The city of Encinitas and the Encinitas school district are in competition with the cities of San Diego (for costly Portland Loos) and Escondido for the bottom awards by the San Diego County Taxpayers Association.The San Diego County Taxpayers Association beclowned itself in 2013 when it awarded the Golden Fleece to the Poway Unified School District for the disastrous $1 billion capital appreciation bonds which the SDCTA had itself endorsed. Fortunately, this year there is no record of the SDCTA blessing the Pacific View purchase.
[...]
The annual program notes the best and worst in local government efficiency, spending and decision-making.
[...]
Golden Fleece Award Finalists
Metro
* City of Encinitas & Encinitas Union School District – Pacific View Profiteering
* City of San Diego – Portland Loos
* City of Escondido – Adoption of Citizens’ Property Rights Initiative
Regional
* Palomar Community College District – Computer Dumping
* Caltrans – Water Wasters
* San Ysidro School District – Title I Cover-Up
Friday, May 15, 2015
Encinitas is finalist for Golden Fleece Awards for Pacific View deal
Times of San Diego:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Dalakranz should get the crown for fiscal retardation. I think he truly believes money grows on trees.
ReplyDeleteThe rest of us know the $10 million plus could have and should have been used on other needed projects like Hwy 101 streetscape and quiet zones.
So how is the donation drive for PV going? what the goal $150? Pfff. That will take awhile.
Way to go Kranz.
ReplyDeleteMaybe he can join the 3Cluster F*** Club? Make it a foursome CF.
ReplyDeleteI hope you will acknowledge your small role (at least many of the commenters here) in lobbying the council to buy PV. Of course you will claim that you didn't want to spend $10M but I don't remember a price ceiling mentioned on the petitions. Give yourselves a big pat on the back.
ReplyDelete12:08 apparently missed the meeting where residents spent $1,200 on a lawyer to support to gain a legal opinion that the council suit the school board and Baird to buy the property for 30 cents on the dollar of the low appraisal price of $ 4.5, possibly a new Naylot act price near $ 2.5 million.
DeleteYou also musy have missed the meeting where residents again demanded the council renegotiate upon due dliligence for a lower price.
You might note thazy spreading misinformation does not make you right, it makes you look foolish
5:17 PM
DeleteOh yes, hold everyone accountable except yourself. In the end many of the commenters noted participating as one of the "724 people who sent a SavePacific View email" effort to buy PV after it was clear the Naylor Act was a dead issue. So thanks for all the years of paying interest on $10M when we could have been using it for other things.
10:30, Yeah, like burning more fuel behind 300 more Lexuses with their daily trips from Pacific View Estates.
Delete10:53, Thank you for sparing us a 2 hour lecture.
Delete10:30- You are factually incorrect- There were a number of people who asked their names be taken of that Save PV site when it became appasrent it was front for the Barth-Shaffer-Kranz boondoggle. Many of tehse same people spent their own money to a land-use attorney to give the council negotiating leverage to file a suit-
Deleteall 5 council members ignored the wishs of residents. Not a single council member had the leadership to file a suit, or make a motion to file a suit. Gaspasr, Muir, barth, Kranz and Shaffer are all complicit in their disregard for taxpayer money and the cost of PV.
Had Muir or Gaspar made a motion to explore a suit perhaps Kranz would have jumped ship and supported it- maybe Baird and EUSD would have lowered the price-
We will never know as all 5 lacked the courage to do so.
9:37, A lawsuit would have queered the whole deal and a developer would have the property now.
Delete2:22- Factually incorrect-
DeleteThe PV property is not zoned for residential use. Why would a developer pay anything for that property? To put a commerical office building there? THere is already too much office space in Encinitas-
misinformation to support Shaffer-Barth and kranz misleads the public. A developer would neer have bought PV- there is no upside (unless the bought of the council to change zoning- which was defeated by the passage of Prop A)
A lawsuit against EUSD would have brought the price down-
Sabine should have pursued the implementation of the provisions of the Naylor Act and brought the price down a multitude of millions. He is worthless! Dump Sabine and sub-contract law firms when needed.
ReplyDeleteSorry, but unless the council directs him to, that's not his job. Your beef is with the council not Sabine. So are you claiming that that absolves everyone of responsibility for spending $10 M?
DeleteSabine advises the council, remember? The council has Mr. Legal Eagle to inform them of things that they supposedly do not know. You seem to have the tables in reverse on who informs whom on what. He had to have input; if not, he is incompetent. I think the theory was that the Naylor Act had expired due to the type of use the property had been used for after the school years.
DeleteIt could have been challenged, as the law is made up as it goes along.
meanwhile Barth's flipping through her rolodex, calling residents to ask them to file an injunction and invoke the naylor act. the very embodiment of cowardice.
DeleteSabine and Vina got ahold of the independently contracted lawyer/consultant and pre-briefed her for hours, immediately before the Council Meeting, when she presented a case to Council basically recommending against pursuing legal options.
