On Facebook. The link is to what is quite obviously nothing but a press release from the software vendor.
But what's the reality of OpenGov? Are Encinitas and its water district really "the first two governments in San Diego to launch elaborate online budget platforms?" Does Encinitas really have better online budget information than Carlsbad or San Diego? Do any readers here know of formerly apathetic neighbors who started using OpenGov and are now much more engaged?
We don't know of any regular users of OpenGov, and we tend to hear from quite a few fairly active council watchers. We do recall giving OpenGov a cursory look when it was first introduced in Encinitas, and found it fairly simplistic.
Civic apathy stems from City abuse of residents...Shaffer typically blames the messengers...gee, maybe fake transparency will make it all seem ok!
ReplyDeleteShe's only been here 5 years and has repeatedly puffed-up her middle-management hall-of-shame resume. Truth, "Emptied trash cans in offices of a company that supplied mechanical pencils for a NASA substation..."Claim by Lisa, "...worked for NASA.
DeleteAs for OPENGOV: Those warrants for non-payment on political billings from a mid-western State where Kranz once campaigned for public office should catch up with The Great Deliberator before the current written complaints of 'menacing' by female City employees are allowed to see the light of day in the City of Encinitas's Personnel Department bulletin.
How do you make those written formal complaints disappear... legally?
City Council, Jeff Murphy, Manjeet Ranu, and Mike Strong lied to residents about the draft housing element. Murphy, Ranu, and Strong sent the draft housing element to the state agency HCD to begin the state process of approval.
ReplyDeleteHere's the letter -
Mr.. Glen Campora
Division of Housing Policy Development
California Department of Housing and Community Development
2020 W. EI Camino Avenue, Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
2013-2021 Housing Element DRAFT
Attached is the draft City of Encinitas 2013-2021 Housing Element for your review. To assist your staff in reviewing the draft Housing Element, this transmittal consists of the following:
· Draft Housing Element overview (six-page summary);
· Department Completeness Review Checklist;
· One hard copy of the Draft Housing Element; and
· A CD containing the draft in adobe format is also included.
Please be advised that the City intends to rezone sites needed to accommodate its RHNA allocation for low/very low income concurrently with the Housing Element update.
As such this submittal includes three different housing strategies, each with its own sites inventory. All three strategies are being analyzed as part of the Environmental Impact Report, where the analysis results will be presented at a future Council hearing for final selection. Not all the sites included in this draft plan will be included in the City's final housing strategy.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me by phone at 760/633-2696 via email at jmurphy(§encinitasca.gov
Sincerely,
JEFF MURPHY, Director
Planning and Building Department
cc Larry Watt, Interim City Manager
Manjeet Ranu, Deputy Director
. Mike Strong, Associate Planner
If this caught you off guard then you haven't been paying attention. They have been very clear about the process for months.
DeleteThey have been saying that they will put in market-rate high density instead of affordable housing for years!
DeleteJeff Murphy has lied to the state since their projects for years have had almost NO affordable housing! It is Jeff Murphy that is not paying attention. Let's hope that the State does.
what a load of bullshit!
ReplyDeleteI am stunned that you don't recognize the vibrancy in this.
DeleteMurphy was pretty clear that this is a draft and not the final product. Might as well get a sense of the state's thinking sooner rather than later - sounds prudent to me......
ReplyDelete- The Sculpin
8:35 AM
DeleteA draft sent to HCD is considered the final document unless HCD wants changes.
11:36 AM
DeleteYou're thinking of a final draft that has been officially adopted by council. That hasn't happened. What's referred to here as a conceptual draft was approved by council for submission to HCD for preliminary feedback. HCD understands this. They will probably couch their feedback it being preliminary and could change once they get the final draft.
We aren't the first city to do this and this isn't the first time Encinitas has asked for preliminary feedback from HCD. It happened in 1989 when we adopted our general plan and housing element. The city was surprised that HCD had problems with the final version after getting what the city thought was positive feedback from HCD on earlier drafts.
2:28 PM
DeleteDon't take any wooden nickels.
HCD will also consider "third party comments" presumably to include residents who wish to comment.
For third parties submitting public comment to HCD, comments
should be received early in the HCD review period to allow
consideration as appropriate and incorporation of comments in
conversation as detailed below.
** note all public comments should also be submitted directly to
the local government.
