialist Lew Edwards to address the council on her process and services. During council discussion Ms. Edwards said most cities spend $100,000 dollars. When the council asked for a more detailed estimate of costs and scope of service, neither she nor Vina provided one.Excellent!
A Freedom of Information request revealed that just that morning Mr. Vina had received from Ms. Edwards a detailed email with the heading "Cost Estimates" that defined two proposals and had an estimate of $168,000 dollars, 68% more than the figure shared with the public. So why did Mr. Vina withhold the information?
Did Mr. Vina conspire with the contractor to mislead the council? In the email defining the cost estimate of $168,000 Ms. Lew recommended to Mr. Vina that they tell the council most cities spend up to $100,000. Why not just tell the council the proposed estimate?
That Ms. Lew was directing the city manager what to say is troubling. The city manager should represent taxpayers not contractors. One day after the emails were released Mr. Vina sent an email to all council members directing them to no longer discuss the tax hike by email. It seems there are things Mr. Vina would prefer the public not know.
On March 25 residents made a presentation to the council showing the emails that the city manager withheld financial information. The council took no action. In July the council gave Mr. Vina a job review in a closed session out of the view of the public. Before the meeting resident after resident asked the council to hold Mr. Vina accountable for his secrecy. The council took no action.
UPDATE: e-mails between Vina and Lew below the jump. I think we can safely assume the $77,500 option was never going to happen, because it ends at the time of ballot placement in July, and without Ms. Lew's services in persuading the public to vote yes, the whole effort would be worthless. And Ms. Lew was clear in the e-mail that $100,000 was the minimum that other cities spent, not that $100,000 was a valid estimate as the council and the public were led to believe.
UPDATE 2: The Internet never forgets! Thanks Anon 1:29! Here's what Barth wrote the weekend after the meeting (emphasis added, but red in original):
Fact Check: What we discussed was NOT to place a tax on the ballot but rather to understand the process and possible cost. The $100,000 was the estimated cost for research, polling, public outreach and the ballot measure.But who will Fact Check the Fact Checkers? I don't see anything on Lew's menu that would cost only $20,000. It's $25,000 just to sign her before she does any work! Who gave Barth that idea?
The purpose of the polling would be to get the public's input: Do they support a tax and if so for what purpose. It would cost far less than $100,000 and more likely around $20,000. Unlike the previous 'feel good' surveys the questions would be much more specific.
If polling showed there was strong support for the idea the city council would then have to vote to place a measure on the ballot. It would require a super majority of at least 4 votes. If the council agreed, then the public would vote on the measure. However, I doubt that would happen since Council members Gaspar & Muir have already said they would vote NO regardless of the public's opinion.
While you may not support the idea, a number of people I have spoken to say they would if it was for specific projects such as street improvements, more pedestrian RR crossing & quiet zones, open space and especially to purchase Pacific View. Others also told me they see it as a way to move these projects forward at a faster pace with everyone, residents and visitors who shop in Encinitas, paying for the improvements and it does NOT create any long term debt.
It is a topic worth discussing not just saying NO.
From: Gus Vina
Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2014 12:36 PM
To: Catherine V. Lew
Cc: Bettye Watkins; glennsabine@cox.net; Glenn Sabine
Subject: Re: Reply on Cost Ranges for City of Encinitas
Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2014 12:36 PM
To: Catherine V. Lew
Cc: Bettye Watkins; glennsabine@cox.net; Glenn Sabine
Subject: Re: Reply on Cost Ranges for City of Encinitas
Hi Catherine. Yes of course it would be in a subcommittee setting if at all. This council does enjoy the subcommittee approach but I think that could delay things in this case. I appreciate the additional information and we will stay in touch. Thx
Sent from my iPhone
Sent from my iPhone
Hi, Gus: Good to hear from you. I’ve sent Glenn some additional perspectives on how the RFQ is typically structured, that I’ve asked him to share with you.Re Council involvement in any interviews, I assume you mean a subcommittee of the Council in a non-Brown Act setting. Having any proposed city consultants interviewed in a Brown Act setting would be unorthodox if not unprofessional. Among other issues, technically competitors to those being interviewed could sit in on one another’s interviews, as could the media, which could report on our proprietary business approaches. Under those circumstances, LEG and our network of team partners would respectfully decline to participate.I very much enjoyed meeting you and your team, and look forward to being in touch further -- CatherineFrom: Gus Vina [mailto:gvina@encinitasca.gov]
Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2014 9:45 AM
To: Catherine V. Lew
Cc: 'Bettye Watkins'; glennsabine@cox.net; Glenn Sabine; Gus Vina
Subject: RE: Reply on Cost Ranges for City of EncinitasHi Catherine. Thanks for your presentation and good job. I will regroup with staff next week and then be in touch with you on next steps. Generally, we will prepare a staff report that presents to council a draft RFQ and I would then ask them to 1) approve the scope of the work, 2) appropriate funding, and 3) direct me on whether they want to interview potential proposers or leave that to staff's discretion.Thanks again and we'll be in touch. Enjoy the weekend.Gus
From: Gus Vina
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 10:48 AM
To: Catherine V. Lew
Cc: 'Bettye Watkins'; glennsabine@cox.net; Glenn Sabine
Subject: RE: Reply on Cost Ranges for City of EncinitasHi. I do remember you saying that. Sorry. Let me check with the Mayor so we can move that item up to the front. Six is good, but let me verify. thxFrom: Catherine V. Lew [mailto:catherine@lewedwardsgroup.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 10:40 AM
To: Gus Vina
Cc: 'Bettye Watkins'; glennsabine@cox.net; Glenn Sabine
Subject: RE: Reply on Cost Ranges for City of EncinitasOh! I thought I had specifically noted the need to travel to another location.
So what time should I actually come? I will come later then--CatherineFrom: Gus Vina [mailto:gvina@encinitasca.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 10:38 AM
To: Catherine V. Lew
Cc: 'Bettye Watkins'; glennsabine@cox.net; Glenn Sabine
Subject: RE: Reply on Cost Ranges for City of EncinitasHi Catherine. Thanks for the info. Great stuff. The TUT item this evening is almost last on the agenda so I apologize in advance…it will be late. If it starts to get too late I will work with the Mayor to see if we can move it in front of some of the other items. Looking forward to meeting you tonight.Thank you.From: Catherine V. Lew [mailto:catherine@lewedwardsgroup.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 9:38 AM
To: Gus Vina
Cc: 'Bettye Watkins'; glennsabine@cox.net; Glenn Sabine
Subject: RE: Reply on Cost Ranges for City of EncinitasGood morning, Gus: I’m looking forward to meeting you in person tonight. I am planning on being there at 6 pm—is that the right time?As I will be leaving shortly for the airport, I’ve copied Glenn on this email so he can deliberate with you as well. Best practices have changed significantly since our last collaboration with Glenn, which was:-Services to Placement only (March through July): LEG is only retained for city services up to placement of a measure on the ballot which is the model which was utilized in La Mesa and Vista with Glenn. Following the natural conclusion of LEG’s services to a city, LEG is retained by the community campaign committee.-Services through Election Day: Now, for virtually all of our cities, LEG is retained for legally permissible activities all the way up to Election Day which is what we’re doing in National City. This would include disseminating factual information from the City that includes the measure letter, following Labor Day.I’ve provided *ESTIMATED* costs below for each modelA. Services to Placement only (March-July):a. LEG Professional Fee--$25,000 plus $2,500 NTE Travel = $27,500b. Polling—depends on desired sample size/survey length, usually around $25,000c. Direct Mail—without knowing anything, two mailings are presumed—one early interactive and one late announcing placement of the measure $12,500/mailing = $25,000. **However, please note that the final number of mailings is not decided until after survey research and the number may increase depending on what survey results show.d. Possible total $77,500B. March through October Model:a. LEG Professional Fee--$39,500 plus $3,500 NTE Travel = $43,000b. Polling-- about $25,000c. Direct Mail—without knowing anything, four mailings are presumed= $100,000, with same proviso as above. Many of our successful cities implement five.d. Possible total $168,000You would know best what cost sensitivity, if any your Council has. My best recommendation is that we say that most cities spend a minimum of $100,000 (which is true) on effective planning for their TUTs and it could be more, depending on what the community’s initial reactions are. CatherineFrom: Gus Vina [mailto:gvina@encinitasca.gov]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 11:29 AM
To: Catherine
Cc: Bettye Watkins
Subject: RE: ReplyThank you. Yes, I would make sure Council knows it is very preliminary. The point I would make with council is that these efforts have to be very deliberate to be successful and there are costs that go with it. I would hate for them to take short cuts only to not achieve their goal.Thank you!!From: Catherine [mailto:catherine@lewedwardsgroup.com]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 11:28 AM
To: Gus Vina
Cc: Bettye Watkins
Subject: ReplyYes Gus I was planning on providing that to you tomorrow--however it would be very preliminary
Dictated/sent from my iPhone. Please excuse typos and brevity.