DeleteGus Vina and Glenn Sabine have done a hideous job negotiating on behalf of the citizens. Had they done so, with competence and transparency, we could have, with public support, purchased PV at no more than $5 Million.
In their largeness, Kranz, Barth and Shaffer gave away $5 Million. Their excuse? Overpaying wouldn't matter in twenty years.
She was not convinced enough not to try getting other people to do what she should have had the balls to do - but that's always been her MO.
DeleteIn reality, in the second incarnation of the City/EUSD pas de deux over PV, the City paid Peter Norby and Patrick Murphy to run the ad hoc committee and it was ONLY after the reporter from the UT, who had knowledge of the existence of the Naylor Act, that the ACT came up to the public's knowledge at all.
DeleteThe Council was behind on the Hall Property and even tho it would have been under a mil to purchase the PV property after the Naylor Act and a coupla other laws chizzled down the investment, Dalager didn't want ANY $ spent on PV: and so, now, our kids get a $25 mil property and that is just for the purchase of the dirt!
Sabine's job is to answer/advise, NOT to tell or coerce: he serves the 5 council people, and Kranz's response most often when queried about PV is, "In 50 years the kids will be thankful for this action."
This is a BIG FAT CLUE as to WHY Kranz broke the law (Brown Act etc...) on abandoning the City's budget and swallowing whole the incredibly fatuous lie concerning 'bids' and auctions etc... Kranz wants to be be given 'attention', remembered like his Dad; same goes for Teresa.
Norby and Patrick Murphy were directed by Cary and Phil to make sure the Naylor Act was not invoked. The mythos concerning the Dollar A Year handshake agreement to allow the parking of city trucks on the vacant playing fields was made not in part, but wholly for the result of invalidating the Naylor Act.
The Council is prepped to spend $150K to memorialize Teresa Barth by planting a fruit forest in a park in Cardiff during the longest drought in modern memory.
Its NOT a five mil mistake, its a $20 mil error, and is that the correct word for it? They made the fatal commitment to EUSD believing they would be greeted as heroes; only to find that they had piddled where they play with no fresh undergarments nearby.
This news just in; City Council to begin City Manager search all over again. Problem? Not enough women applied. Please GOD, don't tell Carly Fiorena.
Hmm, where does Supe Roberts fit into the CM Search schematics?
See you at the 'ground-breaking' of Teresa Barth's Fruit Forest.
11:16, Everyone should aspire to be honored and remembered as well as Tony's dad.
Delete1:17 like saying everyone should be on an ego trip.
DeleteThe "dollar per year agreement," was signed by Council and the EUSD board of directors, beginning in January of 2004, although the agreement was drawn up in December of 2003. The lease agreement was signed at least three separate times, over the years, before Baird arrived on scene, reading to pick the low hanging fruit.
DeleteThis was not an handshake agreement, but a carefully parlayed and carefully hidden plan with future development agreements contained in the lease recitals.
Our city's coffers are heavily dependent upon development for sources of revenue, beginning with property tax and sales tax. Next in line, for generating revenue, are permitting fees associated with development or redevelopment.
Citizens are mostly uninformed, unfortunately. We keep re-electing the same Board of Trustees for EUSD, the same directors who have betrayed Encinitas taxpayers. This absolutely is a case of public officials, including Tim Baird, profiteering at taxpayers expense.
Ignorance and lack of accountability breed corruption on a wide scale.
So what? Another BIA sour grapefest. Sad to see Taxpayers Associations play into their hands so easily when Pacific View is so very special and worthwhile.
ReplyDelete1:22- Happy to see that you want our City to go broke. Do you have any idea how underfunded we are in a lot of things? If not, you might want to ask Kranz or Shaffer. They are the ones spinning the lies that we have a whole million dollar surplus. Forgetting of course, that we are underfunded in CalPers, and other things. No street repairs, no under grounding of lights, but I will bet anyone that somehow they will get around Prop. A.
ReplyDeletePensions are underfunded by $20 to $30 million by some estimates - and it grows larger by the year. This city is headed to the shoals of bankruptcy.
DeleteAgree, pensions are out of control everywhere. But there are continual street repairs, maintenance and undergrounding cables and positive step creating revenue (Pacific View being one of them). No doubt the BIA and other development interests will always try to get around Prop A. Until there's evidence of their success, no need belly aching over it. We won.
ReplyDelete"Positive step creating revenue (Pacific View will be one of them)"-..What a farcical comment. PV will NEVER generate revenue to cover its costs let along turn a profit....sorry Teresa you are wrong yet again.
DeleteSee Barth-related comment above. Sneak.
Delete7:05, Its pretty clear you either have no vision or are in line with the BIA, Andreen or whoever else tries to steam roll the coast. Its that 40 acre park that will be the everlasting negative cash flow. PV will create jobs, events, revenue and enrich people's lives. And you both couldn't be more wrong about me being Teresa.
