Wednesday, June 22, 2016

6/22/16 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.

Please use the comments to record your observations.

33 comments:

  1. At about 6:35 Mayor Gaspar goes to the side desk and types. The thought that came to mind was "gold-plating a turd."

    ReplyDelete
  2. Is anybody watching this fiasco?

    Gaspar said none of the council members want the HEU; they're doing it only to comply with state law.

    Shaffer said, whoa, no, I enthusiastically support the HEU cause it brings housing diversity to the community. She ignored the fact that the purpose of the HEU is to provide housing that very low and low income folks can afford. Unfortunately, the economics make providing that housing impossible.

    The HEU cannot achieve its purpose, but the staff and council are pushing it through anyway.

    Then Gaspar personally rewrote the HEU ballot wording, which passed.

    Kill the HEU in November!

    ReplyDelete
  3. reported out of closed session:
    Unanimous vote - council directed the contract lawyer to begin settlement arrangements with plaintiff (Meyer)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is the city going to give this shark blood money? He is a disgrace to humanity and the archetype of American GREED.

      Delete
  4. Wow! How sneaky can Blakespear get? Much of the up zoning in the housing element update includes mixed-use. Blakespear wants to eliminate the words mixed-use from the ballot statement so the residents won't have that informantion upfront.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Right. She thinks that we are all so ignorant that we don't know what mixed-use means.

      Vote NO on this scam.

      Delete
  5. A citizen commented on the subterfuge of rewording the term "floating zone" to "At Home in Encinitas". She inferred that this was an attempt to confuse and sound more benign. A Planning Department member did a round about double talk trying to explain the rationale behind it.
    There was lengthy discussion about the wording of the HEU ballot initiative and Gaspar and Blakespear wanted to delete "sustainable mixed uses" from the wording - they thought it sounded hostile. As someone already commented. Shaffer acted as a cheerleader for this initiative, claiming it is the right thing to do. Gaspar appointed Shaffer and Blakespear to write the ballot initiative.
    There was discussion about the pro and con arguments for this initiative in the ballot information booklets. The oppositional argument is apparently a matter of who comes first; if there are a number of arguments against, the council chooses the one that will appear on the ballot. This is where they could throw in a ringer - have 'plants' submit doctored arguments that are weak or confusing and use these as the oppositional argument.
    Kranz asked if the public would get involved with the councils' pro HEU statement and Gaspar and Shaffer were adamantly against it. Gaspar said it would show their hand to the opposition and Shaffer cited the passage of Prop A as a negative example of public involvement. Shaffer is a dictator - she doesn't like anyone questioning her.
    After watching this, the only vote possible on the HEU is NO.







    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gaspar appointed Shaffer and Blakespear to write the proponents' statement that will appear in the informational booklet that precedes the ballot booklet itself. The initiative is already written. It's one of the items that was passed by unanimous vote tonight.

      Delete
    2. 10:29 PM Correct clarification. They will write the argument in favor of the HEU.

      Delete
  6. Man, they really want to screw this up to make sure no one understands it. The HEU does not provide affordable housing, as that is not what it is for. It provides more housing and that's it. Don't let them fool you with the twisting words. Remember, no matter what, Meyer and his band of thieves will still sue us no matter what we do. There are 34 cities in California that have no HEU and nothing has happened to them. The reason we are getting sued is directly related to Meyer and our own very weak City Attorney. Vote NO and then fire the City Attorney and get one that will fight for us. This is bull.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The city has 'special counsel' for the HEU proposal. Why have a City Attorney that isn't multi-faceted? It seems the city does a lot of hiring of specialty lawyers - dump Sabine and apply his salary to a "hire as needed" budget for council. His only job is to attend council meetings and make a crack or two - he is worthless!

      Delete
    2. The city attorney is the biggest mistake as a hire for Encinitas. Seems like every council is frightened to get rid of him.

      Delete
    3. 11:34 PM

      If you're ever arrested be sure to hire a tax attorney to defend you because any lawyer should be multi-faceted. All the laws and court decisions are so easy to follow.