On Mar 10, 2014, at 10:30 AM, Gus Vina <gvina@encinitasca.gov> wrote:Hi Catherine. Hope you are doing well. I was wondering if you could provide me with an estimate (ballpark) on what a TUT effort could cost the city? I am expecting this question from the Council and while I recognize that until they decide on the scope of the effort it is difficult to provide costs, even a range would be helpful for the discussion this Wednesday.Thank you.From: Catherine V. Lew [mailto:catherine@lewedwardsgroup.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 7:20 PM
To: Gus Vina
Subject: Do you copy?Dear Gus: It was great to meet you today via telephone. This is my contact info! Looking forward to talking further about the City Council meeting on March 12th.Warmly,Catherine Lew, Esq.President/CEOThe Lew Edwards GroupFollow The Lew Edwards Group on Facebook!
I guess my only question for Mr. Audet would be whether the scope of the project with the estimate of $168K was the same as the scope of projects that "other cities typically spend" with the estimate of $100K. Clearly the council did not feel that they were deceived......
ReplyDelete- The Sculpin
Sculpin-That seems to be the problem in so many cases. Council never seems to feel it was deceived. And yet, they continually get deceived. For example the last minute bond issue over PV. If one believes the Council, the evening they heard about the bonds having to be possibly taxable bonds, they acted surprised. Teresa Barth still wanted to move forward, even then it would add an a lot of additional debt if we go that way. Over and over again, Council seems not to know what the City is doing. That bothers me. I'm not saying that the City should micromanage everything, but I am saying that they should know more than they do. There are many things that, if they know it, they are not saying. So are they being deceived, or are they just not very good at being a council member?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sculpin. I'm not sure this is a big issue.
ReplyDeleteIn business it's not uncommon to begin a negotiation with a quote that includes optional expenses that may get removed during the negotiation, because the buyer doesn't want or need them.
It's like getting a menu at a restaurant. It shows what's available, and what things cost, but it doesn't mean you have to order everything on the menu. It may well be true that an "average" city contracting process narrows the focus to a core set of services that total about $100K.
Really sleazy businesses do the opposite. They propose a low-ball number to win the business and get a signed contract. Then, after you are fully committed, they reveal a string of excluded services that cost more. My company loses business to sleazebags like that all the time. It sucks.
Lew conspired with Vina to mislead the public. Lew sent an email stating an estimate of $168,000.00 Lew then told Vina "we" should tell the council $100,000.00
Deletewhen the council asked for detailed estimate Lew and Vina said nothing.
Kranz made the motion to move forward with the tax hike process and said 'we need to tighten up the cost, all we have is a back of the napkin estimate" but Vina had the detailed estimate the whole time.
Barth then changed Kranz's motion, without making her own motion, from getting an estimate to "Direct the city manager to engage a firm"
Shaffer then asked for a detailed estimate, again Vina and Lew withheld the $168,000 estimate
Barth talked about it in her "news letter" the following Saturday. She said that it would be much LESS than $100,000, then wrote a $20,000 figure. After that and after public outrage, she said that she would not run for office again.
DeleteBottom line - Kranz, Shaffer and Barth tried to sneak in a TAX HIKE, with Gaspar and Muir voting no.
ReplyDeleteBottom line...
DeleteNo one tried to sneak in a tax hike. That is not true.
10:57-How about now with a taxable bond TO pay for PV? Is that a tax hike, or what would you say it is?
Delete10:57 they tried to sneak in the first part of a tax hike, the tax hike survey and getting it on the ballot.
DeleteBarth challenged Muir that night saying shouldn't we find out what people want, and Shaffer said hey, the citizens want the right to vote-
Barth, Vina, Kranz and Shaffer were set to spend $170,000 on a survey until the UT did an article about it and residents outed them-
Shaffer backed off not because it was a bad idea but until after the election
remember- Shaffer is on record that a tax hike taking money away from Encinitas families "sounds like a pretty good deal to me"-
That hike would have happened if a super majority vote had not been required. When Shaffer realized Council didn't have it, she backed off.
DeleteIt was manipulative, just like Shaffer and Kranz' support of the Right to Vote Initiative, and then backing off after they were installed in office, by gullible voters.
If a foia request got the letter, can we not just see the letter? There is too much spin even from the informed Mr. Audet to come to his same conclusions.
ReplyDelete10:50- Of course you can do an FOIA request for the letter. How about you do that, take the time out of your day, pay the fees, and then post it. I'm sure Wc would be most happy to post it, or just scan it into your comments. Too many people seem to think that just a few people should do all of the labor and pay 10 cents a copy for the labor, including going to City Hall and making sure that it is not a Friday when they are closed. Why don't you do us a favor and take one for the information team? Or if not that, you will just have to believe what is posted.
ReplyDeleteAre you kidding? He already has it. Refers to it. And rather than post it (which would be easy to do), he gives us his interpretation of the email contents. Why not just post it if its so damning?
Delete3:44 like it's his job to post something for you to see - fat stupid and lazy is no way to go thru life son
DeleteThanks Dean Wormer. Unlike so many of his defenders here, i don't take his interpretation as gospel. Glad he's there to give it and for the work he does though. Just disagree with a lot of his conclusions.
Deletehe didn't conclude anything. Vina got an estimate for $168,000. Vina withheld the information from the public.
DeleteI don't know if WC added this later, but I clicked on "see more," and I could read the public info request letters, here.
DeleteThanks, EU.
5:16pm Vina got an preliminary estimate with a range of between $75K and $168K (and it could have gone higher). He reported approximately $100K based on what other cities had spent on similar services. Nothing sinister there.
DeleteMr. Audet conveniently leaves out the fact that there was a range of estimates, and while he mentions the two proposals, he only gives the higher estimate price:
".. that defined two proposals and had an estimate of $168,000 dollars"
Wouldn't it have been more accurate to say "with estimates of $75K and $168K"?
Everybody has their take, and i appreciate Mr. Audets. And i thank EU for posting the entire email chain.