Delete11:06- the wanna be T, you have hooked your wagon to a losing entity, PV. What's worse is you won't be around to pay the bills when they come do, nor will Barth Shaffer nor Kranz, but you have no qualms about saddling the rest of us with your whims and folly. Shame on you, but as a burnt out hippie you have no shame.....hey, if it feels good spend the $$$$.
Delete11:24- the wannabe Harwood. You will forever whine instead of try to help make PV a success for everyone. I can understand you're sore when you lost over 2 acres of ocean front property to fudge pack with your inferior bid, but get over it. There's still countless acres of property in Carlsbad for your ilk to bulldoze. And yes, it does feel good to invest $$$$ in a worthy project for most of the voters here. But hippie? Not old enough. Burnt out? Lotsa fuel. You naysayers stand in the way of making Encinitas the best it can be. Making it a bedroom community might benefit a few, but hardly contributes to what the majority of us want here - beginning with Mr. Pritchard.
Delete1:07 - there's nothing to make a success of The council fell for Vina's advice that neglected to tell them all the ways they cannot make revenue from PV. Taxpayers are stuck with an attractive piece of property that cannot house Shaffer's "museum" or any other mechanism by way significant revenue can be made.
DeleteI'm as anti-Harwood and his fake concerns over affordability - same with Marco/BIA, but the PV deal is a mess no matter how you look at it. It was worthy could we have paid the true lower value we could have paid, but blew, and it could be worthy had Barth not had such stars in her eyes over Vina that she trusted him to negotiate the fine print. The fact that after 10 years the onus comes off the "no residential development" restriction and you've come full circle to Harwood getting to bulldoze. If you don't think Marco won't step up to be the first to threaten a lawsuit over that in the name of "affordabiltiy," then maybe you think it'll be the BIA instead.
Now you have Murphy asking for more planning staff and there's just no end in sight to the mismanagement of money at the City.
In time, PV will out do its full potential. But guess what "no we can't" people achieve? Glad you're not a BIA fan, but strange you're on the same side of the school fence with them.
DeleteI am not in the Barth/Shaffer/sustainability camp and I am fiscally conservative enough to know a bad deal when I see it. You don't have to be in la-la land with the sustainability crowd to be dead set against the BIA's double-speak and ill intentions.
Delete5:49, but it helps.
Delete3:55- They are already getting around Prop. A. Been over to Leichtag lately or hear what they are doing? Check it out if you don't know. Even the former "Encinitas Environment Day" started by Bob Nanninga, is now called EcoFest and is happening this weekend, not at city owned Cottonwood Creek Park, where it has always been held but at Leichtag. Hmmmmm
ReplyDeleteGood keep it on private property, they can absorb the costs and any liability.
Delete5:53 - Do you have a list of violations of Prop A? It seems you are saying holding EcoFest there is somehow a violation of Prop A. Could you clarify why this is?
DeleteCottonwood Creek worked well for Environment day, nobody is walking from downtown all the way up to Saxony, even had visitors from Moonlight beach going by. Funny how money can buy zoning changes, traffic fixes, and move local events. Free trip anyone?
ReplyDeleteLeichtag buying their way into Encinitas...walking straight into Kranz's open arms....
DeleteKranz was moved by the Temple Mount and saw the burning bush - it was composed of perk$$$!
DeleteHe is bought and paid for.
ReplyDeleteEcoFest is likely not to draw the comparable crowds that it would had it stayed where it's always been held. It's a power grab to legitimize the Foundation's agenda. Amazing how free gifts sway the mentality of the council - it's a Pavlov's response!
ReplyDeleteWhat is the foundation's agenda?
DeleteTo turn Quail Gardens Drive into Balboa Park North; seriously.
DeleteWatch the Traffic Commission Agenda, they telegraph their moves there.
BTW, WHO okayed PV being formally designated as 'surplus' to the EUSD district?
Jim Farley, CEO of The Liechstag Foundation.
What does it mean?
8:37- The Foundation's agenda, along with the County's agenda, is to buy enough property around here so that Encinitas can become a part of the County, albeit seemingly run by locals. Leichtag is doing this in increments. New wing for Scripps. County wanting to buy out Quail Gardens, having Eco Fest in an area that is to zoned for it, the list goes on. Give it a few years. Maybe Encinitas will even have on the ballot a new name, perhaps Leichtag?
DeleteEncinitas is part of the County of San Diego, although "seemingly run by locals."
DeleteIn my opinion, Leichtag is doing good works. I don't see any reason to feel threatened by it. I did prefer Environmental Day to be held at Cottonwood Creek Park, as envisioned by Bob Nanninga. Bob Nanninga was also the first person I heard bring up the Naylor Act with respect to our City's purchasing PV.
