Tuesday, July 26, 2016

Barth's, Shaffer's husbands take out papers to run for Mayor

Union-Tribune:
The Encinitas mayor’s race took a funny and familial turn Tuesday, with two more husbands of prominent politicians indicating they might enter the race.

Steve Bartram, who is married to Councilwoman Lisa Shaffer, and Don Barth, the husband of former Encinitas councilwoman and mayor Teresa Barth, both pulled nomination papers this week, just days after Paul Gaspar — the husband of Mayor Kristin Gaspar — announced he was running.
Our first thought was that this was a stunt just to make a mockery of Kristin Gaspar's husband running, but it may be more strategic than that. Presidential elections bring out thousands of voters who don't pay attention to city council races. Put three men and one woman on the ballot with an uninformed/disinterested electorate, and the woman will win the plurality every time. Sadly, even in 2016, many people still vote based on sex and race.

Don't be surprised if they both file for mayor but don't spend a lot of time or money campaigning, and don't try to get the Democratic Party endorsement. That way, they don't split the Democrat / Smart Growther vote with Blakespear, but they do cause chaos in the uninformed vote. Well played, Smart Growthers!

98 comments:

  1. They are just as "qualified" as Big Boy GASpar.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. None of them are qualified!! Ass clowns each and every one of them....

      Delete
    2. Lisa, you have failed as a council member in a YUGE way and your husband will probably be as big a loser as you were.

      Delete
    3. Holy sh!t, some guy actually voluntarily married Lisa Shaffer?

      Delete
    4. Holy sh!t, some guy actually voluntarily married Teresa Barf, I mean Barth?

      Delete
  2. Send in the clowns!

    ReplyDelete
  3. WTF? I thought Stocks was bad. These 2 are worse. Blakespear much be in on it. They are all friends. Guess I will vote for Gasbag. Wasn't going to but they are all crazy as shit. Maybe they want to name the town after them? What crap.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Still hoping Lisa Shaffer will run so she can be crushed in a re-election attempt so even her arrogant self will get the message that a lot of people feel they "Oops, made a mistake" voting for her four years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Is this some kind of joke? Barth is a fruity as her fruit grove at Glen Park. If these 2 aholes are serious, I can't wait to send in the clowns as well.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This is payback for Blakespear going against Shaffer when she flipped on the Cardiff portion of the Rail Trail. Shaffer is pissed so she gets together with her good friend, Barth, and they get their husbands to run. Only they aren't really going to run, they just pulled papers. These 2 are beyond nasty. Blakespear must be fuming. It doesn't make sense any other way. If Blakespear was in on it, what could she possibly gain from it? If this were a pro development person(s) it would make sense they would be trying to split the vote away from Gaspar. But they usually agree with Blakespear, in fact they helped get her elected. Everything about this is just plain weird unless it is a vendetta against Blakspear.

    ReplyDelete
  7. 11:48, did you even bother to read the lead-in analysis? You seem clueless and you are coming up with lame theories when the real explanation is laid out for you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I tend to agree with 11:48. It probably is a kind of payback, but also, I feel they probably won't really run. They are annoyed with Blakespear for being the swing vote on the Cardiff Rail Trail issue. Shaffer can't let go of that, and Barth can't let go of being in the limelight, either.

      Rather than people voting for the lone woman, some people would go for the Barth name. Don Barth's running would take away votes from Catherine Blakespear. Less people have heard of Shaffer's husband, and he has a different last name. Between his former job as a Marine Aviator and a school teacher, and Shaffer's previous jobs, they are already getting four government pensions.

      People who do know they are the husbands of Teresa Barth and Lisa Shaffer aren't going to get over feeling betrayed by those two, as well as Tony Kranz, over Prop A. Council should have remained neutral on that, or should have supported its passage, if they signed the petitions qualifying it for the special election. Barth didn't sign, but she signaled to many of us that she supported it, because she supports the people's "right to vote."