It disturbs me that there was an attempt to vote on this without all of the details being known and without a cost breakdown on what they were voting for.
10:50
ReplyDelete1. Contractor sends city manager email about cost estimates for work.
2. Contractor writes cost estimate of $168,000 dollars
3. Contractor then recommends telling council only $100,000
4. Later that night contractor claims $100,000
5. Council asks for more detailed scope and estimate
6. Contractor and City manager say nothing of detailed email received earlier
No spin, no conclusions to be drawn. Only the facts- Vina and the contractor withheld the $168,000 estimate from the public l
I believe Vina intentionally withheld the cost information because if the council knew it would be that much they would not go along with it.. Vina plays his cards pretty well, but in the end it will catch up with him.
DeleteI respect Mr. Audet for taking the time to get to the bottom of this matter. If it doesn't upset you as a taxpayer, then something is very wrong.
Audet again tilting at windmills and Gaspar and Muir always vote no.
ReplyDeleteThank you Don Quidik.
DeleteThanks for the update! But still, I'm not really seeing a conspiracy here. I guess Vina is being faulted for not providing a range of costs. Regardless, I don't even know how anyone could provide a range if they didn't understand the scope. So if we can agree that the city council is the one who ultimately decides on what the scope should be, the only valid number (and it's not that valid) is to ballpark what other cities have spent. Once the council was serious, then I would expect a more serious discussion of fees.
ReplyDeleteI think a far more egregious lapse in advice is the difference between taxable vs. tax-exempt bond. That kind of lapse can get you fired in the private sector. Fees associated with an un-scoped, undefined project is really a non-issue.
- The Sculpin
12:55 would have us ignore the scope of Option A and the scope of Option B- we'd be better off ignoring 12:55
DeleteThat was the night that Barth asked, can't we take action, even though this is agendized as an information item? And City Attorney Glenn Sabine, said yes.
DeleteBarth, Shaffer and Kranz' plan was foiled by the need for a super majority. City Manager Gus Vina loves hiring new staff, new members of his cabinet, and new contractors.
12:55 This is NOT a non-issue. It is a very important issue. When council votes on a project at a certain dollar amount, whether it is $100,000 or $168,000 it affects all of us. To say that it doesn't matter is nonsense. Maybe you over there in Olivenhain don't care how our money is being spent. The rest of us certainly do. Speak for yourself only.
ReplyDeleteOh please relax 1:04 - they weren't approving anything. There was no formal proposal outlining what the council wanted Edwards to do. This was discussion points only. As you can see, it went nowhere. Just to make it personal, under your view, if you meet a plumber at Home Depot, and he offhandedly tells you that it would cost $300 to put in a water heater at your house, are you bound to spend the money?
Delete..........and who else would I be speaking for?
- The Sculpin
1:10
DeleteIs a plumber a city manager?
Is a plumber asking for tax payer dollars?
Does a homeowner have a fiduciary duty to represent taxpayers?
Your logic is idiotic- as are your analogies
I'd tell you to buy a clue but likely you spent all your money on a plumber-
1:10 Oh please. Save your analogies for an audience who might give you a standing ovation. Your logic is too flawed.
DeleteSculpin, you're wrong on this. There was a plan to take action. But it would have taken four.
DeleteThat "survey" for $25K, not $20K, was only a small piece of the pie in the sky.
If I recall, it was listed on the Agenda as an "information item," and Mayor Barth said that they could vote on it. More work by the weaselette for the weasely City Manager. Council is supposed to work for Encinitas citizens and not Gus Vina.
DeleteThis is just a further indication that Andrew Audet and many commenters here don't know how the world works. This is a nothing burger but it does inflame the troops which I'm sure is the real reason for this post.
ReplyDeleteWatching Audet speak before the council highlights two things. Audet is mightily impressed with himself and he loves a good audience.
1:40 At least Andrew Audet has the guts to confront someone when they see there is a little behind the scenes negotiating going on, the full picture not being presented to council so they can make informed decisions on behalf of US, the taxpayers.
DeleteMr. Audet does not get paid for doing this. He does it because he cares. We all should care that we have HONEST people representing us. WE pay their salary and if they are misleading the public, perhaps it's time we get rid of them.
I also believe Mr. Audet makes a difference. I would love to put the two of you together and see what bulb burns brighter. I guarantee it won't be yours.
1:40
DeleteThe city manage has a responsiblity to work for taxpayers. Vina withheld financial information from the council. It is clear from the emails he conspired with the contractor to mislead the public.
The city is in bad financial shape. Vina violated the public trust. He and the contractor were asked for specific information and they withheld it-
In you world ethics don't matter, trust has no value and representing taxpayers is last on the list- nice neighborhood- say hello to Shaffer Barth Kranz, Dalager and Jerome Stocks when you pass them on your street
"it is clear from the emails"
Deleteshould read
"it is clear from Mr. Audet's interpretation of the emails"
until he posts the email
i see its now posted -- just looking at the comment updates and not the updated article
DeleteThank you, Andrew Audet. Good work.
DeleteIf Vina can not be trusted to give the council important information, what else has he done or will he do in the future to mislead the council and the taxpayers to get his way?
ReplyDeleteI believe this man has no morals and certainly does not have Encinitas on the top of his list. We are getting screwed by this city manager and the council is too blind to see what is happening. They are not listening to the residents who speak before them. We get ignored and they go on their merry little way making one bad decision after another.
It is hard to believe that we have five of the dumbest people sitting in one place at one time and making decisions on our behalf. I thought some of the past councils were bad, but this one is getting close to when Stocks and some of the other fruit cakes were sitting beside him.
Update 2- Interesting update that Barth made up the $20,000 figure-
ReplyDeleteAlso, she writes that the all in cost was only $100,000 but the all in cost from Lew Edwards was actually $168,000 + if you read her email to Vina, the scope of option B included the possiblity of more survey's- so $168,00 was the low end.
Was Barth in on it?
Interesting, read Barth's email closely
ReplyDeleteThe Barth Shaffer Vina plan (Tony is too stupid to hatch a plan, he just goes along) was to use Lew Edwards and peak democracy to try and "educate" the public that a tax hike was good-
they then planned to use that manipulated data to try and force Muir and Gaspar to put it on the ballot by wrongly claiming it it is what the people want
the plan got blown up with the FOI and the UT writing about it, Shaffer said the issue had become politized.
If Blakespear is elected will she follow thru after the election with the Barth plan? It only takes 3 to get it on the ballot.
I thought it took 4 out of 5 council members to vote to put something on the ballot. Has this changed?
Delete3:45
DeleteThe plan was
1. Three people vote to approve Lew Edwards
2. lew Edwards cooks up a survey that says 98% want a tax hike, supported by the city spin doctor and peak propaganda
3. Barth and her cronies then seek to shame Gaspar or Muir to put it on the ballot (that is when the 4th vote is needed)
4. once on the ballot the city spends more on PR and Spin to pass it
Notice how in her newsletter Barth takes her marching orders from Debbie Wasserman Shultz to try and paint Muir and Gaspar as the party of no- this is why Encinitas has non-partisan elections, put the people first, not the ideology~
Then notice how Barth says people would support a tax hike for Pacific View- after they paid 10Million
When residents asked Barth,Shaffer Kranz to negotiate a better price after due dilgence the three said No-
my bad 3:45, I meant to write it only takes three to start the survey
Deletewhat a little liar Barth is-
ReplyDeleteOf course they discussed placing a tax hike on the ballot
why else would they have invited Lew Edwards in? There would have been no reason to discuss the cost and process unless they were discussing putting it on the ballot
Good riddance Teresa-
While I have never been a supporter of Barth (this is why), I read this a little differently. This is a case of reading or hearing what you want to hear, rather than taking the time to understand what is in front of you. It appears Barth thought that you could do a poll for about $20K (actually $25K) without having to pay Edwards their initial "professional fee". It's in the Estimate - section A.2 and B.2. Why on earth she thought the city could do that I have no explanation for.