Within 30 days:
HCD analyst completes review including consideration of
public comments received.
2:56 PM
Delete"Don't take any wooden nickels." Okay, you got me. I have no idea what you're talking about.
Each time HCD receives a HE to review they have 60 days to review it and get their comments back to the submitter. It behooves anyone wishing to comment on the submitted HE to get them to HCD as early in the cycle as possible to allow HCD to give them full weight. It's not unusual for affordable housing advocates to submit comments to HCD on HE's.
Noticed I used the word "cycle" as in this is the first submittal for Encinitas for this RHNA cycle, however late. There will be additional submittals, hopefully just one more. With each submittal HCD has 60 days to turn it around. People can comment on each submittal.
Are you under the illusion that the current incomplete HE is the only one that Encintas will submit to HCD?
"We don't know of any regular users of OpenGov, and we tend to hear from quite a few fairly active council watchers. We do recall giving OpenGov a cursory look when it was first introduced in Encinitas, and found it fairly simplistic."
ReplyDeleteIt sounds like nothing will satisfy you. You are just anti-government and continue to whip the troops with anything you can distort into an issue. I realize this started in another thread by a commenter but it's definitely your style. Trying to make something out of nothing.
Hey, I'm not the one making hyperbolic statements in a marketing press release, or touting said press release.
DeleteNothing wrong with OpenGov, but it ain't revolutionary.
Here is the same old tired swing at critics on this site. Based on the remarks at 9:07, it seems like we have more than a few city staff and developers or lawyers who support them who follow this blog more closely than posters!
DeleteOur city has $104 million in annual tax revenue, over 200 full-time employees, a council that rolls over and follows staff recommendations almost 100% of the time, many council-appointed commissioners and other community members, a communication specialist to handle the press, and here is the old claim that they are being treated unfairly and being overpowered by citizens.
How credible is the claim, "It sounds like nothing will satisfy you.." when Gus' "28 obstructions" can frustrate the most basic city plans as unpaid volunteers on their days off?
Give us a budget of 10 million and see what we could do!
According to the the OpenGov website send them your data in excel format and in a week or two weeks your OpenGov program is ready. You can switch between graphs - percentage, stacked, line, and pie chart. The program is simplistic and isolates categories as compared to using the spreadsheet.
DeleteHow much did the city pay for the program? Not found in the city's OpenGov program. Is the program under license? Not found in the city's OpenGov program.
If you like the choice to switch between different types of graphs check out the program on the city website.
I said it once and I'll say it again, Lisa would do well to stay off of Social Media..
Delete-MGJ
11:00 AM
Delete"Give us a budget of 10 million and see what we could do!"
I have something better to propose. You, EU, run for council or better yet, mayor. Instead of criticizing everything, show us how it's done. Be on the inside so you can let the sunshine in. Show us how to make the right decisions or tell us why the rest are making the wrong decision. You've put a lot of effort into this Blog. It can't be any worse as a councilperson.
You've got plenty of time to position yourself to run as campaigning won't really begin until next year. Commenters on this blog are crying out for viable candidates. Who better than you?
I can hear the excuses already. "I'm more effective here" for one. No you're not if you're elected. Even if not elected your message would reach a larger audience through your campaign.
So why don't you throw your hat in the ring? Back up your statement.
1:32 PM
DeleteWhoops, my bad. That statement was in the next comment not EU's but I stand by my encouragement to EU to run for council in 2016 given his many criticisms of the city and its current and past elected officials. Your readers are crying out for leadership, EU. Answer the call.
Agree Mr. Green Jeans. 9:07 sounds to me as though Lisa Shaffer is posting on this blog again, as well.
Delete10:30 AM
Delete"Nothing wrong with OpenGov, but it ain't revolutionary." Why does that matter? I didn't find anyone claiming that in the case study text. What does it need to do to be revolutionary and why does it matter?
1:52,
DeleteSome readers may, as I did, find it amusing that the professor can't tell the difference between a promotional corporate press release and a real news story.
I'm sorry if you don't see the humor.
4:47 PM
DeleteFinding Shaffer's touting a vendor press release as recognition funny is one thing. These vendor press release "case studies" have been happening for years and are a big yawn. But you had to find something to slam by saying "it ain't revolutionary" when neither the vendor "case study", news report of it, or Shaffer's Facebook comment even alluded to it being revolutionary.
