Union-Trib:
The Encinitas Soccer League is urging its some 1,700 members to come to Wednesday night’s Encinitas City Council meeting to lobby for artificial turf and permanent field lighting at Leo Mullen Sports Park.
“It’s certainly a need,” league President Rick Lochner said Friday. “If you look at Carlsbad, they’ve got about a dozen (city-owned), lighted turf fields — we’ve got none.”
[...]
The Magdalena Ecke Family YMCA, which owns the Ecke Sports Park fields on Saxony Road, has recently indicated that it is considering eliminating one or more of those four fields as part of a future construction project. The soccer league uses those fields for Saturday games and nighttimepractice sessions. And, if the YMCA proceeds as planned, “we’re going to be in a world of hurt,” Lochner said.
Who didn't see this coming? Thanks for nothing Council and the Y.I wish someone could share what the Y is doing with a future construction project. Do they have to abide by Prop. A?
ReplyDeleteDepends on what they plan to do. Prop. A may not apply.
DeleteThe item on the agenda is Leo Mullen Sports Park. The league wants the city to install artificial turf and permanent lights. The height of those lights is subject to Prop A height limitations. I don't know it the Y field will come up.
Delete6:44 wishes Prop A won't apply.
DeletePoint well taken 6:44. I have seen a number of Prop. A violations already, including Coral Tree which is back to what they were doing before and got called on it. And over at Leichtag, they are building things that look like Prop. A violations. However I am not an expert, as some of you are. What is your take?
ReplyDeleteIs your definition of a Prop A violation "I don't like it?"
DeletePlease expand upon how activities at Coral Tree Farm violate Prop A.
Now I see why Prop A passed. Nobody understood it.
DeleteMore like you don't like it. Still spewing propaganda. Sour grapes two years later.
DeleteNext you'll be yapping about the much warned-about "unintended consequences" that never materialized.
9:02, That's why poor old McDonalds had to take their plan to rebuild to an expensive public vote before they rebuilt their black cinder. Oh wait, no they didn't. Nevermind.
DeleteExactly!
DeleteRemember Gaspar is adamantly for lighting at the new park. I wonder if somehow the council overlooked the Y's contract on purpose, so that lighting could go up in the Park. Remember it has been tested, although you won't find a single document in the City that says they have done it. I just heard about it from staff a long time ago.
ReplyDeleteHow long has Rudloff been the Parks and Rec director? She still doesn't know that the General Plan written in the 80s prohibited structures over 30 feet - light poles included. Before Prop A the council could just ignore residents and build those 90 feet light poles without a public vote.
ReplyDeleteHooray for Prop A that gives the right to the people to decide on outrageous structure heights in Encinitas. What happened to the Carlsbad residents on the Express Soccer league board that were always pushing for field lights in Encinitas? A few years ago the league board was going to pay for the rubberized artificial turf. Didn't they have hundreds of thousands of dollars in their bank account?
Let them pay for it today. The City funds are needed for other City projects.
ReplyDeleteLike providing places for our kids to play. Sports leagues provide a community service and depend on city fields.
DeleteYup, my sentiments exactly. You want it, you pay. There will be another firestorm if they go for lights.
ReplyDeleteI used to work with Rick Lochner about 20 years ago in Torrey Pines. Small World...
Y gate. This is just warming up. Tell us council, why did you give it away?
ReplyDeleteI'm not going to believe that Kranz was drunk and listening to Red Hot Chili Peppers.
ReplyDelete6:55 no need to wonder. Kranz at the very least knew before the contract expired. No secret he's pals with the Eckes and Leichtag crew. Something in it for everyone except the Little League.
ReplyDeleteKranz will be dressed as Mr. Spock and will paralyze any critics of his sell out with the neck pinch.
ReplyDeleteCould the E3 group have a hand in future development plans for the YMCA's ball fields at the expense of 55 years of our kids having a great reliable place to play?
ReplyDeleteSomething smells about this whole deal. I don't believe for one second it has anything to do with needing a parking lot. If this is allowed to go down, it will only be the start of more to come.
The E3 group, the Ecke Ranch, and Liechtag don't have any say in what the Y plans to do. It will be the local Y board and maybe the SD County Y org that approves any plans. When they added the competition pool, they took out a bunch of parking spaces. On weekends, parking fills up early. And people park in the neighborhood across the street.