With respect to PV finally being declared surplus, in 2012, as I recall, that was more malfeasance of office by former EUSD Superintendents, the Board of Directors, and conflicted advice by the Superintendents' legal counsel.
As soon as the School District permanently closed its doors as a school, in June of 2003, and began leasing out the grounds and buildings, with a lease effective in Dec. of 2003, but signed in January of 2004, PV should have been declared surplus. But PV wasn't declared surplus until 2011-2012, because the district wanted the time to run out for the Naylor Act to be able to be invoked.
However, the Naylor Act is set up to toll from the time that the school was permanently closed, and leased out for non school purposes, OR put up for sale, NOT from the time that a public school property is officially declared surplus. That delaying tactic was simply more subterfuge and lack of transparency aimed at achieving future development goals of both EUSD and the City of Encinitas through pandering council members, staff, and non-independent contractors, such as Norby and Sabine.
Kranz wants to put between 8 and 13 units on his mother-in-law's property. Kranz and Shaffer said that they beleived in affordable housing so that they could get their kids some and get them out of the house. Shaffer says that she knows many people who want to live in Encinitas and spend a lot of time here but that they can't afford it.
ReplyDeleteIs this a city priority to get Tony and Lisa's kids affordable housing in Encinitas?
Who pays for the insurance for a city sponsored event on private property?
ReplyDeleteEcoFest is no longer a City sponsored event, so I guess Leichtag picks up the tab for insurance. When it was at Cottonwood Creek Park the city did not charge for the Park, volunteer sheriff's manned the area, those who organized it, including moi, picked up after the event and absolutely nothing, except a free permit, was donated by the City of Encinitas. It was a tribute to Bob from Day 1 and we used to put his picture up after he died, and held a small memorial for him each year.Many community organizations donated food, etc. The fruit and the juice and the ice for pedal powered smoothie bike, that the kids loved, was donated by Cardiff Seaside Market. Not sure what's happening now, as this is the weekend for Eco Fest. Check it our for yourself, as I have no desire to go.
Delete12:36, So let me get this straight. You're an environmentalist. You have no idea why the event was moved to Saxony Rd. You don't know if the event still honors Bob; still has the smoothie bike or is engaged by Seaside Market, but you're certain you don't want to go check it out. Sounds rational to me. And if you know the answer, were the "Volunteer Sheriff's" paid?
DeleteNot 12:36 here, but honestly this move to Leichtag is nothing but a transparent power play to start collecting events under their roof. I, too, am certain I don't want to go check it out. The last thing I want to do is encourage this takeover so they (and Barth, Fox, and Michelove) can crow about the success and push for further incursions. Who wants to bet the street fair moves there next?
DeleteMost world-domination plots do not begin with building a hospital, a retirement home, and a farm.
DeleteWho said "world?" You did. Hyperbole can't get you away from the fact that Leichtag is pushing, and pushing hard. And buying.
Delete2:30, I'd bet you $100 the street fair never moves to Saxony. But then I'd have to reveal my name and you'd begin to build a case against for gambling on a blog after I won. I think its great that there is enough open space somewhere in Encinitas that CAN accomodate the EcoFest. Cottonwood Creek Park is beautiful, but but EcoFest has outgrown it and you have to park far away to enjoy it - if not get yelled at or towed for parking in the wrong place. I'd sooner think you'd ask the current organizers of the event the reason for the move than to attack Leichtag. I don't blame you for being leery of influential businesses coming to town, but for an environmentalist to boycott EcoFest for its new venue is certainly biting off your nose to spite your face. And Bob could give a crap about any tribute to himself compared to benefits his successful event might bring for the planet.
Delete2:52, lol. How do those plots happen? I may want to get in on the ground floor with you.
DeleteMany people, including myself, either rode our bikes or walked to Environmental Day at Cottonwood Creek. In fact, we got to enter a drawing for a bicycle if we didn't arrive by motor vehicle.
DeleteI disagree that Cottonwood Creek Park has been "outgrown" by Environmental Day. I feel there should still be an Environmental Day, there, which typically wasn't held until June, in years past. EcoFest at Leichtag is fine in addition to, not as a replacement for Environmental Day at Cottonwood Creek Park.
Eco-fest has a drinking area designated. Look for your council members there.
ReplyDeleteGood question about how Encinitas Environment Day morphed into Eco Fest. The answer lies in the hands of Dave Algren and others who took it over because the original people that put it together , even after Bob died, didn't want it changed and others did. Encinitas Environment Day did not outgrow Cottonwood Creek Park. However whoever is pushing that B.S. is someone who wants you to believe that. And Bob, and many of us knew Bob and who is was, WOULD MIND if his name was not mentioned. Those of us who knew Bob and hung out at the E Street Cafe in the AM got a taste of what was affectionally called "The Bob Show". He was a hoot and is not easily forgotten. He also liked people to think he was the Founder of Encinitas Environment Day ( and he sort of was, with a few others). I doubt if he would particularly like an organization that uses the Old Testament as their Bible, doing much of anything. Remember Bob was "gay". The only reference to anti-homosexuality is in the Old Testament. Just sayin'. The volunteer sheriff's at Cottonwood Creek ddi not get paid (hence the word "volunteer") Many others helped get the tables up, get the signs up, etc. were all "volunteer". The city did not charge for the event permit and it was deliberately held at Cottonwood Creek Park so that people could walk or ride their bikes. Even if you had to park at the railroad station, it wasn't that far of a walk. The times change, and we are changing. Each of us can decide if we like what we are seeing.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the straight skinny from someone who actually knows, not someone who sells the BS.