If the point of your comment was to take a shot at the city saying it's now open and transparent, fine, that's SOP here, but that's not how you wrote it. Not that you're "making hyperbolic statements".
9:51 AM,
DeleteOK, Mr. Grumpypants.
The corporate press release touted by Shaffer called the software an "elaborate online budget platform" and the first in the county when in fact it just makes simple Excel-style graphs from spreadsheets.
How much are we paying for these simple graphs? I don't know, because the "elaborate online budget platform" doesn't have that information!
4:32 PM
Delete"Mr. Grumpypants"?? Really?
Funny how now we refer to them as Excel style instead of Lotus 1-2-3 or really Visicalc.
"The corporate press release ... elaborate online budget platform", oh no, hyperbole in a marketing press release. Who would expect that?
Whatever strengths or weaknesses OpenGov has, city officials appear satisfied with it. If that makes it a failure by definition then that's your problem but at least you get to take a shot at Shaffer and isn't that what it's all about.
So your focus is on the manner of the presentation not the data. Do you want fancy graphs? Better crosstabs? Etc. Do you want transaction level data?
If OpenGov is nothing special what should the city have purchased? OpenGov was created in 2012 working with the city of Palo Alto and several other Bay Area cities. I don't know if there is another product currently out there that does the same thing but I couldn't find any other product that was available when the city got OpenGov.
So you want more transparency and access to city information but when you get it, you aren't satisfied. Grumpy? I'd say you are.
Transparency is a culture and process.
DeleteTransparency is not having backroom deals to give away the Little League fields. Transparency is not lying on the Prop A ballot arguments. Transparency is not hiding the road reports from the public. Transparency is not hiding wastewater violations at the Ecke Community Park. Transparency is not lying about having already hired Rutan & Tucker to write a report against Prop A. Transparency is not lying about the cost of hiring sales tax propagandist Catherine Lew.
You can't just buy some silly graphing software to display data that's already public and then declare the city "transparent."
10:12 AM
DeleteBoy you are a Grumpy Gus. Look, I understand the thrust of the initial post. First term councilwoman Shaffer mistakes PR fluff for real recognition. What a dope. Just another example of why she is a bad councilperson. Whether I agree or not with your litany of the city's non-transparent failures, buying "some silly graphing software" is just one step in trying to make city information more accessible and, hopefully, more understandable to residents.
That capability has been asked for at council meetings. So the city did it. I played with it with it was first available but that was a while ago. It's okay but if there is any other similiar software out there, it's probably much the same. But you are unable to give them even that. You didn't say that that was a step in the right direction but they need to do a lot more. No, you, in effect, trashed the software and, indirectly, the city for buying it. There apparently isn't anything the city can do to gain your approval. And claiming that the city hasn't earned it or lost it long ago is a cop-out.
Seriously?
DeleteYou're criticizing me for not praising the city for purchasing software that I don't find particularly useful.
And I've asked around and haven't found anyone who finds it particularly useful. Even you admit that you don't use it and haven't since briefly playing with it when it was first announced.
I don't feel the need to offer praise for every symbolic gesture no matter how meaningless. If you do, you are welcome to write a letter of thanks to the city for the software you don't use.
If you have a more legitimate criticism, please explain. Because I don't see it.
It just speaks to more council disregard with taxpayers money. EU is on the money and the list of wasteful spending grows.
Delete4:28 PM
DeleteOkay. Limiting ourselves to finance, what would you expect to see that would garner your praise? Full access by the public to the city's financial system so anybody can perform their own forensic audit? Because that will never happen. What level of financial detail do you want? What analytic capabilities should it provide? The more sophisticated the software, the higher the price. Would just a spreadsheet of the data be sufficient because there are plenty of desktop software packages available, both proprietary and open source, that would allow you to do some financial number crunching?
Is the city suppose to guess what everyone wants. I know there are some on this site who wouldn't be happy unless they have full access to all city systems. They want to be able to expose what they presume are all the nefarious activities going on in the city. Is that where you're coming from?
So please tell us what financial capabilities you want the city to provide the public.
By the way, I understand fund accounting and city financing. I read the city budgets and follow staff presentations to council. This was the basis for my reaction to OpenGov. It has some nice rudimentary charting and aggregation capabilities but doesn't add much for me that the budgets don't already give me.