DeleteI have been a member for years, and they have way more members now than they used to.
The city could have and should have exercised it's right to a clean lease extension. Given the current parking issues, and a possible expansion plan, I'm not surprised the Y asked for the change, nor do I blame them for asking--that's what people do when contracts are drawn up. I am surprised that the city granted the ask without any reciprocal value on offer.
I have also traveled the world and used YMCAs everywhere under the Away Program. I can say that this Y is a poor design for a space constrained place. It's rambling one-story design, with courtyards takes up more land than necessary. I would hope they would consider a parking garage, second level, and or more efficient building configuration before wiping out a ball field.
The Y is well run, and the leaders are good people. They have a mission to create healthy kids and healthy families, and the ball fields align with that mission. The Y has a duty to their members to grow and modernize, and a right to do so. But they can be smart about it, and do the right thing by the broader community as well.
I believe they will ultimately do just that.
-FP
Its not it's. Space-constrained. Any other fat thumb errors. Sorry.
DeleteGet off your high horse on the spelling errors, that was a nice overview of the situation with the Y from someone with real background, devoid of the usual factual errors and outright speculation. Thanks FP!
Delete8:33, I rather appreshiate FP's high horse.
DeleteRight. Get off your high horse grammar queen. We are sick, sick, sick of you.
DeleteMaybe instead of lights they could just light the ball?
ReplyDelete8:33, what they got we gonna get and put it in us.
ReplyDeleteSo in the local news, Lisa R admitted that lights over 30ft would trigger a Prop A vote. Here's the challenge for the neighbors: higher light standards allow for down-lighting that block unwanted horizontal projection. A higher pole allows the down light to illuminate a larger area, reaching the middle of a playing surface from poles at the edge. If the city thinks the vote won't succeed, they can skip the vote and approve 30ft standards with fixtures that are aimed horizontally from the edges of the field. That's worse, as some of the light fixtures will necessarily aim right at the houses.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree with putting lights in a neighborhood at all. Especially where the marine layer scatters light across a wide area. But if the city is hell bent on installing lights at the park, the neighbors are better off offering a compromise: support the high poles in exchange for hard restrictions on amplified sound and days and hours when lighting is allowed (with assurance of enforcement and fines for violations).
Ah, the old tried-but-untrue City claim that it can control light.
DeleteRight up there with the fire chief's claim that Santa Ana winds pose no danger in Olivenhain "since the wind blows only ten miles an hour on average in a year."
The Council bought the wacko wind statement, they'll be sure to also believe that the City can control and contain light.
That's not what I said. All light reflects, refracts, and scatters off of particles and droplets in the air, as well as the fields, plants, players and spectators. So some light will always escape the fields.
DeleteBut there is a huge difference in the unwanted glare that comes from indirect light, vs. direct light. Direct light means your house, your window, your retina is exposed directly to the source of the light. The light is pointing at you. Indirect light means that the light that reaches you is bounced or bent before it gets to you. It's the difference between stating directly into the headlights of an oncoming car, vs. sitting the driver seat and viewing the illuminated scene.
Again, if the city installs tall light standards, the light reaching the homes would be indirect light (less glare). If the city opts to avoid a Prop A campaign, they can simply install the lower 30 foot lights, and aim the lights at an angle, exposing the neighbors to direct light (much more glare).
My thought was, if you (we) don't have the votes on the council to stop lights altogether, then you (we) are better off with a compromise that uses the taller poles, coupled with and agreement that there will be no amplified PA system, that the lights cannot be used during Daylight Savings Time, can only be used Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday until 8pm (for example).
If you don't have the votes to stop lighting altogether, this compromise is better than the alternative: direct light, more glare, no restrictions on amplified sound, no restrictions on hours, days, or time of year the lights can be used.
FYI, I live very near the park, too.
Musco lighting stated that the light spillage from the planned, half the light output of the Rose Bowl, sports light would be equal to 80 full moons.
DeleteStadium lighting on 30-ft. poles won't work for organized sports. If the lights are angled in to the field, glare won't only be in the eyes of the neighbors, but also the players. Any ball in the air will be lost in the glare.or darkness if it goes high.
DeleteThe real question is will 90-ft lights be allowed by the Coastal Commission. Prop. A isn't the only obstacle.
4:06,
DeleteAre you sure?
From the linked article: "For years, the league has rented costly, portable, diesel-powered lights, so it can use thosefields when it gets dark."
