Wednesday, December 17, 2014

12/17/14 City Council meeting open thread

The current city council has continued prior councils' practice of not providing written summary minutes of council discussion, but only "action minutes" which state the outcomes. Encinitas Undercover will provide a forum for observers to record what occurs at each council meeting.

Please use the comments to record your observations.

Item of interest tonight:

- How much of a slap in the face of the council is it that Gus Vina refused to even give them the contractually required 90-day notice?  How do the council members feel now about spending the past two years on Vina's "visioning" exercises and unanimously rating Vina's job performance as "excellent?" 


97 comments:

  1. Every decision and recommendation that Vina made for the entire City including council, the 200 plus staff members, and Encinitas taxpayers was to look out for Number One. He can't leave soon enough, and I feel sorry for whatever unfortunate city is conned into picking him up. He really ran this city like a dictatorship!

    ReplyDelete
  2. KEVIN
    Your ego is showing through again.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This Maznjeet isx most likely to replace Vina in driving density. Mufphy as slick as he is appears to have some ethics, this Manjeet looks like he has no ethics other than getting paid and serving his masters -exit one bad actor and enter another

    ReplyDelete
  4. Prediction:

    "Every decision and recommendation that [insert name of future City Manager] made for the entire City including council, the 200 plus staff members, and Encinitas taxpayers was to look out for Number One. He can't leave soon enough, and I feel sorry for whatever unfortunate city is conned into picking him up. He really ran this city like a dictatorship!"

    ReplyDelete
  5. politics at city hall with sandag appointment. Gaspar recommends replacing shaffer at sandag to fepresent meyers, harwood and developers while promoting her political future with regional name recognition

    shaffer wants to continue, to represent marco gonzalez and the regionalist agenda

    how will blakespear support? she is the swing vote - Marco backed her, let's see

    ReplyDelete
  6. Way to go Catherine and Tony on your support to keep Lisa on Sandag. What a big baby Gaspar is. She is so used to getting what she wants when she wants it, it is hard for her to swallow not getting her way.

    Lame duck mayor as I originally predicted. Her and Muir should just go home. Lisa, Catherine and Tony will do just fine without them.

    Bye Bye Gaspar and Muir. Go have dinner at McDonald's.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What a far-fetched conclusion, 9:12. You don't know what lame duck means. Gaspar "got her way" in that she was elected mayor, by the people.

      Delete
    2. 9:12 Gaspar showed great leadership last week handling the meeting. So she motioned herself to beon Sandag it is her perrogative, as it was Shaffer to make another motion

      Marco did back Blakespear, and Blakespear is a regionalist - not surprised to see her side with Shaffer, the fix was in -

      Delete
    3. Gaspar will be a one time mayor. Shaffer and Blakespear way above her in the intelligence area.

      Delete
    4. 9:25 Lame Duck means an ineffectual or unsuccessful person or thing = Gaspar

      Delete
    5. 11:04, your definition is partly right.

      Lame duck is political weakness of a politician who is leaving office soon. Other pols don't need to trade favors or compromise with someone who cannot reciprocate down the road. So pols leaving office soon are weak and ignored.

      Gaspar just got elected--not going anywhere soon--not a lame duck.

      Delete
    6. Agree with 6:50. I think the term you're looking for is "figurehead."

      Delete
    7. In N' Out - Encinitas heritage site.

      Delete
    8. 10:06

      You are entitled to your opinion. Lisa Shaffer has proven herself to be a liar- it that is intelligent in your eyes- so be it. Shaffer also paid 10M for a property that appraised for $4 million- again, it you find that intelligent so bo it. Shaffer also increased debt level and then wanted to raise taxes and stick it to the public- if living outside your means is in your eyes intelligent so be it-

      I am not a fan of Gaspar, I am less a fan of Shaffer

      Delete
    9. I will take 11:04's definition that Gaspar is ineffectual which was so evident at last night's meeting. She couldn't even remember if a motion was made or not. Also, couldn't remember what the city clerk discussed with her on procedures. An absolute clown is what she looked like, not to mention a big baby.