ReplyDeleteWhat I do know is very few of the council members are deliberative by nature. I get the sense they don't spend much time immersed in the detail. What is somewhat heartening is that Graboi and Blakespear seem to be far more deliberative. Julie couldn't have handled DR without careful review of everything that passes by her desk - and Blakespeare's profession demands deliberation. It's really too bad they're running against each other..........
- The Sculpin
To be fair to Teresa, I have spoken to her many times when she had to leave early so she could do her homework for her meeting. That said, I can't answer why she would think that, and I don't have info on hand either way. I would definitely want clarification there. Maybe she got worn out with all the b.s. she had to put up with the first 4 years. All I can say is I know she tried, and she cares. If she came up short in the deliberative process she's not alone, and at least she tried, unlike Gaspar, Dallager, Guerin, sometimes Stocks and Bond....
DeleteBarth and Stocks, separated at birth. Exact same in smarts and (bad) attitude.
DeleteNobody is as bad as Stocks....
DeleteStocks is an arrogant ugly A-hole. Too bad Muir and Gaspar are still friends with the idiot.
DeleteBottom feeder, all you ever put out here is to act as an apologist and an enabler to these sycophants in our midst.
ReplyDeleteAs usual, no thanks for the waste that you bring here and what you, as the bottom feeder that a sculpin is, live on.
Spare us your tripe or actually get out of your slimey depths and come to a council meeting or two. You might even recognize some of your fellow sculpins that we have too many of on staff and council. It would probably be old home week for you if you ever cared enough actually show up.
3:53 I agree with your comments. Bottom feeders usually stay at the bottom.
ReplyDeleteSculpin: I agree with your assessment. Both Julie and Catherine are educated women and do their homework. This particular Council, with the exception of Shaffer (who has a Ph.D. but is really not interested in doing her homework) is perhaps one of the least intelligent of all the Councils' I have seen since incorporation. One doesn't have to be a college graduate to be intelligent, if one does their homework. But it does help, especially in matter related to financial things. I think they are all in "over their heads" when it comes to matter of financial importance, even though are current Mayor says she is a CFO. I realize Gaspar has a college degree, but it is in broadcast journalism, not a really tough major (no offense to any others that have that same degree). None of them have a financial background, and that is what we desperately need right now.
ReplyDeleteSo, lowly citizens continue to do FOIA requests and then get slammed for doing them, especially by the Council. In the next week or so I will be sharing something with Wc, and perhaps he or she will post it. But I have to wait until the person I wrote to responds. I have given him a week. Then I go public. It might not mean anything to most people, but, I did some homework in the very little spare time I have ( I work full time like a lot of you) and it needs to be shared. You may think it stupid, or maybe not. But here's the problem. Why should citizen have to do all of this? Why can't we trust our own City Council to do the right thing in the first place?
The citizens of this community, who voted, voted in Prop. A. Perhaps it doesn't represent all of the citizens, but in a democracy, if you don't vote, you really can't complain. The problem is we don't get to vote for Vina, Sabine, or staff. The Council does that. Therefore, it would occur to me we need intelligent people up there. In a community with one of the highest rates of educated people in this County, it shouldn't be that hard to get 5 thoughtful and respectful people up there. But, unfortunately, it seems to be the case. Of all of the Councils' you have seen since incorporation, can you name 5 people that have already been on the Council that you think would be good to have again? I can, but I would love a response from you, or anyone else.
Dennis Holz, Dennis Holz, Dennis Holz, Dennis Holz, Sheila Cameron.
DeleteDefinitely Dennis Holz, but not the current Sheila. The 20 years ago Sheila yes.
DeleteCurrent Sheila better.
DeleteDennis Holz for sure. I think Jim Bond was intelligent in his early years. That doesn't mean I always agreed with him, but he seemed to know what he was talking about. In his later years, well that's a different story. I haven't lived here long enough to know how the original council's stack up.
DeleteCurrent Sheila is not up to the challenge, not in any way. She will trail Gaspar and Tony by a wide margin.. Gaspar will be the mayor....ugh...
DeleteThis is just a bunch of regurgitated nonsense to rile the masses.
ReplyDeleteThe EU posts a recent post from the EB that just reurgitates a post from the EU. Hyberbole at its finest.
You're begining to sound just like the lame 24/7 media outlets on cable that like to pose as real news sources but really just chase ratings for talking heads who play to whims of their selected base.
A purley partisan entertainment echo chamber on this blog for those who reside only in their safe and skewed bubbles of reality and wish to remain ignorant of the real world around them.
4:10 sounds like someone is concerned that non-profit journalism is having an impact. Keep at it WCV - the public has a right to know!
DeleteCould it be Barth and Shaffer are having people question their bogus newsletters and unethical actions? Pretty soon Teresa your walking group will be you alone- people are finding out
That's not journalism, but nice try....
DeleteWatch out for Kranz while you are walking. He can throw a mean tantrum on the sand!
Delete4:10-That may be the funniest, and most stupid, thing that has been said on this blog in a very long time. Are you saying that a few citizens like spending a lot of money on FOIA requests (they are not free, by the way) and then make up elaborate conspiracy theories just for their own amusement? Hell, if that's the case, there is a book deal waiting for them. And, they would actually make money, rather than shell it out to the city.
ReplyDelete4:18
DeleteYes, that's it in a nutshell.
Emphasis on NUT! There seems to be alot of them on this blog.
Glad you got a laugh. Thanks.
Well said 4:10, it's starting to get very Alex Jones on the blog....
DeleteWTH is a "Community campaign committee" ? That Lew Edwaerds group is one slick outfit
ReplyDeleteAnd what is this crap- She worked with Sabine to apss tax hikes in La Mesa and Vista
cronisym
I know Sabine is also City Attorney for La Mesa, where Art Madrid has been mayor, seems like forever. But I didn't get the Vista reference? I wondered about that, too. How would Sabine have any say on what happens in Vista?
DeleteWe need a dedicated City Attorney, who doesn't get paid by the hour.
8:40- Because Sabine has far more reaching power than you many know at this time.
Delete4:08 sounds like our old time Mayor Sheila. There is no former council person that would get a second chance, especially as Mayor. Surprise!
ReplyDeleteHope Sheila gets voted in. She has support in Leucadia for sure.
DeleteSheila was fantastic at the last forums
DeleteSheila's a crazy fool. Many in leucadia. Know she is a KLCC wacko!
DeleteThanks for your endorsement, crap master. With you against Sheila and Julie, their chance of winning rises.
DeleteAnd if either doesn't win, both of them would be a shoe-in in 2016. Remember, Tony didn't make it the first time, when only two seats were open, same as now. There will be four seats open, next election, three council seats, and the mayor's seat.
New Encinitas will vote Gaspar in, while the coastal sections will divvy up Cameron and Kranz.
DeleteCrazy Cameron and the KLCC platform will never win… they support keeping the crappiest parts of Leucadia unsafe, ugly and stinky- just like their own lives. Wait and see- they will get trounced. Talk is cheap and I predict no better than Barbara Yost last election.