DeleteSomeone mentioned this Fox person - assume it's the same as Tiffany Fox, who was posting awfully long and hard on all the "Nextdoor" blogs in favor of everyone signing on to Peak Democracy late last year. I find the hard sell these non-city workers engage in more than passing strange.
5:53- Yes, Tiffany Fox is the same person you mention. She along, with Mim Michelove ( a huge fan of Farley over at Leichtag), and Teresa Barth put together a 5013C group called Engage Encinitas. It has a thing called Third Thursday where the group invites some kind of person to speak on topics such as riding your bike to work, urban farming, saving water, to name a few.. It's held at the Encinitas Library. For those interested, Google Engage Encinitas. You may also see the E3 cluster on the same page, but I'm not sure if it's there anymore, as I didn't Google it before I posted this. Someone mentioned a while back the the E3 group was comprised of these 3 women. It has been difficult to exactly know who is with who in these organizations. They are all 5013C ( tax deductible charities for those who don't know what a 5013C is) so I don't know if they are actually individual groups and are sharing this tax exempt sat us or how it is all configured.
DeleteOh gosh, I would not have known how to save water or even that I needed to without a cluster telling me about it.
DeleteBarth's attempts to continue to "contribute" is really annoying.
Isn't Barth's group considered a coven?
Delete10:18,
DeleteQuestion: do you know how to detect if your home has a water leak below ground, or in a toilet where the leaked water doesn't openly drip like a faucet?
Question 2: Do you know what percentage of domestic water use is attributable to leaks?
I do, because I went to the Engage Encinitas event at the library. Most of it was stuff I already knew, but there were interesting nuggets.
Don't be blinded by the scar tissue of old grudges. Today is a new day.
--FP.
Witch valve did she tell you to turn?
DeleteAnswers: shut off every fixture in the house, then go out your meter box at the street. You can detect even a small drip leak of the meter dials move at all over a 15 min period.
Delete10% of our local domestic metered water use is attributable to leaks.
Thanks, 10:53 - if I didn't know already (which I happened to), you spared me clapping eyes on the "outreach" (which I was in no danger of attending).
DeleteYou meet a dog that bites, you stay away. You witness underhanded dealings and nastiness, you stay away. This has noting to do with grudge holding and everything to do with knowing the nature of the beast and wanting as little as possible to do with it.
Barth has no problem lying about anything that doesn't suit her - witness Prop A whoppers, Fox bizarrely posts city propaganda for the city and Michelove has had nothing but bad things to say about city "obstructionists" (Barth's word for city watchers). I don't need to go near any of them, I do not trust them or their motives. To each his own.
9:22 AM Very astute! Cackle cackle!
Delete2:03,
DeleteI don't know you--not trying to pretend I do, but I read these boards regularly, and I'm curious:
Can you list specific people from city government (past or present) with whom you have regularly disagreed, but who were good honest people?
I ask because the default position here seems to be to ascribe words and phrases like "underhanded dealings," "nastiness," and "lying" to anyone who makes a decision we disagree with. Sometimes people's motives are questioned for even meeting with others we may disagree with.
Is it possible for a city leader or staff member to act against your or my interests on specific matters without being evil tools of some dark conspiracy?
I have my own judgement about a few people who really should not have been on council in the first place. People without the temperment, intelligence, or work ethic. However, in my eyes, there are more that fall into the category of trying to do the right thing, even if we don't see things the same way.
So, back to the question: can you list people from city government who are honorable, but with a different world view?
How about the rest of you?
--FP.
To be fair, the Prop A ballot arguments were unambiguously lies. And the Little League fields giveaway was certainly underhanded unless you prefer the theory of mass incompetence-- but then if it was just incompetence why hasn't the council held Rudloff accountable?
DeleteNot giving council a free pass on Prop A, but you have to agree there was a lot of misleading information fed to everyone about it. And in closed sessions, Gus was probably pushing against it with all his might "We'll be sued!" "McDonalds will never be rebuilt!" "A kitchen remodel will take a public vote!" "It will tear down the Boat Houses!" "It will make houses taller in Cardiff!" blah blah blah and who knows what else. And all the misleading flyers were circulating too. Especially the claim "5 story buildings were never on the radar". So, its pretty amazing we won will ALL of the council members against Prop A. But I cant blame all of them for deliberate deception, but believing the developers & Rutan and Tucker more than the people at large. And thanks to Bruce E. for clearing out the cobwebs. Had only council and others heard you out.
