Monday, June 29, 2015

Which council member is exceeding your expectations?

Encinitas Guerrilla asks which is the most disappointing current council member.

As we prefer to focus on the positive here at Encinitas Undercover, we'd like to turn that around and ask which council member has most positively surprised you.

47 comments:

  1. None they all a bunch of hacks. SOPM (Spend Other Peoples Money) is what they are all about.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "As we prefer to focus on the positive here at Encinitas Undercover," Really?

    You could have fooled me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tongue in check.....

      Delete
    2. Tongue in cheek?
      Check in the mail?
      Check in cheek?
      Tongue in the mail?

      Delete
  3. The candidate yet to be elected!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I still think Catherine is doing a great job. At least she knows the law and can write legal things that Sabine can't seem to do. I like her.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. lolololllloooolllll....

      Delete
  5. I too was beginning to believe Catherine was the only keeper of the bunch until her recent vote on the project next to the Leucadia Shell Station on Orpheus.

    The owners first presented a four unit propoal to the community on site with what we thought were honest plans of their intentions.

    After going back to city, they came back with a fifth, so-called remainder lot that was never part of their original intent they brought before the public who showed up that one morning for their original presentation.

    Council, with Catherine's vote, allowed them to have a fifth lot without having to submit to all the regulations that a five unit project has to abide by. Undergrounding all utilities is one. They got a fifth lot under a four unit status thanks to her boneheaded vote. What a giveaway.

    Once again, it appears a builder goes to the planning dept. and comes back with a higher number of units than they originally presented to the community. That has to stem from planning. Jason St was similar. The owners originally told all their neighbors they were intending to build four units with no Density Bonus and when they came back, the number had jumped up to seven I believe

    Their neighbors were rightfully outraged with those new numbers. Fortunately the owners went back to their original stated intent of four units on the existing single family home residence.

    No surprise that this type of thing happens all the time and there is no one to blame but Planning.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That vote cost her a lot goodwill and resident support.

      The letter that she wrote last week helped, but people being what they are will remember the bad things before they remember the positive.

      Delete
  6. I don't care how long he's been out of office, I still go with Dallablabber....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 3:47- Of course you do.

      Delete
    2. For comic relief - yes!

      Delete
    3. How about that last election pamphlet that the
      D-blabber mailed out, with his dog Spot by his side - I think the dog was the only one that had the credibility and got a few votes.
      The dog was so embarrassed, he probably ran away!

      Delete
  7. Well, for one vote last week on Agenda Item 10B, the council surprised with a 4 to 0 vote to rewrite and send the letter opposing AB744. The letter was very strong. Read it here:

    http://www.encinitasca.gov/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=5605

    The best thing they have done in a long time on a significant issue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That letter was outstanding.

      It's also just one more example of staff not being competent enough to do the job we pay them oodles to do. Will McSeveney be reprimanded for not managing to string sentences in a coherent manner and having his one task taken away from him by the council? Will overpaid lobbyist Jonathan Clay have his contract terminated for working quietly against residents? No.

      But we can say that all four council members last week said and did all the right things. Now let's see if they can continue to put residents first without the "obstructionists" doing staff's work for them!

      Delete
    2. The State is not going to listen to a little town called Encinitas. The council tried, will get a reply that says thanks for your input, but NO we will not change the bill. It will stand as written.

      Any bets?

      Delete
    3. "The State" is also hearing from L.A. County, with other cities adding their voices every week. Exploitation of the Density Bonus law is being noticed and opposed in increasing numbers. This item is popping up on blogs statewide. The State will listen when the numbers reach a tipping point, and they're headed that way. L.A. County represents how many million people?

      Delete
    4. But you can always hope, 7:40 ;)

      Delete
    5. 7:58 Good luck with your theory. Not going to happen. CA needs the building industry here as bad as you need a beer.

      Delete
    6. Ain't a theory...it's called reality. Put down your beer and try it sometime.

      Delete
    7. 9:54 we will see how it ends, won't we?

      Delete
    8. Ever notice how any legislation that further enhances density bonus gets traction but legislation that tries to limit it goes nowhere. Whether or not AB 744 becomes law in what ever form, legislation to give local governments more flexibility dies on the vine.

      Delete
    9. The Senate vote on the bill just got postponed a week due to growing opposition :)

      Delete
    10. And AB744 does not propose to give more flexibility to local governments - it proposes to remove it.

      Delete
  8. None of them have met my expectations and I don't expect anything good out of them in the future.

    Truly a disappointment (all five).

    ReplyDelete
  9. I like them all. Lisa could loosen up some though. Liked it when the rest of them actually read hate clips about themselves from this blog on a tape at the State of the City Address. That was hilarious. Good sports. We've had former council members flat out nasty to the public. "I'm not going to get into a pissing match with a skunk!" one said. Haven't seen that attitude in a while, so professionalism and diplomacy are a refreshing change.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You must be the little white haired lady that shows up at the meetings and tells them all how wonderful they are.

      BARF!

      Delete
    2. 9:17 PM

      So now we're attacking "the little white haired lady". How degenerate can you get. Stay classy Encinitas.

      Delete
    3. 9:32 You get an A+ for reading correctly.

      Delete
  10. I like Catherine. All the others are tools and fools.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She did a good job last week, so let's hope that she stays on the right track after some of her other votes.

      Delete
    2. she did a good job last week...so what you are saying is that a blind squirrel finds and acorn once and while. sorry that don't cut it, she's as big a fool as the others just not as experienced at being a dope....give her time.

      Delete
  11. They gave the lifeguards more budget! $150 k more….. Un F097g believable. This Council group is totally clueless. Lisa is an idiot.

    ReplyDelete
  12. 9:17 You must be the prejudice psychic here who's always wrong.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 10:19 Says the little white haired lady who is mostly enamored by her presence in front of the camera.

      Delete
  13. Dump Muir - the conduit for $tock$.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Muir is a joke in the biggest sense of the word, along with his follower Gaspar because they both love $tock$. She can't make a move without looking for Muir's approval. Sick!

      Delete
    2. Gaspar is taking orders from Muir, who is taking orders from $tock$?! That chain of command is tantamount to di$a$ter!

      Delete
    3. Gaspar has earned her new moniker - Ga$par.

      Delete
  14. The elephant in the room - $32 million in unfunded pension obligations - and growing like a malignant cancer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And don't forget the road maintenance which the council decided to continue underfunding despite the recommendations of their own consultants!

      Delete
    2. That is more than $40 million, isn't it? I thought that Shaffer said that we would need over $2 million per year just to maintain the poor levels that we currently have. Before the election, they spent $1 million and praised and complimented staff and themselves.

      Delete
  15. All but Catherine suck. Dump them all next election. No incumbents.

    ReplyDelete
  16. No pension reform on the agenda of any of these council members - it is the sacred cow that cannot be touched. And I think the courts voided bankrupted municipalities from claiming exemption of these obligations.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Meaning Muir (et al) will be bleeding the system until the day he dies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Muir will need it with his health care issues.

      Delete