      Delete
    10. 9:40

      I disagree-

      I am not a fan of Gaspar, she does however run a much better meeting then either Stocks or Barth ever did.

      I did not think she looked like a clown at all. Shaffer looked to me like a whiner- she had the votes lined up to retain her Sandaq spot- yet she had to blabber on to make it sound reasonable-

      the Kranz- the I saved PV from a housing project- yet it remains on the high density up-zoning mao, begain making accusations at Gaspar- unfounded, and Kranz couldn't back them up. Again, Kranz and Shaffer had the votes, so why be vindicative and call names?

      It is my opinion that Shaffer and Kranz acted like Stocks and Bond- they made a big deal out of something that was straight forward- they had the votes going in

      Muir did say something interesting about the Brown act violation- but then Barth Shaffer and Kranz appeared to regularly violate the brown act

      I am sure Shaffer will be playing the victim in her newsletter

      Delete
    11. 10:06 I disagree with your take. Gaspar is a very shrewd person. She will screw you with a smile on her face. She will never ever admit that she would do anything wrong or for vengeance. She wants people to believe that she is the all American type girl. Unless you have had experience with this chick, you will not understand. She will go as far as she can to get what she wants and step on you in the process.

      I am thrilled to see that it looks like there will be a majority vote of Kranz, Shaffer and Blakespear sticking together, so that the dummies (Muir and Gaspar) don't ruin our city with their developer friends.

      Muir is a baboon and should have never gotten a seat on council. The guy is clueless.

      Gaspar will show you the real her over the next two years. Stay tuned.

      Delete
    12. It appeared that Muir and Gaspar had discussed the appointments based on what Muir had said, defending Gaspar that the Sandag thing was not done in vengeance. How would he know unless he spoke with Gaspar? Then accuses the others of violating the Brown Act. What an A-hole.

      Delete
    13. 10:21

      Kranz and Shaffer are stack and pack high density supporters - no different than Gaspar and Muir- saying they will protect the town from developers is laughable- they sided with developers at desert rose, they sided with developers on prop a, they sided with developers on rutan and tucker

      Delete
    14. Muir a "clueless baboon" I think you're giving him too much credit! And this guy gets $179K/year for life off the city?!! Simply outrageous!

      Delete
    15. 10:40 Laugh when you find out the favors Gaspar owes her developer friends.

      Delete
    16. 11:20 and Shaffer Kranz and Blakespear will be sitting right there beside Gaspar forcing Stack and Crap housing all over the city

      they are one in the same- Shaffer wants upzoning to benefit Marco, his clients and his sisters calls for "social justice"-

      Gaspar wants profits

      THey vote exactly the same on density issues-

      no laughing here, they are both threats to our quality of life

      Delete
    17. 12:44 PM
      Very true. All 5 are the same.

      Delete
    18. And I am certain you voted for Gaspar.

      Delete
  7. Gaspar has just proved she's a weak mayor and has ittle leadership ability.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, Shaffer and Kranz have proven they will join with Blakespear to be pushy and uncompromising. Gaspar was the one who compromised, rather than continue the stalemate.

      Delete
    2. 9:20 I believe the city attorney made it clear to Gaspar that they could be there all night voting on her recommendation which obviously was not going to pass. Gaspar had no choice but to give in if she wanted to get her kids off to school in the morning.

      Delete
  8. I know it's politics, but I thought as our first elected Mayor, and the person with most seniority on Council, KG, should have been the SANDAG rep.

    Also, Gaspar's recommendation for the Traffic and Safety Commission is well-considered, but now we've got the tyranny of the three person majority sand-bagging KG's recommendation for that appointment, too.

