Thursday, August 27, 2015

Carlsbad mall developer wins

No matter which side you're on regarding the Caruso mall plan for the Carlsbad strawberry fields, it raises some interesting issues.

Developer Caruso says he had to do an end-run around the California Environmental Quality Act because CEQA is such a quagmire it makes it impossible to do anything.

Union-Trib:
A citizen-led initiative was the best way to get Carlsbad's approval for a proposal to build a lagoonside shopping, entertainment and open space destination, the developer of the project said Wednesday.

Rick Caruso, founder and CEO of Caruso Affiliated, said he chose the initiative process because he didn't want his unique plan to get bogged down in the legal quagmire that can happen with the California Environmental Quality Act.

Even though his Agua Hedionda South Shore Specific Plan was designed to comply with CEQA, he said, the initiative process completely bypasses that state legislation.

CEQA makes it too easy for a competing developer to tie his project up with a lawsuit that, he said, even if he wins it, can be costly and time consuming.
And Carlsbad residents feel hoodwinked because they signed petitions believing they were supporting a public vote, but the initiative process allowed the council to approve the development without a public vote.

Encinitas' Prop A would theoretically prevent such a large-scale development without a public vote here.

22 comments:

  1. Anyone up for a CPRA request to the City of Carlsbad to see if the City got any money from Caruso, and if so, who got the money?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Probably didn't need to pay them directly. The council is surely salivating over the sales tax revenue.

      Delete
  2. So back when Prop A was certified, there were calls here for the council to adopt it and avoid the expense of an election. I don't remember if EU had advocated council adoption but a number of commenters did. So if the Encinitas council had just adopted Prop A would the citizens have felt hoodwinked? Carlsbad did what many here wanted Encinitas to do.

    Westfield is contemplating some kind of action according to the U-T. I'm sure that's because they are diehard environmentalists.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Touche! I was wondering if anyone would call me on that.

      Yes, I probably did advocate council adoption, but I'd still defend that position and point to a big distinction: Prop A was only about creating a right to vote, while the Carlsbad mall is about approving a huge, controversial development.

      I don't think many of the petition signers would have felt cheated if the council approved Prop A without a vote.

      Delete
    2. We would not; it was their "just trust us" line and Jeff Mrphy's proposal to take the 4/5 supermajority vote down to just 3/5 (remember that? whoopsie) that sent the clear message to proponents that we had to take the vote to the people.

      Delete
    3. Might I remind everyone, it was Kranz' idea for the council to adopt Prop A and it was shot down?

      Delete
    4. 10:06 AM

      I don't remember Murphy proposing a simple majority option to updating the general plan. It was 4/5 when he got here and it was council who pushed through repealing it. Please point us to where Murphy proposed a simple majority of the council to update the general plan for intensifying land use.

      Delete
    5. The Carlsbad City Council voted in favor of a developer that used dirty tricks to confuse Carlsbad residents, and the Encinitas City Council voted to take it to the ballot--despite a huge number of signatures, to allow developers a shot at playing dirty tricks and confusing voters.

      Does anyone notice a pattern of citizens getting screwed and developers getting the red carpet treatment?

      Delete
    6. I'd like to remind 12:51 that after Tony Kranz asked it if could be adopted and Sabine shot it down that Kranz wrote an article in one of the papers in opposition of Prop A.

      Most of us will never forget....

      Delete
    7. Yes, Kranz at first suggested Prop A could be adopted, and then Council could put it on the ballot at the first opportunity, during a General Election. Unfortunately, that would have given monied development interests more time for their BS propaganda. But it would have saved the enormous costs of a special election.

      Kranz back-peddled; although he and Shaffer signed petitions supporting Prop A, they voted, unanimously, with Barth, Muir and Gaspar, to oppose Prop A, writing disingenuous arguments against it.

      Muir and Kranz were on the subcommittee that was to come up with a FAQ position statement, through staff, not the public, and other means to spread anti prop A propaganda. Kranz was all for it, and had details about publishing mailers to be sent as educational materials.

      Fortunately, Muir said he had an epiphany, while at the dentist's office, and decided that advocating against Prop A wouldn't be purely educational, so another mailing, through the City was avoided, and there was no FAQ page created by staff, for dissemination through the proposed mailers and online, not actual questions submitted by the public.

      Delete
  3. The only comparison I can see with both issues is our Encinitas city council and cronies used the same techniques as Caruso to try and defeat Prop A. The lied, mislead, spend tons of money to spread their lies, paid people who didn't know anything about Prop A to sit at tables and spread more lies, but they did something even Caruso couldn't pull off. They used our tax dollars to do it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I encountered several Prop A petition circulators who didn't know what they were talking about. Petition circulators are often paid and I doubt they are required to learn in depth about the petition issue. I'm not suggesting that Prop A petition circulators were paid, just that circulators often are, especially at the state level and the US Supreme Court rejected prohibiting paid circulators.

      While Prop A was about general plan and zoning changes whereas Carlsbad was a development approval, one of the arguements of this blog post is were Carlsbad's citizens deceived becuase the city council adopted the petition instead of holding an election. My point is the Carlsbad city council did what many here encourged the Encinitas city council to do. Adopt Prop A unmodified which is allowed under the initiative process.

