Wednesday, March 11, 2015

3/11/15 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.

Tonight's meeting is about the Housing Element. One commenter says that the Planning Department is putting back in a bunch of stuff from the rejected IAG "ugly baby" plan.

40 comments:

  1. Fascinating that on the 9 May 2014 EU, Muir is quoted as saying the city needs a hiring freeze but now he wants to hire 3 new firefighters. Anything for the good ol' boys......What a buffoon.

    ReplyDelete
  2. No oral comms allowed tonight. It's all about the muzzle.

    ReplyDelete
  3. How many times will Muir say "As it pertains to" or "as it relates to" (can't recall exact phase).

    How many firemen does a city of 60,000 need? (At $100K/yr a pop)!

    Dump Muir.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. $100/ yr a pop. I wish… Try $200k a pop when adding in all the perks/ OT and overhead expenses to house this princesses. Next up is a $6 million dollar fire station for the forestation to cook their gourmet meals, BBQ, Watch Movies and Get a great night sleep in their 700 count sheets with beds provided by four seasons suppliers.

      Ugggg. Encinitas tax payers screwed again. Vote them all out.

      Delete
    2. The fire chief says the new positions are needed because the current overtime approach for staffing is stressing the employees out. Getting paid time and a half for sleeping??? Where do you sign up for this give-away? I think an efficiency advisor needs to realign the Fire Department, as the chief and the council seem incapable.

      Delete
    3. 9:30 AM

      "Where do you sign up for this give-away?" Try city hall. See if you can qualify. If you do qualify report back to us all the details on your cushy job.

      Delete
    4. Well, I'm way better educated and way mor physically fit than Mark Muir.

      But, I'm not a good buddy of Jerome Stocks who helped his campaigns.

      So what do you think my chances are?

      Delete
  4. Tony worried about getting sued and omg the timeline, the timeline! Developer shill...hometown boy my a$$.

    ReplyDelete
  5. He has been in discussion recently with Shea Homes so no surprise.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Copped out immediately - Dalakranz indeed!

      Delete
  6. At 52:59; Whats this bullshit about 2/3 stories? Did he forget about Prop A? Or did he pull something off an old shelf?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Housing Element Update vote itself is required, thanks to Prop A. Otherwise, our Council would have rubber stamped the Update and no public vote (no wonder they fought Prop A so hard).

      With this HEU vote the City satisfies the legal requirement of Prop A, but not the spirit of Prop A, which was intended to afford residents the opportunity to evaluate the attractiveness (or not) of a project proposed to exceed the General Plan.

      The Housing Element Update asks residents to put their trust in a blind vote on yet-to-be-seen projects. The problem is that if the voters approve the Update, good luck with what the City sees fit to approve.

      Delete
  7. I wish I was as happy as the woman behind the speakers.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Breakneck speed"

    What is a phrase never before used to describe the Encinitas HEU process, Alex?

    ReplyDelete
  9. DING! That's RIGHT for the daily double! (clap clap clap clap clap)

    ReplyDelete
  10. Opps. You forgot to use the form of a question.

    ReplyDelete
  11. You have to admit Murphy is oddly resistant to actually stopping to engage in the thought process...something is up with that. Who is he working for, anyway?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Ga$par "concerned" that we'll require the developer to show financials when claiming a project won't pencil out. Gosh who planted that worry in her brain??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gaspar also has a picture of Marco's daughter and her with the daughter having the gavel in hand. Was Marco there, and why does his daughter know the mayor so well? Wasn't in town to see the show. But, Gaspar and Marco's FB pages both show the picture.

      Delete
    2. Sorry for the grammar above. It's late. I was asking why Gaspar is posing with Marcos's daughter?

      Delete
  13. Time to vote out all the ninny council. They're approving programs with no basis or information. Trust us said Murphy, Ranu, and Strong.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The 'Not Ready For Prime Time Players' are at it again, thanks to Murphys sub par progress on producing anything new, no matter how long we wait or how critical the time schedule he claims is calling for.

    The $300,000 should be delayed indefinitely until he or his replacement can provide something other than what MIG tried to sell us years ago.

    Thanks Catherine for the lone voice you provide.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The rest are happily working against residents. There's more going on behind the scenes, no doubt.

      Delete
    2. Catherine has been voting yes with the other destroyers of Encinitas.

      Delete
  15. Tony Kranz is an $%^$. The developer's shill.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Does the council realize that all the other General Plan elements must be changed to follow the programs they are approving for the housing element.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Gaspar just made a motion to send the unfinished housing element off to HCD.

    ReplyDelete
  18. As a city we have just been screwed by all 5 council members.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not if we defeat this in Nov 2016. I say screw them right back.

      Delete
    2. And who says "That's all folks!" ?

      Delete
  19. Council votes to screw residents close to apartments and condos with unbundled parking.
    What are the consequences of unbundled parking?
    Neighborhoods lose their parking areas because apartments and condo owners don't want to pay for parking in their buildings.

    ReplyDelete
  20. 5:53-

    Its simpler than what you wrote. The fact is the developers want to make MORE profit by adding more units instead of adding the needed parking for the projects. As usual, the developers profit off the quality of life of the surrounding neighborhood. Vote out these fools that are developers shills.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I don't know - seems to be some programs that talked about windfall sharing....so i think there is more opportunity to talk about what that means. overall staff said the programs that were committing were mandatory and the rest were optional. They seemed to be on it. And quite honestly there wasn't really anything major to disagree with. Important thing is to follow through and discuss at Council in the future. I want to talk about sites and see the EIR work.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That odd voice of false optimism again....

      Delete
    2. 7:32 AM
      You are in the dark as to how Murphy is changing the general plan to fit the needs of the developers.

      Delete
    3. In the dark of working for the dark side - pick one.

      Delete
  22. 7:32 AM
    Did council approve deleting mid-range density from the housing element?

    ReplyDelete
  23. 7:32 AM
    What council approved last night is going to state agency HCD for their input.
    How easy will it be for the council to back out of all the programs?
    Murphy, Ranu, and Strong played the council for fools.
    By the way, we are voting on the housing element. The sites are included in the element.

    ReplyDelete
  24. 7:32 AM

    Read the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Many of those proposed programs are in direct opposition of the policies in the Land Use Element.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Someone glued GASpar's chair so it wouldn't move, but someone forgot the duct tape for "as it relates to" Muir.

    ReplyDelete