Delete--Peaceful Encinitas Parent
You are not "peaceful" when you stand in judgment of other people's lives, labeling them "stinky," More poo-poo projections on your part.
DeleteI think 4:08 is Ms. Greene getting ready to try and unravel some deep dark secrets about her dear friend Glenn Sabine.
ReplyDelete$abine - the $10 million dollar man? Cha Ching! Bilk the rubes (city) while no one (city council, voters) is paying attention.....
DeleteIt seems Sabine needs to be investigated after he is fired. The city deserves a refund.
DeleteNot going to happen...The best outcome you can hope for is Sabine leaving.
Delete7:04- You may be right. But what is coming is going to be brutal for Sabine and it will go directly to City Council in Oral Communications. WIll let Wc know when the show goes on. Perhaps it will happen before the elections, because it will also expose some others who just happen to be running. Just saying a a little bird told me. And, funny thing, it wasn't Ms. Greene.
DeleteIsn't questioning honesty in politics like questioning to much bleach in the klan's hoods?
ReplyDeleteFOIA = Freedom of Information Act. It's a federal law having to do with getting federal government documents. The Public Records Act is a California state law having to do with getting municipality, county and state documents. The requests are called Public Records Requests. If you like abbreviations, call one a PRR. If you submit a FOIA request to the city, they won't know what you're talking about.
ReplyDelete6:28- Here is how you write it to the City andy they WILL respond: "Pursuant to the California Public Records Act, and the Freedom of Information Act, I request the following:" Then put in what you want. The City then has 10 working days to make sure you get it. You will have to pay 10 cents per copy if you want paper copies, and it's a good idea to get them, as many times in the past, the City denies, or loses, whatever was requested if asked again.
ReplyDelete7:14 is right. I have always worded it that way, as I was told to do so by an attorney, who has also requested a lot of stuff from the City. It has always worked. I have received what I wanted and received it within 10 working days. I have, over the years, paid a great deal of money, at least by my standards, and I have piles of paper in a file cabinet, but I can go back and look to see if the City is telling the truth. And, as it happens, many times they don't. And that is why I believe, this blog and other independent sources are of such great value. Newspapers have to be very careful about what they print. There are a lot of Marco's in the world. And, as we have seen, they love to sue cities for whoever they are representing.
DeleteThe Freedom of Information Act is a federal law for federal government documents. It has nothing to do with Encinitas city documents. For city documents, you make a public records request. The Public Records Act is a state of California law. It makes responding in 10 days mandatory.
DeleteIf you doubt, Google to find out!
CPRA = California Public Records Act
DeleteSo one can submit a CPRA request, and expect the documents within 10 days.
Why is no one mentioning the $77K estimate?
ReplyDeleteAnswer: it doesn't fit the narrative.
It's really clear to an objective observer what went down here:
The contractor was asked to provide guidance on a cost estimate range. The contractor returned a high and a low scenario, defining the end points in the range. The high end of the range is more than double the low end. That's a big spread. To be a little more helpful and narrow the range, she offered up that most cities end up with a package at or above $100k. Obviously, a final number can't be known until the city clarifies what services they want (e.g. How many direct mails? Four? One? Zero?)
Sculpin is right about Theresa's 20K. She obviously thought we could contract a la carte for just a survey, and nothing else. It's a mistake, not evidence of evil.
Sometimes this crowd rally's around things that matter. Then there's now.
It was not a mistake and not necessarily evidence of evil. It was certainly evidence of deception on the public. Barth cleverly switched the agenda item from informational to action. But she forgot that a super majority was needed to put the tax increase on the ballot. Both Gaspar and Muir stated that they would not vote to put the tax increase on the ballot, so the plan collapsed.
DeleteBarth was angry when she wrote her newsletter. She threw out the $20,000 figure for a survey because that is close to what the city had paid in the past for the Satisfaction Surveys done in election years. But the city writes the questions itself. Did she think Lew Edwards would write the questions for free? Barth, Shaffer, and Kranz were ready to start the process and would have gone for the whole tamale if Gaspar and Muir hadn't overturned the bowl of masa. ¡Dios mÃo!
7:48 nice try-
DeleteBarth read teh whole estimate as she said $100,000 in her newsletter- try again
Lew told Vina to say 100,000, after quoting him $168,000 plus- try again
there was no mistake- when the council asked for specific estimates and scope Vina withheld the information
ps- Barth changed Kranz's first motion requesting getting more cost information to "direct the city manager to engage a firm"
yes, it's evil, Barth was in on hoodwinking the taxpayers
7:48 you remind me of wehn Jerome stocks was exposed for the being financially incompetent when he responded to a Coast news column trying to convince residents that the interest the city paid on the hall park debt should not be considered part of the 'purchase price" - he looked like a financial moron and he was exposed for it
DeleteBarth knew all along she wanted to the Lew Edwards survey- that is why she cahnged Kranz's motion to "direct the city manager to engage a firm"
If Barth really thought the public should vote then whey won't she put the PV Bonds on the ballot for a general obligation bond requiring a vote
Barth has been exposed as an ethical fraud, you can try to make excuses for her, but you can't hide the facts
Sculpin is a fool and council needs to be fired for keeping loser Vina.
ReplyDeleteWhat can't be denied is that Kranz, Barth and Shaffer supported increasing our sales tax!
ReplyDeleteAgreed . All of Council sucks and needs to be replaced.
ReplyDeleteHas anyone else noticed that the Peak Democracy site has not taken another survey? Are we still paying for this service?
ReplyDeleteYes, it's now called e-town hall. You are welcome to register, have your IP discovered, and be tracked.
DeleteAnd before y'all get in a twist about "yeah, right, like they'd do that," there are loads of people who think otherwise and won't participate. You don't need to be suspicious of the city to be wary of privacy issues, whether it's your credit card at Target or some fledgling system at city hall.
8:23,
DeleteCan we assume that you wear a paper bag over your head at council meetings (unknown comic reference, anyone? anyone?)? And you only communicate with city staff or elected officials through email anonymizers? I'm sure your 8:23 post was made from the library, right?
Nah.
You just don't like the fact that when more people participate, it becomes clear that the 10 people who seek to dominate the conversation are a tiny minority. Your claim that the masses are terrified to use the system is a very convenient explanation for why your opinions are exposed as a minority viewpoint on e-town hall.
The real problem with Peak Democracy is that it is unscientific sampling, so it doesn't represent the opinions of a random sample of citizens. It's open to manipulation by the city. By design the city hoped to steer public opinion in a predetermined direction. What happened to the promised openness and transparency?
DeletePublic speakers at city council meetings are also unscientific sampling, right? Should we end that practice as well?
DeleteAs of "open to manipulation by the city," it's true that the city gets to frame the question, and pick the topic. But how is this different from the city's ability to define agenda items and create staff reports for regular city council meetings? Aren't city council agenda items equally "open to manipulation by the city?"
The system isn't perfect. It has the same flaws that the traditional city council meeting has. But it's more convenient for more citizens; it has the advantage of giving council a broader base of feedback. Example: the Off-Leash Dog Park topic brought 601 responses. If that topic was on the agenda at a regular council meeting, would 601 people show up? If they did, could the council conceivably listen to 601 speakers at 3 min each? That would be over 30 hours of testimony.
How do we know Peak Democracy responses are from real residents and not a bunch of fake accounts created by special interest groups to create the illusion of popular support for something?
DeleteAt a council meeting, you have to be a real person for your opinion to count.