    BG appears to be more aligned with special interests. Everyone wants "complete streets." That buzz word is all it takes to sway Shaffer. TK and CB follow along, and there is a stalemate on this issue. Save the vote for January 21, if you have to, but don't let Shaffer bully the new mayor, as LS tried to do with her bogus substitute motion.

    It will be great when LS leaves; she has said, repeatedly, she's only serving one term. She was wrong on voting to appeal the decision by the majority of judges weighing in on the Court of Appeal re SANDAG's lack of compliance with environmental requirements for its planned freeway expansion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The stalemate is over, because Gaspar did compromise.

      Delete
    2. By voting for SANDAG to appeal to the state supreme court, Shaffer contradicted everything she had said to that point about supporting GHG reduction through non-auto transportation. The reason she gave for supporting the appeal on legal grounds was bogus and complete BS.

      Delete
    3. Did Blakespear, Kranz and Gaspar appoint the insider planning person from Dudek ?

      Delete
    4. 9:18 PM
      Complete streets is the new code for stack and pack. No one wants complete streets.

      Delete
  9. Why did Kranz move that Council accept the January 16 termination date for the City Manager's resignation and re-employment? Why sign a severance contract and not require that all parties abide by it?

    When negotiating his new job starting date, Gus Vina should have taken into account the 90 days notification required by his employment/severance contract.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gus Vina had lost majority support of the council and was pushed out. Vina decided to resign. The council was happy to accept the terms of his resignation letter. It was all carefully orchestrated to save face on the part of Vina and council. It all makes it easier for Vina to find another job and the council to find another city manager.

      Delete
    2. As Barth would say, "It was political."

      Delete
    3. Or as Barth did say, "The council went too far."

      Delete
  10. CA must be in the know about outhouse candidates after all the crap done to our city. Please follow Vina down the road.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Gaspar has only two votes and knew that .She had to compromise .Playing the victim card so soon poor baby it's going to be a very long two years.

    ReplyDelete
  12. This ridiculously biased commentary is so lame

    ReplyDelete
  13. Muir, shut the F up with your saying "as it relates to". I am ready to pull your hair out or squeeze that hot air out of you . SHUT IT!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That ain't "hot air" - it's toxic waste!

      Delete
    2. What does it all relate to according to Muir? It's a bad repeat phrase like "You know?" Basically, he has nothing to offer.

      Delete
  14. Gaspar is going to go home and cry on sugar daddy's shoulder, then call her mommy and have them come to the next meeting. Maybe son will show up also. Poor princess. Not much fun, is it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is getting really out of bounds. People can disagree with politics but let's leave family members out of it. Thanks.

      Delete
    2. Gaspar is the one who brought her son to speak in front of the council to support her during Shaffer's reconsider-gate.

      Delete
    3. 12:54 Gaspar started involving her family so they are fair game. She should have thought about all of this before bringing her family on the scene. She gets what she deserves. Thank you

      Delete
    4. Because a council member's family show up in support, or speak in support of a candidate doesn't make them "fair game."

      It's normal, and typical for families of political candidates to be involved in their campaigns.

      Attacking family members is low class.

      Delete
    5. 2:19 PM
      Very true. Gaspar is using her family to further her political career.

      Delete
    6. Agreed 2:19 PM - if she exposes her family to the political limelight, they are fair game for lampooning. She is exploiting the "family values" cliché image by inference - making her family pawns in the political process.

      Delete
    7. Let's not "attack" or "lampoon" family members. Commenting on Gaspar's theatrics is quite fair, however.

      Delete
    8. Gaspar needs to stop parading her children, husband and mommy in front of the cameras. If she agrees to do that, we will stop talking about her family. How about it Gaspar?

      Delete
    9. Could it be we have a clone of Kate Gosselin in our midst?

      Delete
    10. Does Gaspar have a dog? Worked for Nixon!

      Delete
    11. Anon 10:59, show a little sensitivity and taste. Kristin does not have a "sugar daddy," and is married with 3 kids who they are both working hard to raise. How would their children feel if they read these comments?