      Delete
    4. 9:33 AM What do you expect of a City Attorney then - to only know the Roberts rules of protocol? Have you ever heard of the learning curve? Sabine has had the time to update his knowledge of the housing issues - it didn't start yesterday. Your exaggeration avoids the facts of the situation here in Encinitas - it is a major issue to the city - Sabine should have educated himself. He is a tick, sucking the blood out of this city.

      Delete
    5. Sabine doesn't know Roberts, so um...yeah.

      Why is he still employed here? Oh, now I remember: for his "institutional history," according to Barth.

      Delete
    6. 12:12 PM

      "What do you expect of a City Attorney then ... Sabine has had the time to update his knowledge of the housing issues ..."

      Not sure what you're saying. Are you say Sabine should have asserted himself on the HEU? You do know that a non-elected city attorney works for the council. The city attorney advises the council but doesn't take the lead unless directed by the council. A city attorney is a generalist with more of an emphasis on government code and procedures. City attorneys often aren't the principal attorney in litigation involving the city, depending on law firms that specialize in the area being litigated. While their names may appear first, it is often the hired law firm that provides the legal resources.

      Delete
  7. As a sidebar - Lisa Rudloff is working for the city of Irvine.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Why did Brust fire Rudloff?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She needs to fire many more dead weight administrators. The Planning Department needs to be thinned. But she is looking to hire an assistant city manager - she's already loading up her entourage as to pass the buck.

      Delete
    2. Jennifer Campbell, assistant city manager from Glendale, Arizona will be the new Parks and Rec Director. Current interim Parks Rec Director will move to city manager area as interim assistant city manager.

      Delete
  9. Rudloff got fired for many reasons, not because she was Jewish. She would not attend mandatory meetings, unless she wanted to, she took over the Parks and Rec. Commission and became a dictator, she did not have good "sandbox skills".

    ReplyDelete
  10. Muir appears to catch up on his naps at these meetings. He did get caught up in a minor tiff with Shaffer, over his questioning whether street "PCI" could be increased. Shaffer admonished him for trying to introduce a new budget agenda, when the budget had already been approved. Muir protested that he had brought up the idea previously. Muir needs to go - he appears to be clueless or disinterested in the proceedings. I get the impression he isn't the brightest bulb in the pack. And good riddance to Shaffer - her arrogance and condescending manner is annoying.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Who will write the argument in opposition and the rebuttal to the argument in favor?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just saw 9:30's comment. I guess the answer is anyone, and the city council will choose based on whatever criteria they have? Since it has to be signed it has to be someone with a big name.

      Delete
    2. 8:48 AM The city council choosing the argument against the HEU initiative is comparable to the fox guarding the chickens.

      Delete
  12. Buildings could be 48 feet tall. With waivers for density bonus, who knows - sky's the limit. Mixed-use, which is condos over commercial, is planned for Sprouts shopping area, the Encinitas Town Center, Von's center on Santa Fe, the old Target center at Encinitas and El Camino, the intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Rd and Encinitas/Manchester, and Cardiff town Center. Most of Leucadia 101 south of Leucadia Blvd., most of downtown Encinitas will be mixed-use. All voted by the council to be mixed-use. The council voted to reduce the parking requirements.
    No place for parking on some of the sites - look for the city to require underground parking. City council wants residents to ride bikes or walk everywhere. Condos will be market rate that was emphasized by the previous planning director.
    No, the city isn't guaranteeing that the condos will be for low income families. This is the whole reason for the up zoning for increased density - for low income.
    Vote NO on the housing element update November. Tell your friends and neighbors to vote NO.
    At the same time vote those fools of a council out of office

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Vote Muir out - he seems to be mentally absent most of the time.

      Delete
    2. Muir = numb nutz

      Delete
  13. Good news about the HEU vote in November:

    "Meyer didn’t agree with the settlement. Putting the housing element to voter approval is as good as ignoring state law, he said.

    "'Do I think if it’s subject to voter approval it has a prayer? No, it doesn’t have a prayer,' Meyer said."

    ReplyDelete
  14. 10:40- What source are you getting this from/ Not saying it isn't true, I'd just like to read more about what happened. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Voice of San Diego article posted today or yesterday.

      Delete
    2. http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/land-use/encinitas-conundrum-obey-its-own-law-or-california-law/

      Delete