      Delete
  8. 11:53- Help me out here. Maybe I am clueless. When I see the word Smart growth I think of more development, which I would think would be closer to Gaspar than Blakespear's ideology. Please explain to me what I am missing? I am new in town so maybe I am not understanding what smart growth means. I did get involved with the rail trail and heard how Blakespear flipped so it could go on the west not east side. That's why I said what I said.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Smart Growth" is an anti-suburban-living philosophy that if you build high-density near public transportation, people will stop driving. It's popular with the developers who profit from it, but also with environmentalists who believe it will help reduce Global Warming.

      Teresa Barth and Lisa Shaffer have long espoused the Smart Growth philosophy. Blakespear was a protege of Barth. While she hasn't made explicit comments about Smart Growth that I can recall, she agreed with Barth and Shaffer on Prop A and the HEU.

      Delete
    2. For those of you around the last 20 years or more, there's still a voting divide in this town of people from the Real Estate/Development/Rotary Club world and the more slow growth people.

      Those candidates/Council members are/were: Jim Bond, Jerome Stocks, Dan Dallager, Christy Guerin/Mark Muir/Kristin Gaspar/Chuck Duvivier/Lerch etc.

      On the other side, promoting slower growth and without the big money backing were/are Tony Kranz, Lisa Shaffer, Teresa Barth, Maggie Houlihan, Sheila Cameron, Dennis Holz and not I guess you could say Kathrine Blakespeare. Although It seems with a newer, richer, and more NIBMY-esque populace, things have changed a bit and you have the Prop A. guys like Julie Graboi.

      I don't think most voters are engaged enough to really know about the defining ideas behind smart growth, or the nuances of what parts of the philosophy those candidates support.

      So until I see someone actively saying they are "Smart Growth" and putting those specific platform points in, I'll stick with the old definitions.

      Delete
    3. Kranz, Shaffer, Barth, Blakespear for slow growth? You might want to check their voting records. They vote like they love the developers as much as the worst of them. Throw Tasha in there, too.

      Delete
    4. Smart growth isn't anti suburban, and no one is coming for your car.

      EU knows better, but he also knows his audience, and has to dumb it way way down.

      Smart Growth is best described as anti sprawl. We have a choice to make. Do we continue to expand the urban-rural interface and eliminate open space, or do we preserve open space and make room for those units in areas that already have infrastructure to support them?

      Take Pacific Station as an example. If those units were built as single family detached homes in O-hain, they'd occupy a lot more space--displacing critter habitat.

      Also, if those units were in O-gain, every trip to the grocery store, to restaurants, to Petco Park, to the dry cleaners would put cars on the road for many miles. The folks in Pac Station probably drive less miles, because they have Whole Foods in the building, and all those other destinations right there. They still drive, but less, which is a good thing.

      If you like being able to take a day trip to wild space to walk, run, mountain bike, or exercise your pet, it makes hella sense. If you want same ole Tuscan stucco boxes to sprawl from Mt Laguna to Rainbow, then you'd probably prefer Dumb Growth.

      Delete
    5. What flavor kool aid you drinking, 2:37?

      Delete
    6. 3:07 is Johnny on the Spot--completing the point about dumbing down.

      Thanks 3:07. Good points. Well reasoned.

      Delete
    7. 2:37,

      The folks in Pacific Station are rich out-of-towner vacation pad owners.

      They burn lots of fossil fuels getting back and forth from LA or Arizona to Encinitas.

      Delete
    8. 4:26 PM

      So the Pacific Station residents who spoke against the Bier Garden some time ago were really out-of-towners? Sounded like they lived there. Also, according to the census about of third of single-family homes in Encinitas are rentals. Does that disqualify the current occupants if they're only renting? How many of the Pacific Station units are full time rentals as opposed to vacation rentals? You offered no proof other than a night photos claiming the units were vacant. You sure wouldn't accept counter arguments on such thin evidence.

      Delete
    9. That's some sciency evidence right there.

      I'm left to wonder if pictures of our house windows are the new frontier of phrenology.

      What other enduring mysteries can EU devine from these Windows? Who's been naughty or nice? Where Waldo really is? Why the chicken crossed the road?

      Delete
    10. 5:23,

      Now that you mention it, I believe that the woman who complained about Bier Garden was a wealthy speculator who lived down by Moonlight Beach.