As I said before, I'm more interested in a city that acts transparently and ethically. A software program does not make that happen.
DeleteThat said, there are glaring omissions in the city's implementation of OpenGov. I don't know whether this is due to limitations of the software or the city's inability to fully use its functionality.
A couple biggies:
1) The information presented is historical, while what's important to residents is forward-looking. What levels is the city planning to fund road maintenance at over three to five years? How is the city going to fund increasing pension costs? What are the city's revenue growth projections? It is astounding that after spending a full two years on Gus Vina's "strategic planning" exercises, the city still doesn't have a five-or-six-year financial plan (when the city did claim last year to have a six-year financial plan, it didn't exist).
2) More detail. The broad budget categories may be mildly interesting to somebody, but without a lot more detail, aren't very useful. How much is the city paying each contractor for each project? Why wouldn't this information be included in an "elaborate online budget platform?" What is "elaborate" at all about the city's implementation of OpenGov?
11:29 AM
DeleteThanks for responding. It's a starting point.
"while what's important to residents is forward-looking". I agree forward looking is important. That's a budget which is for two years and is published but in a printed format. A truly online version would be good (not just a PDF). I know a lot of the financial systems out there allow for some form of internal online budget preparation but I don't know how difficult it would be to make an internal version available to the public. Besides, until it's adopted the budget can get changed, but I'm sure most people want to see it prior to adoption. Anyway, it's certainly doable but at what cost.
I agree with the second half of your first point of having a forward looking, multi-year financial plan although PV pretty much shot the wad on that. Currently, despite the strategic plan, the council is struggling prioritizing CIP projects. When they bought PV there were no trade-off discussions and now it's coming home to roost.
While it isn't handy, contract awards over a certain amount are approved by council and those amounts are included in the report. But based on many comments/topics here I'm sure you want to see all contracts. And contracts may be paid out of different revenue streams so just seeing the contract amount itself may not be enough to know the impact on city revenues. I don't know how the city financial system is structured but I would guess that what you're asking for isn't straightforward to do and probably would require staff to maintain a separate database. You may think that's a worthy additional cost.
Finally, are you interested in oversight or second guessing? Second guessing takes more data. Not knowing what OpenGov cost, what if it was only $500? Would it be worth it compared to a cost of $5,000?
Bottom line is most people here don't trust anyone from city hall, past or present, and they want to be looking over the city's shoulder on every transaction. That's just dysfunctional. However, we agree on the fundamentals.
9:16 PM
ReplyDelete"Please be advised that the City intends to rezone sites needed to accommodate its RHNA allocation for low/very low income concurrently with the Housing Element update."
This has been clear from the current restart of the housing element update. Why do you think they are going to put it on the ballot? They didn't lie about this. It was hidden in plain sight. Maybe you chose to ignore it or are only now paying attention. To have an approved housing element is going to require the rezoning (upzoning) on some of the sites identified by council.
9:12 AM
DeleteDo you see anything in that letter that says residents must decide on the up zoning?
11:40 AM
DeleteThe HE is called a draft because it can't be approved until the EIR is complete. If the EIR identifies any problems then they have to be addressed which may cause changes to the HE. It's a draft because all the policies aren't in it yet and a number that are in there need more detail. It's a draft because not every site that is being analyzed is going to be in the final but the city wants to know from HCD what they they will accept.
The HCD cover letter doesn't have to spell out everything. That has to be in the HE which is currently incomplete. One of the HE policies will be to rezone certain sites for higher density which is all the state statute requires. What isn't know is whether the council will decide to rezone the sites at a higher density with no restrictions, meaning they can be market rate, affordable or a mix of the two or use an overlay with affordable requirements.
The whole HE schedule is being driven by the November 2016 election dates. The HE discussions continually bring that up. Why do you think they are putting it on the ballot? Because Prop A requires upzoning to be voted on. It can't be any plainer. Either you haven't been paying attention or you are willfully being ignorant. Or maybe you're just being deceitful hoping to rile everyone up. I hope the latter isn't the case.
The fact is, the cover letter to HCD appears to be deceiving, on the surface, because it is not mentioned that the entire "draft" of the housing element update will be subject to a vote of the electorate.