      Lisa and Tony were the ones to fire the first shot by "reconsidering" Kristin's turn as mayor. This is what caused Gaspar to circle her wagons and bring in family support. Apparently, Shaffer and Kranz had been planning the attack for a long time, and Gaspar had a week to respond.

      Disagree with her politics if you want, but attacking family members does nothing but hurt people.

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

      Delete
    13. 7:02 Oh, the poor baby. It was not an attack. They wanted to discuss the position, but Gaspar made it into an all out attack.

      Delete
    14. 7:02 I do hope Gaspar has the sense to not have her kids reading a blog such as this. Poor judgment if she does.

      Delete
    15. Catherine Blakespear also had her children there, in her support, along with her husband, when she was sworn in. Lisa Shaffer's husband was there at this past Council Meeting. Families are often involved. Voters relate to candidates who are proud of their supportive families.

      Attacking or lampooning the families just because they support their mothers' or wives' public service is low class, as was pointed out, before.

      Delete
    16. We don't elect families and children to serve the public. It is used as a ploy to get the candidate elected. Once elected, keep the family out of our city's business. The children have no place on the dais or in council meetings.

      Delete
  15. Encinitas Blvd. and Quail Gardens Drive -northwest corner - developer wants to destroy the slopes. Found new evidence that the slopes are manufactured and therefore not subject to protection of development under the city municipal code.
    Developer may also get around building height restrictions.
    Goes before the planning commission tonight.
    Side note - Developer put in money to defeat Prop A.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's odd. He's on the Upzoning for Fun and Profit list. If he just waits 2 years, he may be able to put 30 units per acre, 3 stories high!

      http://encinitasundercover.blogspot.com/2014/09/backroom-deal-upzoning-for-fun-and.html

      Delete
    2. It is a planning commission interpretation that can be used for other properties. Jeff Murphy and Manjeet are laying the groundwork for the developers.

      Delete
    3. 2:12 Why? What's their motivation?

      Delete
    4. Because, 4:05, if there were little or no development, there would be no planning department, and M & M wouldn't have jobs.

      Delete
    5. Either he's laying the groundwork for Plan B or he thinks his property has a low chance of being upzoned.

      Delete
  16. Did anyone else think Shaffer's latest newsletter was a bit snarky about Gaspar? LS cannot seem to do one newsletter without trashing someone. Low class IMHO.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh, but she signs them all "with gratitude" - doesn't that make her a good person?? :P

      Delete
    2. 4:43

      As opposed to many commenters on this blog, of course.

      Delete
    3. As it should be. Gaspar knew exactly what she was doing to Lisa when she recommended the appointments. It came back to bite her right square in her mouth. Good for Lisa for standing up to her.

      Delete
    4. I'm confused. I'm not seeing an "trashing" text. The closest I see is the below (which could hardly be called trashing). The SANDAG stuff was also not "trashing.". Perhaps I missed the text in question, could someone post it?

      "The next full City Council meeting will be January 21. The January 14 meeting was cancelled because the mayor and deputy mayor will both be attending the League of California Cities training for newly elected public officials. I appreciate that both of them committed the time to attend. I found it very helpful when I was first elected, and Mayor Gaspar did not go when she first joined the Council in 2010."

      Delete
    5. I wouldn't attend any traing meeting. If you attend these meetings and end up an elitist snob like Barth and Shaffer well fuck it!!
      At this point in their lives they don't know how to run a meeting we the citizens have bigger problems than we know

      Delete
    6. Anon 8:43, I think that what leaps out to me in Lisa's comment is the last part. "I found it very helpful when I was first elected, and Mayor Gaspar did not go when she first joined the Council in 2010."

      What was the point of ending with a comment that Mayor Gaspar did not attend a meeting in 2010? This last part is confusing and destroys the unity of the paragraph to add a comment about Gaspar in the last sentence when she had not been mentioned before.