Because to setup an account, you have to use a real Encinitas address. Any organized effort by pressure groups to create a large number of bogus accounts could be discovered pretty quickly, as people try to register but can't because the address has already been used.
DeleteI signed up for e-town hall and I only see that the City has asked one question about off leash dogs at certain parks. Is tis the only question that has been asked? If so, seems like a waste of money.
DeleteAnd also, there are more efficient and proven ways to influence public policy, like robo-calls, misleading mailers, and hiring stalker clowns.
DeleteIf any group gets busted manipulating E-Town Hall, it's highly unethical, and highly detrimental to whatever cause they are advocating. It would be really really stupid to take that kind of chance.
12:18,
DeleteWhy would the system allow only one account per address? People living with family members and roommates aren't allowed to voice their opinions?
12:26,
DeleteNo, those are ways to influence public opinion.
Manipulating Peak Democracy is about giving the council what they want -- fake opinion data to support what they want to do anyway (like mass upzoning -- just wait for the Housing Element survey!).
EU - I really don't think that's an issue. What confounds me is the schizophrenic opinion of the council on this board - most will agree that they're bumbling fools that can't find their way out of a paper bag during the meetings, but behind the scenes they are Machiavellian masterminds and so technically savvy that they can corrupt an entire polling system to get their desired result - it's simply astounding!!!
Delete- The Sculpin
Sculpin,
DeletePeak Democracy was Vina's suggestion, I believe (as was hiring a full-time Communications Director).
I don't believe many here would call the council members Machiavellian masterminds. Some would probably label Vina and developers as such, and the council as bumbling fools doing their bidding.
I'm not endorsing that view, just pointing out that it's not at all internally inconsistent.
No masterminds in the entire bunch. However, lots of outsiders looking in, so to speak. The question then becomes "Who is really running City Hall?" They hire a Communications Specialist, and fire and code enforcement person. Let's see, one hasn't done anything that the community can see, and the other was fired for-well who knows?
DeleteThough if anyone is a mastermind in that group, it would be Barth. She was twice elected with the support of the Community Character gang, and waited until she had a council majority to reveal herself as a Smart Growth ideologue.
DeleteIf any of the council were masterminds they would have fired Vina and Sabine a long time ago. They are all a weak bunch that will go along with what they are told to do. You can label Vina as "the great manipulator". You can label council "dumb as hell".
DeleteThis Peak Democracy is a bunch of manipulation on the part of Vina. They only want to hear the good things. Anything beyond that, they won't look at. After all, Vina's reputation is on the line.
UNCLE!
Delete- The Sculpin
Not buying the Smart Growth bit on Barth, that would be giving her too much credit, on a blog that doesn't give her any credit....
Delete-MGJ
What part do you not buy?
DeleteShe's quite open about her Smart Growth views now, and it's undisputed that many of the people who worked to get her elected and re-elected were community character types who had no idea about Barth's views as she cleverly maintained her silence.
MGJ
DeletePerhaps you don't get Barth's propaganda newsletter- you know all that trust and transparency crap from the only mayor in Encinitas history to lie on a ballot statemetn
Every week Barth includes an article about stack and pack regional density housing centers- how millenials can't buy houses and want to ride bikes and how seniors want to downsize- it is all right out of "Building One America" google, read and weep, right of Chicago
Yes, Chicago, the same city that donated thousands to the defeat A effort
An article over that the Encinitas Beacon pointed at the 4 weeks ago Stack and pack caveman lawyer Marco Gonzalez wrote a high density op-ed and then 2 weeks later Shaffer tried to redefine the term community character -- 2 weeks later the HEU was rolled out- coincidence? I think not
Barth is an unethical fraud, a charlatan. She promotes this stack and pack so she can sound good when she goes to the regional meetings-
I voted for Barth, if I could give her a swift kick in the ass on her way out the door I would- but of course I would not
How do you know her position didn't evolve on smart growth, and again, what entails a smart growth viewpoint? You can't allege something without defining that term to begin with. You need to define the tennets of smart growth and then explain actions Barth as taken to put those in place, and why it's a bad thing..
DeleteOtherwise you're just running your yapper....
I don't get it. Here's the thing, though, Teresa will be out of here in what, 2-3 months? So you'll have to find something else to fixate on.
DeleteI voted for Teresa and I'm fine with my vote. I'll take Teresa, Tony and Lisa over Jerome, Jim, Danny, Guerin, Duvivier any day. Those are the choices in our town.
The big issue is still density bonus. That's the true stack and pack in our town...
-MGJ
9:12,
DeleteSmart Growth: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_growth
Barth's quotes and approving links on Smart Growth are numerous. Here's just one example: http://encinitasundercover.blogspot.com/2013/05/barth-seniors-and-young-people-want.html
We know her position didn't suddenly "evolve," because, unlike Kranz and Shaffer, Barth never signed the Prop A petition.
9:16 Barth Shaffer kranz have voted the exact same way Danny, Jim and Stocks would have on desert rose, Prop A, Fulvia, Balour and the others-
DeleteThey are the same. Danny- first Mayor to pled guilty to the DAS, Stocks, first mayor to be caught hanging signs, Barth- first Mayor to sign her name to a ballot statment lie sent to every voter in the city
Those are the facts- time to elect new people
Another crappy decision brought to you by Gus Vina and blessed by our Crappy City Council. The longer Vina stay in as City Manager, the worse Encinitas will be in the future. Hey - I know, how about two more years of Strategic Planning?
ReplyDeleteThat way, nothing get done ( because they are planning) and Vina can then retire after 2 years at full pay forever!!!!
Excellent!
Around the time of the Lew Edwards issue, Shaffer brought up the issue of parking meters with some comment like, "Who says we shouldn't have parking meters downtown?" They were in search of quick money no matter how much blowback they would get.
ReplyDeleteGreat financial shape? Really?
Weren't they also advertising pavers at the reg'l sports park for purchase??
DeleteNext week the city will be "seeking feedback to help determine fees for services."
Deletehttp://www.ci.encinitas.ca.us/index.aspx?page=30&recordid=835&returnURL=%2findex.aspx
The city won't be lowering fees or even leaving them at the same level. Fees are going up for sure! Obviously the city is not in great financial shape.
Come one, come all. There will be refreshments and prizes!! Space is limited, so RSVP to reserve a space.
Really?
Shouldn't the city be encouraging its employees to take public transportation? Why not parking meters for employees at City Hall?
Delete9:29, Why yes. Just look how close city hall is to the transit center. What a beautiful example of how it could work today. Employees would love adding at least 2 hours to each workday waiting for buses / trains. It would give them a lot of time to catch up on this blog and War Craft. The only drag is when one out of 8 times the bus is either late or misses an entire hour. But I'm sure the system at city hall could work something out for compensation.
Delete9:29 Yes. These council people should lead by example. They all need to get on their bikes and pedal to work. Just think how much weight they would lose after a year Oh, and they should pay for parking their cars if they won't ride a bike. Or, they could walk to work.
ReplyDeleteA discrepancy of $68,000 makes me wonder - who's in on the take?
ReplyDeleteWhy did Catherine Lew. Feel the need to write and put (which is true) in paranthesis? Why did she qualify it, like she was already scheming to mislead
ReplyDeleteNot sure, but she was slick at the meeting and saved her biggest grin for Vina.
DeleteForget emails. Follow the grins.
DeleteCity government is run by insiders who feather their own nests and cater to the element that promises the biggest return. They rely on the ambivalence of the general electorate and try to discredit the activists who expose their motivations. Vina is a dictator and he has a council that get mesmerized by double talk. We need new blood all the way around in City Hall.