Do you think the temp lights are taller than 30ft? It would appear that "organized sports" are already being played in Encinitas with lower light poles.
If council wants to play hardball (pun intended), they could move toward 30 ft lights at an angle, and then see if the neighbors want to support a compromise.
Again, I'd rather have no lights, but I'm not sure we have the votes.
11:26 AM
ReplyDeleteMunicipal code already has prohibitions on noise and nuisance. This isn't a trade-off situation. The answer is no to the lights.
11;33. That's not going to fly. You know that other sports fields have been lit in town, with lights projecting into neighborhoods. Those fields also generate noise. Nuisance and noise ordinances have never been used to prohibit such activity. Precedent has been set for many years. You cannot enforce ordinances one way in one neighborhood, and another across town.
DeleteFor your legal argument to hold water, you'd have to show that the historical precedent either didn't happen, or that the city has been incorrectly interpreting the law city-wide, and must force all other fields (including schools) to stop using lights and generating noise. And if the city won't voluntarily agree, you'll need to get a judge to impose your interpretation and enforcement.
Good luck.
If you want to know if a vote is needed by the people of this city to install lights no higher than 30 feet, I encourage you to go to Gaspar's FB page and listen to the interview she gave a short time ago.
DeleteThe interview is posted there and she admits that a vote of the people is needed to install lights at the community park no higher than 30 feet.
This is right from the horse's mouth.
Here is the link:
Deletehttp://koct.org/video/category/journalist_roundtable/detail/journalist_roundtable_march_5_2015
All the baby factories in New Encinitas pushed for lights at Cardiff Sports Park on Lake Drive, they pushed for a regional sports park on the Hall Property, and kept voting for Stocks and Bond and people of their ilk. I wonder how they will react to this.
ReplyDelete12:16 PM
Delete"All the baby factories in New Encinitas". Good to see you aren't biased. Maybe the council should set a limit on the number of children allowed per family.
Sorry...I am biased. Time and time again when the residents near the Encinitas Community Park and Cardiff Sports Park spoke up against intense uses, people came kids in tow insisting that that lights (and intense uses) were needed. Emotional pleas were made that the well-being of their kids were involved. It always seemed that they lived elsewhere. Now, the park in question is in an area closer to these people. It's easy to be resentful and biased when you feel exploited.
DeleteParents should be more concerned about their kids studying and getting a good education so they can get into a college, get a degree, get a well paying job and be able to support a family. Sports and exercise is good to a certain point, but too much is too much.
DeleteAnd 1:44 decides how much is too much, right?
DeleteThis sounds like the same voice of arrogance that was suggesting a list of acceptable sports on the skateboard thread. Am I right?
6:36 You are incorrect. Any doctor or specialist will tell you that if you overdo in anything, including sports or exercise, it is not good for your body. Continual day to day stress on your joints and bones will eventually give you problems.
DeleteTake a look at the people jogging. A lot of them are pounding on the hard pavement. Most end up with severe knee and joint problems and replacement knees. The body can only take so much.
I only decide for me how much is too much. If someone else wants to hurt their body, it is not my concern. Was just making a point that I don't think parents think of.
8:45,
DeleteFair enough.
It's true that excessive weight-bearing exercise can be harmful, especially to kids whose bones and joints have not fully developed. The recent newspaper article celebrating a possible world record by an eight-year-old at the Encinitas Mile was irresponsible (https://thecoastnews.com/blog/2015/03/new-records-set-in-races-second-year/). Speaking as life-long runner and triathlete.
However . . .
Kids playing little league baseball or local youth soccer is a world away from encouraging a second grader to run a 5:34 mile.
In fact, if you haven't been paying attention, by far the greater threat to the health of our children is an epidemic of obesity and indolence. If we have to choose a general problem with children and exercise, it is the lack thereof, not overdoing it.
You're right 1:07 - Park Place is certainly not a baby factory - and no one from that neighborhood uses the park on Lake!
ReplyDelete1:44 - a good education curriculum includes sports of some kind - always has and always will.
- The Sculpin
2:52 I'm talking about "book" smarts.
DeleteQuick! Run to the window and see if there are kids on your lawn.
