Wednesday, March 30, 2016

3/30/16 Special City Council meeting open thread

The current city council has continued prior councils' practice of not providing written summary minutes of council discussion, but only "action minutes" which state the outcomes. Encinitas Undercover will provide a forum for observers to record what occurs at each council meeting.

On tonight's agenda: hiring consultants for the housing vote, and reconsidering the ill-considered Cardiff Rail Trail.

Please use the comments to record your observations.

41 comments:

  1. There's a reason "staff" pushed the rail trail on the east side of the railroad. What is it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quicker access to In N Out?

      Delete
  2. Pruim running the clock. Typical staff trick to yap overmuch and completely overwhelm the Council with minutiae. Council, easily confused, then rely on "staff experts" to tell them what to think.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ed Deane having a "vision" for the Encinitas corridor Cardiff-downtown-Leucadia.

    Vision outreach - yeah, right. Why start listening now?

    ReplyDelete
  4. The Mayor discussing swallowing. Gulp.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Is Shaffer falling apart? Wayward over wayside horn. Staff snarky back and with reason I'd say.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Shaffer gets a raspberry for yapping too much and for presenting her pointless PowerPoint. She didn't realize that Kranz would vote for the trail on the west side of the tracks and leave her on the short end of a 4 to 1 vote. I've never seen her slink so low in her chair. She even asked on which side of the tracks the trail in Carlsbad is, as if it were relevant to Cardiff. The tracks in Carlsbad are much further from the coast. Doesn't she know Carlsbad is planning to lower the tracks?

    Another raspberry for the woman who brought up insulting speculation about the motivation of those who oppose the trail on the east side of the tracks -- clearly a desperation move.

    ReplyDelete
  7. She really put the "d" in "desperation" when she stooped to quoting STOCKS to help make her point about wayside horns.

    Talk about not knowing when to give up!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Has anyone seen Shaffers latest email missive. WOW! If she doesn't get her way, there is hell to pay.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not on her hit list: Berlfein and Dadla, the beholden 101 orgs, and Boerner, who advocated for "the process," but tellingly was planted firmly with the non- hit listers.

      Lisa needs to calm the ugly bitterness.

      Delete
    2. Shaffer doesn't play well with others. She believes she is right and has all the answers. She really needs to learn how to change her way of thinking to be more flexible. Her pouting is obvious and she wears her dislikes on her face.

      Similarly, GASpar and Muir need not be so smug about how they knew all the mistakes on the rail trail from the beginning. They both like to throw that attitude in the other's faces. We know, and they know, they did not know everything. Neither one possess engineering or planning expertise. So give it up you two and get real.

      Delete
  9. Shaffer still thinks she is in academia, where sunordinate staff have to put up with the academic megla-egos. Electing her to the council was a huge mistake, but that's retro now. A prickly pear would have been elected over $tock$ - the only reason she got in. (Kranz too).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. People who they betrayed worked hard to get them elected. Expect no help next time!

      Delete
  10. Unfortunately I could not make the meeting and while I watched Channel 8 video/news and read the SDUnionTrib article...

    I want to make sure I know who voted yes and no on the rail trail project and what was the wording for the vote. Can somebody please post that and anything the individual councilmembers made as comments would also be appreciated.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Video of the whole meeting is posted on the City Web site, council comments included. You missed the audience responses, but they don't matter much to the city staff.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Barth is making room on her broom for Shaffer.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Does anyone know what Kranz changed his mind? I had heard Blakespear was going to, but was surprised Kranz flipped as well. What happened?n I also got Shaffer's newsletter and was disappointed in it and her. I am not a huge fan of Shaffer, but this particular newsletter was even snarkier than usual. I can't remember anyone on the City Council, in all of the years I have lived here, that has been nastier to people she doesn't like, except for Stocks. He and she on the Council would be really too much for any community to bare.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Krantz said that the first time he voted for the east side was because Catherine was supportive. He just assumed that her support meant there was community support. So, he changed his mind when it became clear much of the community was against this. I'm glad he took the time to videotape riding a bike on San Elijo. There do need to be improvements made.