      At the last meeting, Shaffer justified her wish to stay on SANDAG because she had a lot of available time, and she claimed that Gaspar was trying to retaliate against Shaffer by taking the leadership role herself.

      Yet, the comment that Shaffer makes above is not very charitable to Kristin, who as a mother of 3 young children at the time, may NOT have had free time to attend the LCC training in 2010. Couldn't Shaffer allow for some leniency towards Gaspar if she didn't have time or flexibility to attend a conference 4 years ago?

      However, there is a larger point. Lisa does not understand that all the training and degrees in the world mean NOTHING when a council member is unethical, unprofessional, and insecure.

      Delete
    7. 1:49,

      I read that as Shaffer explaining why Gaspar is going this time, because she missed it last time.

      Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

      Delete
    8. Who made Shaffer "the explainer"?
      Why does she feel it necessary to tell us what pleases her about some action or event, either inside or outside the council? As if she sits in some chair on high that the rest of the population cares what "she was pleased about". It all comes across in a very condescending way.

      Delete
    9. I agree with 2:47. Listening is not Shaffer's strong suit. She likes to take over meetings and ask the same questions over and over.

      After a vote has been cast, she has been known to stop a meeting and asked someone to explain something that council has just voted on.

      Delete
    10. I agree with EU on this one. Gaspar didn't attend when she first came on council. Now we can see what a difference it makes. Hope she learns how government works.

      Delete
    11. 1:49 That is no excuse for not attending an important conference. If you have small children, maybe politics is not the place to be if you can't juggle both.

      Priorities, priorities, priorities.

      Delete
    12. 7:50,

      Actually, I'm kinda concerned about the training. Look how fast Kranz and Shaffer did a U-turn on their constituents as soon as they got "educated."

      Delete
    13. U-turns are acceptable in some places, and in others it is a NO NO. I believe you will see more U-turns by members of this council and not just by Kranz and Shaffer.

      Delete
    14. 7:54 PM
      It's not an important conference. It is an indoctrination. The newbies are taught the government line of you make the decisions. Forget about the people who elected you. Then they hobnob on how to sock it to the taxpayers for more money.

      Delete
    15. 9:33 How right you are.

      Delete
  17. I have seen Lisa operate like a stealth bomber. She accuses others of what she imagines people to be or to stand for. Coincidentally, these perceived accusations and back-stabbings always favor Lisa politically. After betrays get back to the accused, she makes them prove their innocence or explain to her how her own perceptions were not correct.

    I predict before all is said and done that Lisa will be enmeshed in a lawsuit for the way she attacks others. She marketed herself as an ethics professor, so that makes her an easy legal target, and this is an established pattern.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She'd have to slander or libel someone in such a manner to cause them reputational or economic harm of a discernible nature. Is she stupid enough to go that far? No wonder she only wants to be around one term - she wouldn't survive much more with her antics.

      Delete
    2. Actually, she has gone there....

      Delete
    3. This is the second ugly incident for Lisa Shaffer. The first was the backstabbing of Julie Graboi to get the backing of Francine Busby for the Democratic Party endorsement of Catherine Blakespear. In my opinion it was an unethical action by Shaffer. She definitely plays hardball in order to get what she wants.

      So far Blakespear is supporting Shaffer with her council votes. At some point Blakespear will have to separate herself from Shaffer. But then Shaffer will unsheath the daggers. Either way Blakespear will be in for a very rough ride.on council. Her naive optimism will make it hard for to adjust to the reality.

      Delete
    4. I am beginning to appreciate Lisa Shaffer more and more. She is not afraid to ask the hard questions. I'm also impressed so far with Catherine Blakespear. I think between those two and Tony, we will keep some sense on council. The other two are clueless.

      Delete
  18. But I love the 'little' people... Please tell Mr. DeMille I am ready for my close-up...