DeleteYes, but the council still unanimously rated Vina "Excellent" after the McDonald's and kitchen remodel lies were debunked.
DeleteA lie is a deliberate act. The teller of the lie must believe that the statement is false at the time. Without rehashing history, I don't think any council member lied. I think they all believed the ballot statement to be true.
DeletePersonally, it's the fatalism that bothers me most about how we talk about council and staff here. I'm an optimist. I like to believe that I can change some minds with the right information sometimes. But if we actually believe people are liars, thieves, stupid or corrupt, then the information doesn't matter, so why try? I would go so far as to say that I force myself to believe people are honest and intelligent, even if misinformed. It gives me hope that the next issue can be won. It's a perspective that has served me well in all facets.
--FP.
Council does not run the show, even though they could. Their backers (rotary club clan / developers) set the tone. Look how the ecofair hosts have Kranz completely in the palm of their hand. Holz was the best council example we have mustered and there is hope for some similar leaders in the future. It ain't this group.
Delete8:02, council told lies. Barth went up against a former coastal commission chair and still insisted on her version of the truth. They each lied for different reasons. Gaspar insisted that you'd have to hold a citywide vote to remodel your kitchen. That language or even a hint at it is nowhere to be found in the Prop A language...not remotely.
DeleteI guess if you really wanted to give council a pass, you could always say that they were lazy for not doing their own homework by ready the 4-5 page initiative...so lazy that they ignored all warning signs from the public and lied instead of bothering to read for themselves.
DeleteThat make you feel better, FP?
"Ready" should be "reading." And any who did read it knew they were lying, as the language explaining what it would/would not do was very clear.
DeleteWell that certainly seems to be Lisa Shaffer's point of view: mistakes happen, nothing is anybody's fault, bad decisions should always be viewed in the light most favorable to the decision-maker, authorities should never apologize for anything...
DeleteIt's highly convenient for policy makers, but it's no way to run a city.
I never suggested a need to agree with bad decisions or shirk accountability. A bad decision is still a bad decision, irrespective of the motives that produced it.
DeleteMy point is that as a practical matter, if you honestly believe that council and staff are beyond redemption--that they have inherent character flaws that preclude wise decision making (stupid, lazy, corupt, lying, nasty. . . ), then in your view we are all wasting our time here. If true, we would be better served to tune out until the next election cycle, because the current council offers no hope.
What a sad waste of time to research an issue and prepare a three-minute monologue for council meetings if you truely believe the dolts on the other end have neither the mental capacity nor the moral code to follow along.
Why bother?
My point is: personally, I can't align those two concepts. If it's worth my time and effort to engage, I MUST believe that my effort has the prospect of making a difference, however small. That means I MUST assume that good information, presented properly, coming from a trusted source, can change minds. I must also assume that the people on the receiving end have the ability, willingness, and intelligence to accept new information.
The day I stop believing these things is the day I have to disengage completely. To do otherwise would be a complete waste of my time.
--FP
The two views are not irreconcilable. Just because past decisions were made in bad faith or incompetence doesn't mean we can't encourage the council to improve its decision-making on future issues.
DeleteIndeed, holding them accountable and letting them know we are watching is likely the best way for citizens to influence outcomes!
9:35 I don't feel like I waste my time here. We know that council gets wind or reads these comments on this blog. We have and will continue to make a difference thanks to EU.
DeleteNot everyone will agree and not everyone is right. We need a council that cares about the people they are representing. They know someone is watching and we will keep them on their toes.
I go with the incompetence take, because I have seen it in action. As for holding people accountable, the politics of any given situation down at city hall make that a lot harder proposition in reality. How many times have we heard Vina should be fired, or Phil Cotton, or Lisa Rudloff? Even though it's not a business, there is a certain ebb and flow to the organization down at city hall, and no one council person is going to go it alone to make the move against a highly placed employee. If you had 4 to 1 on the council, maybe this would happen, but otherwise it won't.
DeleteFurthermore, I don't think you can accurately predict the influence of this blog, or any other specific group, other than real estate and developer interests. If you follow the money in that group, you can see where the influence lies. A lot of times the disconnect lies between the council person before and after the election, and those people's supporters. Take Lisa as an example, I wasn't that disappointed, because though I felt she was a better option than say Jerome, I didn't think she was going to be a world beater in office. I had high hopes in the beginning, but after a few months of the campaign, you could see some of the personality quirks and positions that she had were probably going to alienate some people. As for Blakespeare, I like what I see so far and tony though imperfect has made some great efforts for Leucadia. Am I satisfied, no, but it's better than the days of Stocks/Bonds and Dallablabber. Would I like 4 new council people, yes, but I'll probably have to settle for less...