Delete1:42 PM
DeleteThe March 11 joint city council/planning commission meeting to:
1) Receive the draft changes to the draft Housing Element; 2) Receive and consider public testimony; 3) Direct any changes/modifications to the draft Housing Element; 4) Direct that the conceptual Housing Element be analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and, 5) Authorize staff to submit the conceptual Housing Element (with conceptual housing strategy sites) to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for Substantial Compliance Determination.
On pages 27-28 of Attachment B (with is part of the HE draft) said:
The City is committed to providing adequate sites with appropriate zoning to accommodate the remaining RHNA. To accomplish this mandate of the State, the City shall rezone those sites identified on the final housing strategy map provided in Attachment X (See Footnote 3).
The voters will be presented with the Housing Element, rezonings and Zoning Code amendments, currently scheduled for November 2016. This approach will be taken because voter approval is required when major amendments are made to certain land use planning policy documents causing major increases in zoning density or intensity of land use, pursuant to Encinitas General Plan Land Use Policies and Municipal Code Chapter 30. Since accommodating the RHNA necessitates changes to the General Plan Land Use Element, Zoning Map, Encinitas Zoning Code and certain specific plans, a vote of the people is required. Presenting both the Housing Element, along with rezonings and Zoning Code amendments concurrently provides maximum transparency and comprehensive consideration by the voters.
Footnote 3: The exact sites and number of maps that will be included in the Housing Element will be finalized following environmental review, Council decision, and voter approval.
Believe me HCD will see this. I'm sure they already know from talking to city staff that a formal vote is required to fulfill the HE. We aren't the first city that had to do that.
There is no deception here. You're trying to make something out of nothing.
1:20 PM
DeleteThe housing element isn't called a draft because of the EIR. Other cities approved their housing elements without an EIR. You obviously don't know that if problems are identified, the council can vote to override the information in the EIR. T
The official HCD process was started when Jeff Murphy sent the entire housing element to HCD on Monday. When they receive it a 60 day process begins on the review.
The whole housing element schedule is being driven by Jeff Murphy and his cohorts.
The murky programs in the housing element were approved by the council at the March 11 meeting. No public feedback was allowed once the council started discussion of each program.
Some of the programs approved by the council and not implemented will lead to lawsuits. Many of the programs weren't needed.
HCD looks at the whole document not just the maps.
Either the council is too dumb to know when they have been hoodwinked by Jeff Murphy and his cohorts OR the council is in on the lies.
2:21 PM
DeleteHousing elements are not exempt from CEQA. Since our housing element includes intensifying development is some areas, an EIR is required. Yes the council could declare that there are no alternatives to issues identified in the EIR but that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. That's part of the CEQA process.
HCD has 60 days to review the draft and give the city its feedback. Depending on what HCD determines, the cycle could be repeated a number of times. The deadline for HE adoption has long passed for Encinitas so that isn't a factor.
The whole HE schedule is being driven by getting it on the November 2016 ballot or do you think the public shouldn't vote on it.
I agree some of the programs are currently murky and need further detail. HCD, for one, will require it. Council and the planning commission will need to hold further hearings on the final draft that will be formally adopted by council and the version used for the ballot. The public will get to weigh in on those. Whether you think the council will listen to public commenters is your opinion.
Whether some of the programs are needed or failure to implement others will lead to lawsuits is an unknown. It will be best to view them all in final form.
Yes, HCD will closely examine the HE text, programs, sites and constrains. Based on reading HCD evaluation letters to other cities, they get down to the nitty-gritty.
The council hasn't been hoodwinked. They just don't agree with you.
2:49 PM
DeleteBetter brush up on you CEQA. An EIR isn't required. Other cities have approved their housing elements with negative declarations even with the so called zoning changes.
The EIR will make it easier for a developer because little or no CEQA work will be required. With the city doing the EIR each developer could save from $100,000 to $250,000 on a development. Thank you city council, Jeff Murphy and cohorts for giving away public money.
Thanks for the last sentence -
"The council hasn't been hoodwinked. They just don't agree with you."
You verified the council lied.
3:07 PM
DeleteI see you make the common mistake of equating CEQA only with an EIR. CEQA is a process that can result in an EIR or a negative declaration. Either way it's CEQA. There are criteria to follow whether a project, as defined by CEQA, requires a full EIR. CEQA also exempts certain types projects from review but the general plan, including housing element, isn't one of them.