      Delete
    2. If you wanted to see someone who didn't know what they were talking about regarding Prop A, you should have attended the only debate that was held at the Library.

      Delete
    3. 9:16, I can assure you that nobody in Prop A was paid. In addition, A number of people who were snookered into voting against it have learned that it benefits all Encinitas citizens with the exception of those who want to build here.

      If anything, the Caruso project demonstrates how much better protected our city is than Carlsbad.

      Delete
    4. 3:57 PM

      "I'm not suggesting that Prop A petition circulators were paid, ..."

      I don't doubt that "... nobody in Prop A was paid", which is why I said the above. I voted against it and wasn't snookered.

      Delete
  4. 9:16 "...I encountered several Prop A petition circulators who didn't know what they were talking about". I collected signatures myself and find the term "circulators" a bit naughty. All we did was talk to people, honest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's the term the Secretary of State uses so I used it too. I'm sure your motives were genuine, and I have no idea if you were one of the people I talked to, but misinfomation is misinformation. No matter what the issue is, the short time a person has when asked to sign a petition is not enough to understand an issue of any complexity. The short spiels given by the circulators are meant to sound simple and convincing.

      As I understand it, paid circulators are paid, at least in part, by the number of signatures they collect. So it encourages them to say anything to get someone to sign the petition. I myself have had a circulator (not Prop A) say that my signature would only put the issue on a ballot and then everyone could decide how to vote.

      If it were up to me no circulator would be paid but the U.S. Supreme Court said no to that idea.

      Delete
  5. 9:16am Total bs. There were no paid circulators for Prop A. There were impassioned local citizens who were motivated to protect our community character.

    It is obvious where you stand on this most important proposition for the people. Not sorry a bit ,you now have to go through a vote to force your out of character ideas on density. Harwood, Meyer, DeWald, A..ream are always looking for a way around Prop A. Guys, how about trying to build within current code for a change instead of focusing on max density at all costs? It will make you much less slimy although you do seem to revel in it, like pigs at the trough.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 8:46 AM

      I guess you don't take the time to read an entry before responding to it. As I said in that entry, "I'm not suggesting that Prop A petition circulators were paid, ...". I put that in because it was my understanding that the circulators for Caruso mall in Carlsbad were paid. So hopefully you just fly off the handle at the mere thought of being wronged and that reading comprehension isn't your real problem. I'm not part of the group you listed and in no way affiliated them. I strongly support preserving community character.

      But I see that doesn't matter to you as you seem to need evil doers to rail against. The name calling is just juvenile but I've come to expect that here.

      Delete
  6. Just reading from the sidelines. No opinion on Prop A circulators being paid or not. Although I didn't recognize most of them doesn't prove anything one way or another. But if we are suggesting here that the circulators didn't know anything about Prop A, it doesn't matter if they were paid or not. I think you all missed the point. They didn't know what they were talking about. So, are we now saying die-hard advocates volunteered their time to something they couldn't even talk about?

    ReplyDelete
  7. 11:17am, No. Only you are saying some mythical circulator couldn't provide an answer to some mythical question that you asked of them. If you had a genuine interest in finding an answer, if you ever did, it would have been easy enough to find this particular answer on your own by going to the website. You say you didn't recognize most of them?

    How do you even know the few you did see, if you really did, represented the whole of those who went out into the neighborhoods, unpaid except for the passion of doing what they could to put some power in this community's hands against the influence of developers and real estate interests? Something smells with you.

    Comparing Carlsbads' Caruso and his lies of all the goodness he is trying to provide Carlsbad with his 85-15 project to our Prop A efforts is a stretch, to put it mildly. No relation whatsoever can be drawn from these two apples and oranges instances.

    Your motivation trying to associate these disparate situations is more of a question though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 5:27 PM

      "Something smells with you." Is this really necessary? Can't you argue (in the classical sense of the word) without resorting to this? Are you afraid your arguments aren't strong enough without disparaging the other person.

      The original thrust of the argument was the claim that Caruso circulators mislead those who signed their petitions thinking that their signatures would result in an election not that the Carlbad council would adopt it.

      Whether or not the Prop A circulators were passionate, and I have no reason to believe they weren't, that doesn't equate to being informed as I myself had encountered. I don't know how many people circulated Prop A petitions and I don't know how many fully understood the amendments and their ramifications. It's water under the bridge as far as I'm concerned as Prop A passed by about a fifth of Encinitas registered voters.

      The Carlbad council did what people here wanted the Encinitas council to do with Prop A. Adopt the initiative sparing the time and money of an election. Perhaps you want to change the rules so that initiatives to approve a development are treated differently than initiatives amending general plans and/or ordinances. But it's too late for the Caruso development although it sounds like Westfield, owners of the nearby Plaza Camino Real and diehard environmentalists, may be challenging it.

      So the larger question is whether circulators are paid or passionate, they may not understand or communicate everything about the issue that their petition addresses. And paid circulators are further financially incentivized to get as many signatures as possible.

      Whether or not "... Caruso and his lies of all the goodness ..." is true I'll leave to others.

      Delete