DeleteYears ago there was a rendering of what tall lights at the new park would look like and it was horrendous . We do have statutes protecting our night skies from light pollution and if anyone sees what tall lights will look like at the new park, any reasonable person would see this a nonstarter for the Hall Park. Keep the new park a community park and never have lighted fields there.
ReplyDeleteHere is a rendition of realistic story poles that would change Cardiff forever.
ReplyDeleteWww.cardiffians.blogspot.com
They tried to put sports lights at Mullens before. Residents didn't want them.
All the more reason to find out what is really behind this move by the YMCA.
ReplyDeleteSomeone mentioned here that removing that ball field will provide a contiguous area that will offer the opportunity for some as yet unknown development to come down the pike. This is not only about a parking lot.
A little sunshine is overdue and some of our council is involved. You know who you are and we do too. The truth is out there and we have had none of it yet.
Tomorrow, you can bet there will requests from council to come clean, so be ready council to answer up.
5:17 The council telling the truth is quite laughable. They do need to "fess" up, but I don't look for it happening.
DeleteIf lights were installed at this park, how would it affect those driving on I-5? If it becomes an impairment, that could result it many problems.
ReplyDeleteI have sympathy for those living nearby this park. Not only do they have to put up with the noise issues, but would hate to have to deal with bright lights.
Maybe we should install and shine the bright lights on each council person's home and see how they like it.
Regarding the artificial turf fields, Google "artificial turf cancer." Modern turf fields use crumb rubber from ground up tires as a matrix to hold the turf blades and absorb energy, preventing injuries. Unfortunately, tire rubber was never intended to be in such close contact with human bodies. There are several known carcinogens in the rubber, and some experts say we are just getting to the point where cancer clusters from exposure might emerge from the clinical data.
ReplyDeleteFrom a liability and safety perspective, I'm not sure I would gamble on it right now. Especially since our consumption of purple pipe water has dropped, while production has increased. We are pumping water suitable for irrigating parks out to sea.
5:37 That is a great point you brought up. More investigation needs to be done before any artificial turf goes in. There has been evidence that kids who have played on artificial turf are getting sick from the carcinogens that get kicked up from the turf while they play. Of course, the manufacturers of it say it is safe.
DeleteThis issue really needs to be discussed.
Google GeoTurf. Let's put that stuff in.
DeleteI was on I-5 going south from Santa Fe to Birmingham today. It was about 4:30PM. The Park was practically empty. I realize it is Tuesday, but it is also spring break for many. So, we have a 44 acre park and probably less than 100 people there. Why did we build it again? I have forgotten. Seems to me that the parks we already had were good enough for a community of 62,000 people. Can anyone tell me how much this park actually cost and how much will it take to keep it up? How much will it cost to even water it? I realize it's done, but let's not add insult to injury by making the taxpayers pay more, or by putting in costly artificial turf. If the City was going to do that, why did they plant grass in a drought stricken area. And it was a drought stricken area when it was being built. Makes no sense, except it was a pet project of Stocks, Bond and others. I remember the former Parks and Rec. Director saying he even thought it was a bit much. No one listened to him. He went to Carlsbad instead. Seems like they may have a better run city than we do.
ReplyDeleteAs for the "baby boom", all I can say is whatever is happening here in Encinitas one thing is sure. It is getting very gentrified. I overheard some young mothers talking about how they were pissed off at their husbands because they could not purchase the $2200.00 stroller they wanted and had to "settle" for the $1600.00 stroller. I wanted to say "get a job" to them, but I refrained. They were in their new fancy workout attire, and talking with their Starbucks in hand. I doubt if they were talking about "race". I think that's Starbucks new gimmick but not sure since I don't patronize the place. Maybe it is really time to move, as I don't think I fit in anymore. Somehow my 2 kids made it thru their lives with a hand me down stroller, thrift store clothing when times were a bit tough for me and my husband (we both work) and they got through Ada Harris, Oakcrest, and San Dieguito when it was just a regular high school. They did go on to the University of California, (one at UCSC and one at UCSD) and had to work summers to help pay. They are now doing well, and are amazing adults. They learned the value of work, play and communicating with others in a respectful manner. They did not attend after school sports, as they were not interested in it. I wonder how many of these kids are interested in sports, and how many are doing it so their parents can boast about them being #1? I guess I am old school. There is nothing wrong with teaching your kids to read, write, spell, learn how to learn. They do not need to have every moment of their day micromanaged by their parents. No wonder many of them are living with their parents at 30. They don't have a clue about how people in lower income families get by. And when I hear how they could not possibly live around here, I suggest they get 4 roommates and move inland if necessary. God forbid they do that. I'll stop now. I think you all get my point.