ReplyDeleteblah, blah, blah.......
Delete4:54 PM Did you miss your medication schedule????
DeleteAs if city hall would be run by outsiders....
DeleteWhere does Vina leave? I understand it is "outside" of Encinitas.
DeleteI mean "Live"
DeleteI think he used to rent by the Garden View Post Office but now he rents in Carlsbad.
DeleteHe's got short-timer's syndrome. He'll be out of here on a huge pension as soon as he can.
That's great. We have a city manager and city attorney that do not live in our city. No wonder it is run like they don't care.
DeleteThats the facts, but yet the City Council gives them glowing reviews.
DeleteIn order for Encinitas to improve, both must go. Vote out all incumbents.
That means Gaspar in this election...
Delete10:11, name a city where both the city manager and attorney live in that city...
Delete9:10 You go first since I don't follow politics in other cities.
DeleteVina's a dictator? Really?
ReplyDeleteVina is evil? Really?
Again just more hyperbole.
To equate Vina as an evil dictator and the Council's puppet master is absurd on it's face, has no merit and makes you all sound like a bunch of hysterical drama queens.
Your superior intellect seems to have some cognitive dissonance.
You are a complete idiot. Vina is the biggest problem in Encinitas and City Council does nothing. In fact, they give him a excellent review.
DeleteAll of City Council needs to be replaced.
5:41 PM -- You keep repeating the same thing. Before it was Barth, now it's Vina. Really? Really? Really?
DeleteHow about giving some examples of the beneficence and magnanimity of both Barth and Vina? Until then, "evil" and "dictator" still stand. It looks like you're the drama queen. Get off your throne.
Again, Barth is almost out. Let's move on to the current election....
DeleteEvil? That's your own addition. Apparently you see something that I don't.
ReplyDeleteYou've made your own conclusions and call it cognitive dissonance (whatever that is) - apparently your are schizophrenic.
And, yes - Vina is a dictator - really!
DeletePlease look up evil in a dictionary and while you're at it look up dictator and schizophrenic too.
DeleteIt's you're, not your are. Dunderhead!
It's you're not your, Hasbro.
Delete6:14 PM Linguistically challenged.
DeleteDuplicitous, lying, withholding, manipulative, misleading, I'm going to give him the evil title.
ReplyDeleteBased on the collective opinions expressed on this blog over several years, can we agree that one of the following two statements must be true:
ReplyDelete1.) Encinitas government (city council, city manager, city attorney, directors, commissions, and staff) is generally corrupt, incompetent, financially inept, morally bankrupt, abusive, dismissive, manipulative, stupid, conspiratorial, mean, secretive and power hungry.
This statement also applies to most past council members and city managers as well. Most actions of the city should be interpreted harshly, and assumed to be evil in some way.
2.) Many of the regular contributors to this blog have a credibility problem.
It's either one or the other, right?
#1 is the correct answer
Delete#1 definitely!
DeleteBoth and neither. There's too much hyperbole on here. No one on this board works inside city hall (that we know of), so most of what's posted here is pure conjecture.
DeleteThere will always be staff and elected officials down at city hall that some people don't like. The irony is that people will never be happy, that is all the people won't be happy no matter who's in office.
The bottom line is we now have two things in Encinitas: 1.) Very expensive properties and 2.) a lack of available space. With these two things you are now going to get clashing from here to eternity.
It's all about property values and state of mind, do I have enough space, what should be developed, what money should be spent? Will city hall do what I Want!
We're in the age of anxiety and drama, get used to it, it's not going away.
-MGJ
MGJ conjecture-? Barth lied on Prop A, Vina withheld information from the public, Shaffer took a position of wanting a tax hike- these are not fabrications, they are facts.
DeleteMGJ-Actaully several people from the City post on this blog. And, many more read it. Then they laugh and figure out strategies around some of this stuff. That's why smart people don't post everything they know on this blog, because they know that too. All I can say as I really don't want to lose my job.
Delete9:08 So it is a good thing that housing is so expensive that the younger families can't afford to buy and live here?
DeleteYou have yours, so screw everyone else?
I don't like your thinking at all. The drama would be if you moved and let someone else in. How about that? Then you would be full of anxiety. Get real.
2:04 - Housing being expensive is neither a good thing or a bad thing - it just is. Younger families can afford to buy and live here - they just happen to be very different from you or I when we were their age!! But then again, we were different from our parents. Yes, I have mine, and no, I don't want everyone else to be screwed, but I (and most likely you too) had to bust my butt to get what I have, why should my kids (or your) be any different?
Delete- The Sculpin
I beg to differ with you bottom feeder. If you have been doing any reading of the news lately you will find that the younger families are being priced out of CA in terms of living here. They are packing up and moving on to where it is affordable. I can't say that I blame them. Yes, and even though they do work extremely hard, it is still almost impossible to own a home here with 20 per cent down payment required.
DeleteGet up to speed bottom feeder and you will find that it is not like the old days when WE could afford a home. The costs of living here are high and the salaries are not keeping up.
Looks like we haven't left the young ones a very good legacy except big expenses and it doesn't seem likely to change.
California's loss, another states gain.
Correct! It's # 1 !
ReplyDelete7:07- Stupidity comes in many forms, as does caring for your community. You decide what is right.
ReplyDeleteSo at tonight's planning mtg., Kranz suggested re-doing our design guidelines. Um, why? They get in the way of flipping favors to his developer buds?
ReplyDeleteHe must have a new freebie trip from a non profit organization on his to do list. Leichtag got what they wanted after Tony had his free trip of $5,400 from the San Diego Jewish Foundation. Remember, politicians can get arrested for taking bribes, but $5,400 freebie trips are OK.
ReplyDeleteIt's legal if you declare it and it's under the limit. It was and he did. This is not a bribe, and trying to say it's one is pretty uncool.
DeleteNot a bribe? HA! A small town local councilman gets a $5,400 free trip then uses his voting power to favor a not so distance connection? It was "uncool" of Kranz to take the $5,400 for the trip. He needs to be investigated.
DeleteNot if it's legal there, Perry Mason. Somewhere on this blog the limit was stated, and it sounded legal. If it's illegal, prove it. If not, zip it or enjoy having Gaspar as your mayor....
DeleteDo you know how many kitchen stoves Dalager could buy with the $5,400 that Kranz just got from his special interest friend? How ironic!
ReplyDeleteIt wasn't the kitchen stove that was really the issue, it was the attempts to trade favors down at the bank. Tony has nothing similiar. He took the trip, he declared it, end of story unless you can prove a direct quid pro quo.
Deletenothing to the story?
DeleteKranz- deep local roots- so he says
One month after being elected he's spotted at a private party with papa doug manchester- soon after tony votes against residents at Desert Rose
During the bar debate tony is seen drinking and smoozing with bar owners and high density lawyer Marco Gonzales, he then votes against residents
Tony gets a free ride to Israel, the votes in favor of his developer buddy at the jewish run Leichatag center
Kranz- Corruptible Kranz - my baloney has a first name, it's T-O-N and Y
THis is all the same tired old b.s. Here's the deal boys and girls. The winner of the election for mayor will be Tony or Kristin. Those are your real choices. Sheila will be a distant 3rd.
DeleteGaspar has done plenty of schmoozing herself. IF you can prove an illegal maneuver with Tony on the Israel Trip, then prove it. As far as I can tell, he reported it, it was inside the allowable limits, and is totally kosher, no pun intended.