    I will always remember Lisa Shaffer's response to Mark Muir last January 2014 when the city council was considering the council expending hard-earned tax dollars to plant fruit bearing trees in and on city-owned property with the goal of "feeding the hungry". Mother Teresa meets the Sea Hag...

    Muir, asked Shaffer,"You know Councilwoman Shaffer, these fruit trees drop their fruit constantly: and there might be times when they don't draw the so many homeless to Encinitas for a free meal: so, 'How' do you propose to perform maintenance on the areas where the ripe fruit begins to pile up and spill over into the gutters?"

    Shaffer thought for a moment and then said,"Perhaps Staff could pull out the list of non-profits that come before us every year with their hands out, asking for money from the Community Development Grants that the Feds give us: perhaps we could require these volunteers to clean up the mess in exchange for these Grants?" Evil stepmother?

    As shocked as I was by her response to a good question, another question comes to mind after Wednesday evening's council meeting," Just who is going to clean up the mess that Lisa Shaffer leaves behind when, God willing, she exits her council seat obtained through subtrefuge, I mean, she says she is one-and-done, but she isn't prone to honesty, so she could be in for the long haul? Ethics professor, not really? Maybe she fooled some assistant dean somewhere and conned her way into teaching some National Uni course, but come on, anyone with even a passing notion of Shaffer's actions as a councilor has got to laugh involuntarily when anyone brings the word 'ethics' and Shaffer's name in the same sentence.

    Someone who doesn't know the city, doesn't like people, and has no history of public service, before she married into the city in her late 50's is now demanding YOU change to suit her: oh yeah, her neighborhood wants you to rename it Central Encinitas and she demands you drop the speed limit to 25 mph, not just when students are close-by, but because Shaffer wants it that way and well, she knows better, right?

    Luckily, wrongly believing that everyone who is anyone agrees with her, she continues to 'enlighten' us through her Mea Culpa newsletter after every council meeting. Off with our heads! Wait until the new Tree Ordinance is enacted! Oh Baby! Did you know trees were people? That's almost as funny as Saint Teresa and Lisa month before last beginning a co-written article published everywhere with the query,"Can we tell the truth?" which anyone who has met them immediately answered either "No!" or, "Not so far!"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 11:27 As Muir would say......."as it relates to". When Muir figures out who is relating to who, and what is relating to what, please inform us. At this point, the man has nothing else to offer. What an ignorant question he asked about the fruit. Oh well, that's Muir.

      Delete
    2. 11:34, it should be who is relating to whom: objective case, as whom is the object of the preposition, to.

      Delete
    3. I was speaking Muir talk. Guess it went over your head. I know it should be whom, but he doesn't.

      Delete
  19. Awww, Gaspar's husband is trying desperately to defend his wife regarding the Sandag appointment. Is this woman not able to speak for herself? Why is it every time there is conflict concerning Gaspar and some one else on council, the husband has to put in his two cents. We didn't elect you Paul Gaspar. And, truthfully, we really didn't want your wife, but she squeaked by (this time).

    When is it mommy's turn to speak? Just let us know so we can stay tuned. The next two years are going to be comical.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe the Gaspar Family can become a sitcom - All in the Family Encinitas style!

      Delete
  20. $tock$ and Vina were the two most terrible things for Encinitas

    $tock$ brought us the two biggest burdens that sink Encinitas financial future- Regional $port$ Comple$ and the huge Pen$ion$ brought to you by $tock$ 2006 vote for a whopping $36% pensions increase for all city employees pensions forever in one evenings vote. No real public notice and the press didn't even really report on the inpact. Total criminal behavior.

    Vina will leave town shortly. I wish $tock$ would be escorted out of town as well. He was a travesty for Encinitas.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Following close behind are $tocks$ dear friends, Muir and Gaspar.

      Delete
    2. And $tock$ $till linger$ in the $hadow$!

      Delete
  21. So Tony, I'm giving him a big fat raise at NCTD, Kranz strikes again. Kranz knows how to grease the wheels.

    ReplyDelete