9:22 You so hit the nail on the head and I applaud you for your comments. Just wait for the bashing to begin, but that's alright.
DeleteYou raised your kids well and they ended up getting a degree and making something out of their lives. I know some kids who are in their late 20's and 30's still living with their parents because they are too afraid to go on their own and make their own way. As long as mommy and daddy are still catering to them, they have no incentive but to stay put. Or maybe it's the other way around.....mommy and daddy won't let them go and grow up.
Once the kids leave home, for pity sake leave them alone and let them have their own life.
I'm glad I raised my children to work hard and find their own way in life. I wouldn't have it any other way. They are successful and well adjusted. By the way, none of them played sports either.
Good for the both of you. But your anecdotes go against what most people accept, that participating in team sports provides valuable life lessons. And good communities provide parks and recreational space for all kinds of activities, including organized sports.
DeleteI happened to be walking my dog in the park at that time and it was jammed except for the most southern baseball field.
DeleteLet me get this straight. You think Encinitas has become too gentrified and out-of-touch to the point where you feel out of place, and are considering leaving.
And you oppose efforts to create or protect affordable housing here so that Encinitas doesn't become an insular bubble of Starbuck's drinking, expensive clothes wearing, gold-played stroller-pushing, sports-ego-obsessed, snobs.
Have I got that right?
So, to summarize: this place is going to hell, and you oppose any effort to counteract that trend.
Nice.
I have no objection to affordable housing at all. I object to the parents and kids who think that everything should be done for them only. This is an older community if you look at the demographics. We already have a lot of parks for a city this small. Many of them are dedicated to sports only, such as Leo Mullen, and Ecke. We also have Orpheus, Glen Park, the park across from the library, and a few I cannot remember by name. Everything that can be done to protect our children is being done, but that does not mean bad things cannot happen, even in affluent areas such as ours or Solana Beach. It happens all if the time in SE San Diego. I have spent many an hour downtown working with the homeless and mentally ill. They would just like a place to live. And please don't say they are there because they want to be. That is just B.S. I don't necessarily agree with Marco Gonzalez, who lives in a nice home with an HOA, when he says it is racist to not build low income. But I will say I think it is a sign of our gentrification to say that low income is just not possible here. And, not all low income people are drug users, child molesters, etc. But, it really doesn't matter what I think or say, because unlike many people that have moved here, I don't have the money they have unless I sold my home that I bought in 1083 when prices were affordable. My husband and I together could not afford our home today, nor can our kids live here. That's just the way it is, and I don't see it changing anytime soon. No wonder Kranz sucks up to Ecke, Leichtag, etc. He didn't have any clout until he got not he council. Now he goes to Israel, D.C. and other places. Shaffer was just in Yosemite for a conference, all paid for by the city.
DeleteThis place is not going to hell. It is just going to the rich. And the rich usually get what they want in this country. So, somehow they will get around Prop. A. I would bet big bucks on it, if I had big bucks. And, the only way we will not get 90 foot lights if somehow the Coastal Commission can stop it. I wish I were wrong, and I hope I am. I will be the first to say it if I find out I am. I've been around here a long time, and have seen some very strange things go on. And, nothing or no one has ever been held accountable.
Should have said I bought my home in 1983. I am not that old.
Delete11:32, I agree with most of what you say. Encinitas is a town for the Rich now, that's just the way it is. People with bucks live by the beach. As for Tony and Lisa going to conferences, they're just doing what all their predecessors did. It's not a high paying job being on the council.
DeleteAs for the parks, it's a balance. With the available land that is left, there has to be an accounting for a lot of different interests. The one problem with the soccer guys is they haven't been very open to compromise in the past. A lot of these leagues are for profit, this is not the AYSO of our youth. I remember at one of the old Hall property meetings someone actually predicted a crime wave by delinquent youth if they didn't get X number of fields.
We do not have the open space Carlsbad does. We will never have the room or resources to give them the fields they need. 9:22 is right as well, sometimes a little tough grind teaches you how to make it in the world. Maybe the soccer folks can lay some turf over the parking lot at Target and use that, lol!