While your spending all your time bashing tony, ask yourself this. What will Encinitas look like with Gaspar as Mayor?
Not so tired old b.s. The trip to Israel took place before Tony cast his vote on expanding Accessory Use on the Leichtag property. This allowed Leichtag to move their corporate offices from Carlsbad to the ranch on Saxony, even though the offices weren't agriculturally related. At best it looks like poor judgment when a recusal was appropriate. At worst it looks like quid pro qua for his vote.
DeleteYeah, and a month or two of rent of the offices near Legoland saved enough money to cover the trip.
Delete3:25 I shudder to think of Gaspar as mayor. She has shown me nothing so far in her years on council.
DeleteShe is too much of a developer's friend and a puppet of Stocks and now Andreen. She has some big secrets and I don't want her as mayor.
NO to Gaspar.
Did Tony support allowing projects of 9 or less [Fulvia] to not be required to adhere to those new density bonus modifications that the council enacted and we thought that they were finally listening to us?
ReplyDeletePlanning brought that back last week trying to end run around Prop A. This should not stand!
Density bonus is density bonus and every project should be required to follow those new requirements no matter the size of the project.
If the developers are seeking to use DB they should not be given a freebie because they are going for 9 units or less.
Just when we thought our council was finally doing something about this abuse of our community character now they are allowing Planning to divide the issue according to the size of the project.
This is a complete sell out to the developers. WTF Tony, Kristen, Teresa, Lisa, and Mark! Who is running this asylum? You or Planning?
If you want to truly represent us in this election season do not let this go any further than tonights council meeting.
5:05,
DeleteWhat meeting?
9:03 Kranz disclose the trip before he voted? anyone know?
DeleteLast week Barth and Shaffer withheld that they had donated to Blakespear's campaign during the Coral Tree discussion- why did Barth and Shaffer hide it?
Of course her didn't. Why should he. Although he made his mistake by posting it on his FB page. If you want to have another laugh, go to Planning Commissioner Ruben Flores, FB page. He has 2. One is generic and the other say "Ruben Flores-Planning Commissioner-New Encinitas-Government Official. He has also defined community character for us. It't not the way the General Plan reads, but his own interpretation. I wish Wc would do post about that. He should recuse himself from Rossini, as he supports Catherine, and he should recuse himself from anything to do with New Encinitas. In fact, he should be thrown off the COmmission, as it is a violation to say yoga are a government official, when you are a planning commissioner. However, when this was shared with the Council, nothing happened and nothing was done.
Delete10:45 AM
DeleteAt the beginning of the appeal, Councilwoman Shaffer revealed a financial relationship she had with Blakespear. That was grounds for Councilwoman Shaffer to recuse herself, but she didn't.
Shaffer needs to be investigated.
11:512
DeleteWhat is interesting is Shaffer disclosed a relationship with Mom and family- but she did not disclose she had donated to Blakespear's campaign-
Shaffer as an ethics leaders is a fraud
Gaspar will be sending Cameron a great big box of chocolates and a tank you card after next months election for Mayor.
ReplyDeleteYou got that right, because if you're voting for Sheila, you're putting Gaspar into office as mayor...
DeleteKranz would never get elected mayor, Gaspar will only be defeated by Cameron.
Delete9:14 AM
ReplyDeleteGaspar will be too busy representing the council at Mike Andreen's private meetings on how Encinitas Up-Zoning Can Mean Increased Property Values.
Still no peep out of Blakespear and the family's controversial development of Rossini Canyon. "I know nothing" said Blakespear.
ReplyDelete"Ask my mommy, I'm going to cover my ears and go 'lalalala' while she answers."
DeleteGaspar thinks showmanship equals leadership just anther bowhead wannabe
ReplyDeleteCoast News online just did a story about Marco Gonzalez, Desert Rose and the behind the scenes closed door session. It's interesting.
ReplyDeleteSome are saying that Blakespear knowing supported a local pedifile - is this true?
ReplyDeleteI don't think so. The pedophile is allegedly the brother-in-law and next-door neighbor of Blakespear's pro bono client, and apparently had no legal interest in the appeal.
DeleteYeah, let's get off the pedophile thing. That's a total b.s. rumour that has nothing to do with this campaign.
DeleteAsk Pam Slater Price, it was likely her research on behalf of Julie that unearthed it.
DeleteActually was not S-P who "unearthed" the info. Anyway, not the point. The point is parents should know their kids are coming near this guy and then plan accordingly.
DeleteFunny when folks blame the messenger and ignore the message.
Who is it that is so obsessed with Pam Slater? Get off it. Check with the cops if there's a concern, and find where the guy lives. Separate issue than this campaign.
Delete3:21 - it certainly does! If Catherine is representing a client who has a pedophile (relative of their family) living on her property that bring kids. This shows a complete lack of judgement or concern. Doesn't she have kids of her own?
ReplyDeleteIt is not a rumor, it is true. All anyone ha to do is Google it. Not a well kept secret if it is supposed to be. The man, who is Mehl's brother in law, (she is the owner of Coral Tree) lives next door. He has been convicted of lewd and lascivious conduct to a 14 year old girl. Why doesn't someone ask the sheriff if they think it is hogwash? And, it don't matter that it was 25 years ago. Pedophles are to known for their impulse control. And, they rate of doing it again is very high. He may have done it again, and just to been caught. Lots of kids are afraid to tell their parents, as it can be a nightmare them when the cops start questioning them, asking them questions such as "did you do anything to provoke it?" And, yes, they do that!
ReplyDeleteOk, fine, let's say everything you say about the guy is true, how is this Blakespeare's fault, can you prove she knew the guy was there, and that he had this record, and that she chose to expose the kids to this guy? (All of which assumes some horrible crime)
DeleteIsn't there enough to discuss above the belt in this campaign without this kind of crap? I mean, this is disgusting.
From the site people are referencing:
Delete*No representation is made that the person listed here is currently on the state's offenders registry. All names presented here were gathered at a past date. Some persons listed might no longer be registered offenders and others might have been added. Some addresses or other data might no longer be current. Owners of Homefacts.com assume no responsibility (and expressly disclaim responsibility) for updating this site to keep information current or to ensure the accuracy or completeness of any posted information. Accordingly, you should confirm the accuracy and completeness of all posted information before making any decision related to any data presented on this site.
I support Corral Tree Farm.
ReplyDeleteThe neighbors have created a big fuss aimed at protecting their property values from perceived threat of traffic, parking, and noise from CTF.
In the process, they accidentally exposed the existence of a registered sex offender to the public, which will likely have a much greater effect on their home values. Notice that none of the neighbors wanted to mention that in public.
That friends is delicious, free range, organic irony.
Also funny is the fact that Julie brought it up. These neighbors are obviously not Blakespear voters. Instead of courting them for votes, Julie shoots her mouth off and wipes out home equity.
Nice.
I respect Julie for bringing this to the attention of all of us. We have a right to know when and where a sex offender resides. Anyone can look it up on the internet or receive notifications on all updates of sex offenders.
DeleteI do not believe this devalues the neighbor's property. I doubt these people will be selling their homes as they love the where they live. Julie will not lose any votes because of this. In fact, I think she will gain more votes.
Can anyone on this board say without a shadow of a doubt that this guy lives here, right now?
DeleteI just think the whole thing is dirty pool. I think it's bad form for Julie to bring that up in that instance. It smacks of desperation. The Coral Tree farm thing should be decided on its own merits....