      Delete
    2. Shaffer's superiority complex is odious! She can't disappear fast enough.

      Delete
    3. It is pretty clear that none of these people have clear concepts on what is needed or what is aesthetically compatible.

      Delete
    4. Pretty lame council if you ask me. How they can sit there and pretend they know something is laughable.

      Do not reelect any of these idiots.

      Delete
  14. When the residents are better informed than our elected council, that should be clear just who they are listening to.

    Not us, that is for certain. Manjeet and his traitorous operatives in Planning and the influence of developers are who they represent. That is for certain.

    Absolutely Shameful.

    Now for the MOU on the renaming OUR library. It is becoming apparent that council intends to bypass any public opinion. They have no intention of letting us have any say. The library is not theirs to do with whatever they wish. It is OURS. It is not theirs.

    This stinks!!!!!! They know this is a contentious issue and are avoiding any public input. I don't know what we can do to insist that we have OUR say and stop this practice that only serves to show what price our Council can be bought out for.

    This is about far more than any singular family or group that wants their name on our public treasures.

    In the past, this practice was reserved for an honored citizen [Maggie] who had passed on and paid it forward in service to our community's welfare.

    What is happening now with the Mizels is not even close. Don't let it happen.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Get the television reporters, newspaper reporters, TURKO and anyone else who will listen that we will not stand for renaming OUR library without public input.

    Dangling money in front of our council is absolutely shameful.

    I have lived here for over 35 years and I have never ever heard their name before this. I heard they also have or want a library named after them in the Middle East.

    A protest is in order.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Where can we get more information about this? Is there some document at the City that can be seen. I have read about the proposal but I had not read that Council was going to bypass public input.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here's a newspaper article about the renaming:

      http://www.seasidecourier.com/news/mizel-family-offers-m-to-rename-encinitas-library/article_4edd148a-baac-11e5-9632-336224333e01.html

      Check the agenda report on the city website of the Wednesday council meeting (Jan. 13, 2015 Agenda Item 12A). There was public discussion. It was also mentioned on this blog before the meeting.

      Delete
  17. Sold to the highest bidder! We are being sold out, complete outrage this could even be considered much less happen.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Many public college buildings are named in return for donations. In fact, schools within public colleges are named in return for donations. I don't get what the big deal is. The city needs money, someone wants to provide a donation. It should just be a matter of the amount.

    ReplyDelete
  19. 10:24am If you don't understand what the big deal is, you have not been paying attention.

    Our council is attempting to slide this by, underhandedly, without any public participation or comment period. They already know this is contentious and if we are allowed to voice our opinion, this will be thrown out where it belongs.

    Every one of our council members claims the city's finances are in good shape. If so, why are they so determined to go around this community's wishes and sell out our public treasures for any amount? Something smells mightily wrong about this whole newly enacted policy that they are going after.

    Not going through the Planning Commission where the public can be heard should be minimum. That seems to be the only group who listens to this community [for the most part].

    Council did not buy or pay for our public treasures. We did. Council has no right to independently sell naming rights without our consent.

    It is not just about a certain deep pocketed family who apparently knows no bounds. It is about the policy itself. This naming right issue deserves a fair hearing before this community. This naming rights issue deserves our approval, not solely our council, who, sadly, has shown all that they have their price. We do not.

    There you go. It couldn't be easier. Bring this before the public and represent our wishes. No more of the backroom deals over our public treasures. This are not for the council to do with what they wish. It for us. It is ours, not the councils.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for explaining. I agree the public should have a voice. I'm generally supportive of naming arrangements as a way to get money. But, of course, this should be openly discussed. More so, since the library already exists. If a funding source came to fund Pacific View, I do think it would be appropriate to take money in exchange for naming. But, I agree there should be an open discussion.