8:05 - not LOL at all. In Berkeley, which is very space constrained, they have both tennis courts and soccer fields on rooftops. That's not a bad way to make otherwise useless space useful to to community.
Delete- The Sculpin
Good point Sculpin. I asked for tennis courts and basketball courts for the park. I was told that they would not happen because not enough people play either one of those. I think what the city was really saying is that not enough "organized sports teams" play those. When I was a kid, a pick up basketball game was always available. For tennis lovers, there are only 2 public courts in Encinitas. Both are at Glen Park.
DeleteThere are courts behind the park at Cottonwood Creek. There's also the one at Moonlight.
DeleteDid they get rid of the ones at Cottonwood?
Delete8:05am, Both Cardiff Mustangs and Encinitas Express are 501c3 non-profits. The soccer clubs are at the mercy of the city and the school districts for field space so that they can provide the services that our community wants and should have.
DeleteDon't forget that if it goes to a vote on lights, only Encinitas voters get to vote. People from other cities that want these lights, such as Carlsbad and Oceanside, don't get a say. So if it comes to it, vote against it if you don't want 90 foot lighting.
ReplyDeleteHow about 30' lighting for Leo Mullen? Let's do it!
DeleteI'd vote yes! so would a lot of other people.
DeleteInteresting article in the UT. On the soccer fields.
ReplyDeletesandiegouniontribune.ca.newsmemory.com/publink.php?shareid=5d8921819
From the article linked above:
Delete"The lighting issue is more problematic. In order to install field light structures, the city will need to seek voter approval, she said, because the light towers would exceed the 30-foot building height limit established by Proposition A, the growth-control initiative voters passed in 2013."
The article is quoting Lisa Rudloff, director of Parks & Rec. The quote applies to both Leo Mullen and the Hall property. The reason lights were never installed at Leo Mullen is because Carltas (Ecke), owners of the shopping center, didn't want them.
BECAUSE THEY NEW THE CAMBRIA DEVELOPMENT WAS TOO CLOSE AND RESIDENTS WOULD BE DISTURBED. That is why field lighting is NOT allowed at Mullen according to the Encinitas Ranch Specific Plan.
DeleteRudloff needs to be fired for giving away 10 years of leasing rights at the YMCA.
ReplyDeleteFired!!!
At its Wednesday night meeting, which begins at 6 p.m. at City Hall, the City Council will review a new staff report on the condition of the Leo Mullen fields and debate what steps to take next, Rudloff said.
The fact that she hasn't been fired could be read to hint that she was only doing what the council wanted.
DeleteWas the council complicit or oblivious? Inquiring minds want to know!
And someone needs to ask in front of everyone. Trade out one sympathetic little kid story about how much he/she loves baseball and ask the hard questions.
DeleteRudloff also hired on Colorado Consultants GreenPlay paying them at least $60,000 to give 5 poorly attended workshops last fall. These workshops were to survey mostly senior citizens who showed up for the free food and raffle prizes to fill in surveys about raising prices in the Recreation Department. Naturally, since the participants were mostly older folks from the Senior Center, my guess is that they voted to raise rates on kids.
ReplyDeleteHow much sense does it make that parents, coaches, and children are fundraising for these programs while Vina, Rudloff, and other Parks and Rec staff members pay so-called consultants with our tax money to raise rates on Encinitas citizens. We all support the kids, parents and the coaches, but the Parks and Rec Director should hit the road and join Vina. Take Jeff Murphy and Manjeet with them!!
Please come out tonight and make that point. The fire under council's feet has to be HOT or they'll do nothing.
DeleteIf they really wanted to do a study of how much they could raise rates, Commissioner Lorri Greene could have written a valid survey since she is trained in such matters. She would have done it for free and could have gotten valid information. As usual, they hire horrible, over-priced consultants to deliver pre-determined, staff-supported conclusions in mock studies. The results and the excessive money that they pay give staff and council reason to go along.
ReplyDeleteCouncil needs to expect more of city employees and their managers.
Commissioner Lorri Greene? Who is that?
ReplyDeleteLG is former Parks and Recreation Commissioner and Chair. She is also a psychologist with a PhD.
ReplyDeleteOh, she's the one that was out to get Stocks and Sabine. Even she can't make sense of what she says. No thanks.
DeleteYou are a troll 3:08. You ask a question, and then when someone answers, you use it as an opportunity to anonymously smear a respected member of our community. What she says makes perfect sense to me and others.