So Encintas has made the determination that the land use changes required by the HE requires an EIR. If all the were changed in the HE were policies then an EIR wouldn't be required. As stated in the OPR 2003 General Plan Guidelines:
"Adopting or amending a general plan or a general plan element is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code §21000, et seq.) and often requires preparation and consideration of an environmental impact report (EIR). The primary purpose of an EIR is to inform decision-makers and the public of the potential significant environmental effects of a proposal, less damaging alternatives, and possible ways to reduce or avoid the possible environmental damage. This information enables environmental considerations to influence policy development, thereby ensuring that the plan’s policies will
address potential environmental impacts and the means to avoid them. ..."
I think it is you that needs to brush up on CEQA.
3:34 PM
DeleteIt was Jeff Murphy and his cohorts that made the decision for an EIR.
Other cities didn't require an EIR for their up zoning changes.
Why didn't you make a comment on the gift of public funds Jeff Murphy and his cohorts and the city council are giving to all the developers?
The EIR will make it easier for a developer because little or no CEQA work will be required. With the city doing the EIR each developer could save from $100,000 to $250,000 on a development.
Thank you city council, Jeff Murphy and cohorts for giving away public money.
3:43 PM
DeleteLike I said, you need to brush up on CEQA.
3:47 PM
DeleteWell, loquacious one, why didn't you make a comment on the gift of public funds Jeff Murphy and his cohorts and the city council are giving to all the developers?
The EIR will make it easier for a developer because little or no CEQA work will be required. With the city doing the EIR each developer could save from $100,000 to $250,000 on a development.
Thank you city council, Jeff Murphy and cohorts for giving away public money.
3:55 PM
DeleteI'm trying to follow your gift of public funds logic. So is it your contention that even though the housing element isn't exempt from CEQA review but given the magnitude of land use changes required to meet our RHNA obligations we still shouldn't do an EIR? Are you saying the city should just make the changes and have any developer do an EIR when they submit a project?
Just because one city doesn't need to prepare an EIR doesn't mean that applies to all cities. It depends on what is in the plan. And this HE is proposing changes in the land use element which is where the EIR impacts really kick in. Those land use changes will be to the land use element which ripple down to the zoning code.
Because a housing element isn't an exempt project in CEQA there must be an preliminary review. From that review an initial study is performed to determine whether to prepare an EIR or negative declaration. So is it your contention that no matter what the initial study reveals, the city should just do a negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration? That doesn't make sense and would leave the city open to lawsuits (see desert rose). If the initial study points to doing an EIR, the city is required to do one. The idea that it may save some potential developer money is irrelevant. That's how CEQA works.
Sounds like you spend too much time with unicorns.
Besides how many development projects that follow current zoning are required to do an EIR and that includes density bonus projects. Hardly any. We'll see about desert rose.
By the way, are you 2:39 PM below? If you are, are you trying to say that the HE just submitted is supposed to be the final one? Because if you are then you're further gone than I thought. If you're not, it applies to someone else.
Shaffer- another in a long line of worthless Encinitas council people. Pathetic.
ReplyDelete2;20 PM
ReplyDeleteA horse is still a horse not a unicorn. Your fairytale conception belief in the wording of the staff report - conceptual Housing Element (with conceptual housing strategy sites) is pathetic. Jeff Murphy sent a finished 400 pages housing element to HCD to start the official state approval procedure. Read the housing element on the city website.
The March 11 "conceptual" was unreadable.
The council decisions were documented by Jeff Murphy and his cohorts. The council approved a raw document. The finished housing element didn't come back to the council as an agenda item.
The official state process was started when Jeff Murphy sent the finished documents to HCD on May 4. The council @#$% the residents of Encinitas.
2:39 PM
DeleteExcept for the action items, what I quoted was part of the actual HE not the staff report. This feeble attempt to create controversy is getting pathetic. I must have been mistaken that this was just a misunderstanding. You are willfully trying to misrepresent what has happened. Pretty sad really but unfortunately not untypical.
A little honest behavior from council would go a long way. Here we have a perfect example why the activists have to be on council for errant behavior. We the taxpayers are not getting even minimum value from Encinitas government.
ReplyDeleteEvery time Shaffer opens her mouth, it is a disaster. She can't get out on a rail fast enough.
ReplyDeleteCould have swapped out "Encinitas" in this story. NUW has quite the spiel.
ReplyDelete