      Delete
  20. 10:24am If you don't understand what the big deal is, you have not been paying attention.

    Our council is attempting to slide this by, underhandedly, without any public participation or comment period. They already know this is contentious and if we are allowed to voice our opinion, this will be thrown out where it belongs.

    Every one of our council members claims the city's finances are in good shape. If so, why are they so determined to go around this community's wishes and sell out our public treasures for any amount? Something smells mightily wrong about this whole newly enacted policy that they are going after.

    Not going through the Planning Commission where the public can be heard should be minimum. That seems to be the only group who listens to this community [for the most part].

    Council did not buy or pay for our public treasures. We did. Council has no right to independently sell naming rights without our consent.

    It is not just about a certain deep pocketed family who apparently knows no bounds. It is about the policy itself. This naming right issue deserves a fair hearing before this community. This naming rights issue deserves our approval, not solely our council, who, sadly, has shown all that they have their price. We do not.

    There you go. It couldn't be easier. Bring this before the public and represent our wishes. No more of the backroom deals over our public treasures. This is not for the council to do with what they wish. It is for us. It is ours, not the councils.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I'm fine with selling naming rights, but not permanently, and with an objective policy on vetting and screening of candidates, and clear ways to exit the agreement.

    Example: does the policy require the name to be an individual or family name vs. a corporation? Could we end up with Qualcomm Library in Cardiff? If it's a family name, do they need to be current or former residents or is it open to anyone? Is there a moral turpitude clause that would allow the city to revoke naming rights if the name becomes an embarrassment, or could we wind up with the equivalent of "Charles Manson Library" and be stuck with it?

    Finally, naming rights should be for a period of 10, 20, or 30 years, just like stadium naming deals. That way, if in the future the City wants to end the practice and rename the library for Jerome Stocks (relax. kidding) they'd be free to do so without violating a contract.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If they want to donate money to the City, no strings attached, that's OK. If they want to improve the City and pay for some new unfunded improvement that ought to be great. However, the library already exists and it was somebody else's effort. Renaming it is not OK.

      Delete
  22. Going through back channels and avoiding OUR public approval/input like they, council, seem to be intending to do, is wrong on so many counts. Being sneaky raises all sorts of questions of why.

    If anyone thinks this will be the last time, they are fooling themselves. Rest assured, if this is not stopped now and not allowed to be vetted before the public, there will be no ending of this practice.

    Just what price does our council sell out our public treasures for? This much and much less.

    I wonder who advised our council members to avoid our approval? Take a guess folks. It always seems to go back to the Planning Dept. and Manjeet. Enough already.

    Kristen, you proposed this and immediately recused yourself. How convenient for you. For us, not so much.

    Where did go so wrong that it had to be hidden from public input? It is our approval that matters.

    Council, Don't do this. Don't approve this without our say so.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not to change the topic, but if the HEU gets approved, Prop A is reversed and all zoning changes will be decided by Council, staff, and together with developers in the annual "infill opportunity" meetings they have planned.

      Council's fond of taking power, but have not demonstrated they can be trusted...and Councilmembers change.

      Vote NO on the HEU.

      Delete
  23. The mayor is a sneaky weasel and I don't trust her. Shame on her.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All five of the council are sneaky weasels. Shame on all of them.

      Delete
  24. Fun fact:

    Truth or Consequences, NM sold naming rights to their whole town if the eponymous radio show would broadcast one show from the town.

    ReplyDelete
  25. 11:55 PM
    Fun fact - Have you been to Truth or Consequences, NM?
    It didn't help them to change the name. Hot, wind blowing dirt that is constant. Mizelland, a fun filled fantasy town that was once upon a time called Encinitas.

    ReplyDelete
  26. en cin itas, more like en 'sin' cinitas if this is allowed to go any further.

    Council, don't do this!!!!!!!!!! Listen to your public.

    ReplyDelete