DeleteI'll settle for four new council people and a different mayor than the childish one we have now. RAH! RAH! RAH! Where's the best place to be on a Wednesday night, says the mayor! At city hall of course.
DeleteWhat an ass.
Shaffer, Barth, and Kranz voted no differently on Prop A and other important issues than Jerome would have. There is something to be said for the devil you know instead of the turncoats and users who some of us helped to elect.
DeleteIT was foulish to by PV when any number of houses cold be bilt there. But at least when nothing happins theri thats what happins.
ReplyDelete- Sylvia
And this is supposed to be clever?
DeleteEcofest has better parking at new venue but in every other respect is way more enjoyable at Cottonwood creek so let's hope it returns.
ReplyDeleteIn what respects was it more enjoyable at Cottonwood Creek?
DeleteMore accessible to more people, who were encouraged to attend by walking or riding their bikes.
DeleteMore intimate, less noisy, kids play area to name a few. Saw tons of local friends last year, saw only a few people I knew this year which was a surprise.
ReplyDeleteAt Cottonwood Creek Park in the past, the majority of attendees were able to walk or bike there. It was a more intimate setting and was more in line with the community we all treasure. I hope it goes back there next year.
ReplyDeleteSure, today had much more space, for a few more booths perhaps, but the past site has more of a community feel to the proceedings. At least Bob was honored on a poster for his contributions to the event.
Was this moved so they could have an alcohol serving area? Hmmm. Cottonwood Creek Park festivities would never have allowed that unless I have a faulty memory. Perhaps I never paid attention and it was there all along but being a city park, it seems that would have be a no go proposition.
Thanks Leichstag for hosting this event today but I hope it can go back to the Park next year. If it has become too large for Cottonwood maybe the new park could host it since there is more than enough space there. Of course that too would probably eliminate the alcohol serving area.
Why it that now a part of our celebration of mother earth? Surely we can do without that temptation on this one day a year. The example it sets for all the kids who attended is not a good thing for this event. Save it for our street fairs. Eco Day should be better represented than to have alcohol be a part of this celebration.
Dalakranz dun sez them be grain squeezings! Wut better way ta cellybrate de earth's bounty! YeeeeeeeHawwww!
Delete(banjo music starts)
Parking is a huge issue at Cottonwood Creek Park, there isn't anywhere near enough for an event of that size.
Delete-MGJ
Plenty of parking at coaster station and a shorter walk than we had to make at the new location. Try again.
DeleteSomeone asked about violations of Prop A on this blog. I have no idea if Leichtag is violating Prop. A but here is the latest on what they are doing, besides holding Eco Fest.
ReplyDeleteLeichtag Foundation
441 Saxony Rd, Encinitas, California 92024
Live music, food trucks, and plant + produce sale… just come to the #FarmAndHangout! Bring a friend, a blanket, a beverage of your choice, and even a picnic basket as we enjoy the spring colors at sunset on the farm.
Our farmers ask you to wear closed toed shoes and protect your skin with sunscreen, sunglasses and a hat. In order to keep our farm happy NO pets will be permitted.
Live music by The Saltlickers. Gourmet grilled cheese from Cheesy Amigos and gluten-free treats and salads from 2Good2B Bakery & Cafe! Plant and produce sale from the farm and spice sale from The Spice Way-San Diego.
No RSVP required. See you there!
Service dogs must be allowed.
Delete1:33, Obviously planning world domination. (jk, Leichtag!)
ReplyDelete2:14- no one said anything about planning world domination or did they? What I want to know is this a violation of Prop. A. What is Leichtag zoned for? Does anyone know. They are having a lot of events there. Go to their FB page or website. For those who know more than I, are they violating Prop. A or even the spirit of Prop A? Thanks to anyone that knows the answer, as I don't.
ReplyDeleteSend the downtown crowd there! A perfect solution to divert the boozers to a different location.
DeleteProp A is about listing zoning documents and having a vote to change them. And, it includes some height limitation clarifications. People read all sorts of things into Prop A, but that's pretty much it. Wanting to have a vote to change zoning is not not a violation of Prop A, it's exactly what Prop A says you must do. If the Foundation is violating zoning, they are violating zoning. This is not a violation of Prop A. To change the zoning without a vote, would be a violation of Prop A.
DeleteThere was a move to rezone the land into 3 parcels awhile back; whatever became of that? This may have been when Ecke's still owned it.
DeleteI think rather than violating Prop A, it is more of an issue that they are doing all they can to get around the agriculture in perpetuity covenant that came with their purchase of the 66 or 67 acre Ecke property. Time will tell just how good a neighbor they will be and how much they push against the ag designation of their holdings to build on that land.
ReplyDeleteJim Farley and Leichtag know about Prop. A. The property already has approval for a ag research lab, but they want a taller structure and other facilities. They are preparing the public for a future vote they hope to win in order to get around the height limitations and agricultural zoning. Prop. A requires a public vote to exceed the 30-foot height restriction and change the zoning.