DeleteNo thanks to you, troll, for your snide, uninformed remarks.
No knock on Dr. Lori, her bonifides are well established, but the city is never going to sanction her to do a study. She's rightly been an advocate for the people, but I doubt ole Glen Sabine and his buddies would let her do a study...
ReplyDeleteAt least if she did a study (or any ethical person--but not those that our city staff hire) she would explain the procedures and have valid result to share. The "consultants" that the city hires are bozos who will say anything and do anything to get money. Wake up council!!
ReplyDeleteThere are such things as "qualified" people and your friend does not fit the criteria for this category.
DeleteYou are not "qualified" to qualify (to judge) whether anyone does or does not fit into any category, troll.
Delete3:18 Sounds like you have anger issues. Go for a run and get rid of your frustrations or go see your shrink.
DeleteDr. Greene did send an email to the Council when they were going to buy Peak Democracy. She told them it was neither reliable or valid. They wrote back saying it wasn't important and they didn't care if it was reliable or valid. She has offered many times to do a reliable and valid statistical survey, pro bono, several times over the years, but the CIty has always said no. She sent me a copy of the statistical design she would have used, and it seemed impressive to me. However, as most of us know, we have many educated citizens in our community and many have offered their services for free over the years, not just Dr. Greene. So far, I don't think the City has ever taken anyone up on their offers. Does anyone know anything different than that?
Delete10:08 I am sure there is a very good reason that they have dismissed her and her attempts to once again get inside city business. She has stated on this blog that she USES people in order to gather information to be used against them later. Past experience is great knowledge of an individual.
DeleteAny competent person who does a study discusses methods, protocols, and results. The City seeks people who provide results with no details on how they were derived. Basically, they are using taxpayers' funds to buy results to benefit staff members instead of citizens--the people who are paying for these projects. This has got to stop.
DeleteI guess it was easier when an election was on and people could vent on Tony, Sheila and the rest of the gang....
ReplyDeleteThere's an election on next year and I suspect it would be in everyone's interest to undo the Ecke Sports Park giveaway before then!
DeleteProblem is the council ARE oftentimes "awake," with direction to the consultant to produce a predetermined outcome. Think the Prop A Rutan & Tucker $50K bag of fearmongering "maybes," "coulds," and "possiblys" that never materialized and also failed to freak out residents as council had hoped. Just one example of the kind of an awake Council's finagling.
ReplyDeleteThey need to change the rules so that City Mangers can no longer hire on consultants at $100,000 or less. We have had a lot of bad things happen since Council has given away their oversight to the CM. This is not about efficiency--it is about council passing blame on the CM.
ReplyDeleteExamples of why this needs to change are:
Rutan and Tucker and the Prop A issue
Peak Democracy
Veronica Tam--Housing Consultant
GreenPlay--the consultants that Lisa Rudloff brought on to find ways to charge citizens more for use of Parks and recreation facilities
Many, many other consultants that Planning, Engineering and City Managers.
Wake up council. You are responsible for these issues and need to lower the threshold to $10,000 for a CM to hire on outside services.
Council blames the messenger every time, never wanting to make anyone accountable. Lisa calls it "public shaming" to correct staff. Nothing changes because council does not have the will.
Delete1:43pm Thanks for the suggestion to limit spending by staff and the cm to $10,000 without direct council approval through public comment. The number of wasted spending on outside consultants ever since we had the $10,000 limit is beyond comprehension if someone could actually come up with that figure it would appalling to everyone.
ReplyDeleteBring back the $10,000 limit now. The damage that has been done since that time is a disgrace. An accurate accounting, forensic or not, needs to be forthcoming asap.
Allowing this to continue at the $100,000 limit will only serve to let those most responsible for wasting our limited tax dollars to continue to be squandered on expensive outside consultants that have no interest in the welfare of our community.
Come on council, step up and do something to show you are worth keeping next year. Failure to do so will provide an exit for any political aspirations any of you may have next year. You have the power to to show you care abut more than the bought off influencers that have ruled our council for way too long.
As the only hopeful keeper among the bunch, Catherine, you have the opportunity to prove your worth. Your recent misstep with transparency notwithstanding, I would still like to believe you can make a much needed difference. Promoting this move to limit staff to $10,000 would serve you well in the months to come. How about it Catherine? Is it in you to do the right thing?