ReplyDeleteFarley has said publicly that he wants to be a good neighbor to the community. Privately he admits to his ambitious expansion plans.
Frankly, I don't see the two as being mutually exclusive.....
Delete- The Sculpin
Sculpin- You don't see the two as mutually exclusive? Please tell the readers why you don't? I disagree with your permits but I am curious to see how you sell this. Of course, living in Olivenhein it doesn't affect you.
DeleteSorry should have typed "premise"
DeleteIt's not completely clear why Farley and Leichtag are willing to go through the brain damage of a Prop A vote. If they are entertaining it, I would think that they would want to know if conceptually their plans would be appealing to the general public before spending gobs of money on the pre-development soft costs. It's during this process that the "good neighbor to the community" converges with the "ambitious expansion plans", after which, if successful, are no longer mutually exclusive. Regardless, these guys have gobs of acreage, they're not building homes of any sort for resale, and for that size property 30'+ is just not going to be an issue.
DeleteAs for Olivenhain, we have lot's of stuff that's in excess of 30'. Whether it's covered horse arenas, ridiculously over the top rotundas, absurdly expansive porte-cochere's, or just the odd piece of art work, it really doesn't rise to any level of concern because of the sense of scale provided by the surrounding acreage. Leichtag is no different.
- The Sculpin
What if Leichtag wanted to pilot vertical farming here to pioneer methods to grow locally consumed produce with less land?
DeleteA video on vertical farming in Singapore:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nFQOkzEjxQ
Now it all makes sense! Buy a councilman and start the PR circus. If it looks like a prop A walk around duck ...
ReplyDeleteWe know Kranz is bought and paid for by Leichtag. Hy may have declared the $6000.00 trip to Israel, but he still took it without having to pay for it. Hell, even Dallager didn't get that good of a deal on his appliances.
DeleteA very few years back, a presentation was made in advance of Leichtag's Encinitas land deal. Someone in the audience had a full-color, fold-out flier with designs for an Orange County-style cemented-over plaza. When shown in front of the audience, the Leichtag rep got downright panicky, demanding to know "how did you get ahold of that??" Yep, they're good neighbors...just keep telling yourself that...nothing to see here....
ReplyDeleteHave you ever been to a vineyard in Napa or Sonoma?
DeleteFor sake of argument, let's say Leichtag wants to build a 34 ft tall barn, and they invoke a Prop A vote. Would they be doing something wrong by asking for the vote?
ReplyDeleteIf so, then is Prop A written poorly? Should it simply impose the 30 ft limit with no option for a vote, period? If not, what's the vote for? What scenario would you support going over 30 ft, and encourage others to vote yes on a variance?
I just find it odd that people are already lining up to throw mud on Leichtag based on the rumor that they might possibly maybe someday ask for a variance that requires a vote under Prop A. When did following Prop A become an affront to Prop A?
--FP.
It didn't. Why are you trying to stir the pot over Prop A working as intended and making it sound like anyone has a problem with that?
DeleteThe issue here is that Leichtag has already asked for uses not allowed without a zoning change. They have tipped their hand repeatedly.
So they'll have their day at the ballot box I expect and will make their case to exceed zoning density/height.
I'm so confused......exactly what hand did they tip? Are you implying there's a Prop A secret ballot? The process seems pretty straightforward...you want a change or modification in your zoning - you take it to the people. As in any election, the more outreach, polling, education, workshops you do, the clearer the outcome will be - positive or negative. Is that what you arew referring to as "tipping their hand"?
Delete- The Sculpin
In order to exceed the 30-ft. height limit or increase zoning density in Encinitas, the General Plan requires a GP amendment. Under Prop. A a public vote is required. Prop. A clarified the language and eliminated the super majority approval by the council. Anyone can put a proposal through the planning process to increase height and zoning. Now the final step in approval is the public vote.
DeleteUnlikely that anyone would go to a vote for a 34-ft. tall barn. But a 3-5 story research building and housing for visiting scholars? That would be different. Prop. A doesn't prevent anyone from dreaming. It becomes an economic decision. It cost less than $50,000 to place a proposal on the ballot in an election year. And then there is the campaign cost. On the first Prop. A to put houses on the ranch property, Ecke spent between $250,000 and $500.000. And he lost.
The Sculpin and Fictitious Person should visit the ranch and talk with Jim Farley. He's very open, Just remember, he's a lawyer.
In London, most houses are being built DOWN, I'd override Prop A and go dig....DEEP. (there are more than 1 way to skin a cat).
ReplyDeleteYea, that's going to be cost effective....
Delete11:58- versus the cost of footing the bill for an election, I'd much rather take my chances digging.
DeleteCost estimated at $30-$40K if during a regular election.
Deletethe digg option sounds smart… no 3 stories in Encinitas without a vote.
ReplyDelete