      And if you think people living in $900,000 condos are working stiffs who ride the trains and buses, I've got a high-speed choo-choo I'd like to sell you.

      Delete
    11. 5:40 PM

      You mean the young couple who complained the the noised from the Bier Garden made them have to keep the windows closed? I don't think so.

      Delete
  9. Also, this move would dilute the votes based on nothing but name recognition. Maybe Shaffer's husband will change his name.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Steve Mizel Bartram Shaffer

      Delete
  10. The bottom line is that Shaffer and Barth are still very much aligned with Blakespear. Their husbands would not have taken this action without Catherine's approval. At the very least this move was intended to mock the Gaspars. If the husbands actually run it's too dilute votes for Paul Gaspar as EU suggested.

    ReplyDelete
  11. City politics has entered the bizarre zone. Incorporation was a mistake.

    ReplyDelete
  12. All I can think of at the moment is that both women are traitors. They said they would not run again. And if their husbands win, they will be in charge. Shaffer's husband is not physically well, ad Barth's husband always said he wanted to travel more when Barth left the Council. If Catherine does not speak up against this, some of us who would have voted for her will have to change our votes to Gaspar. If she is involved then screw her.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're not understanding the dynamics of politics in this town. The idea is to keep Gaspar and or whoever runs from the big development/Real Estate/Rotary Club axis out of office.

      If Gaspar can run on name recognition, hoping that people won't even figure out it's not his wife, why can't Barth and Shaffer's husbands do the same?

      It's called politics....

      Delete
    2. This is way over the head of the average participant on this blog. It does not easily lend itself to a visceral and from-the-gut VOTE NO. But I have to say, if true - it's almost too clever..... Can't wait for the campaigning to start!

      - The Sculpin

      Delete
    3. Yeah, this is already getting good. I'm enjoying it already.

      -MGJ

      Delete
    4. There is nothing clever about this Sculpin. And there is nothing to enjoy here MGJ. This is more of the same entitled, imperious impositions and manipulations by the same self-important narcissists in Encinitas, Shaffer and Barth. These arrogant ladies, and their sniveling leading men (both clearly suffering from erectile dysfunction for obvious reasons), think that some time sitting atop the public dais hammering a gavel in front of the fearful masses, followed by the publication of wretched weekly newsletters spewing crap that they think is important to their brainwashed sycophants, equates to royalty status. These holier than thou douchebags should be smeared in tar, feathered, and shown the door to Orange County or Tijuana, whoever will have them.

      Delete
  13. I can't wait for the debate forum. Wonder if anyone from the Rotary Club will call Don Barth a "whore".

    ReplyDelete
  14. Sculpin- You imply it's almost too clever. Who do you think is behind it? Do you think that Barth and Shaffer are really that smart? If so, why are they both so disliked?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have no idea who is behind it. Barth and Shaffer may be smart in their own right, but I do not believe they have the political acumen and cunning to pull something like this off.

      - The Sculpin

      Delete
    2. If I can figure this out, I think Barth and Shaffer can figure it out as well, along with some of their supporters. It's not that big of a stretch to figure out that name recognition matters, especially in a presidential election year when more people come out and vote.

      -MGJ

      Delete
  15. Hell, Don Barth and Shaffer's husband are both whores, in the worst possible way. They have sucked the teat of Leichtag and now they want payback. Barth Grove, I can see it now. As for Gaspar, at least he is halfway intelligent, and could run on his own with Kristin. I wonder if either of the other 2 men could say the same?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Larry (Steve) Mo (Don) and Curly (Paul)

    Encinitas is now officially the laughing stock of San Diego County.
    Always has been but these antics take it to new heights.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This is better than the Presidential election.

    All we have to do is put an apron on GASpar and he can be just like his wife. He sure is goonie looking.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Shaffer and Barth are unaware of how much they are loathed for their dishonesty and deceit. By their spouses doing this as a way to somehow get even with Gaspar, they are not showing leadership at all but are showing their typical disrespect towards citizens. Paul Gaspar was actually well-known prior to Kristin running for office. He is also highly educated and runs a large business. The fact that he has been thinking about running for at least a year shows me that he is a thoughtful person and not a clown and a wimp as Barth and Shaffer's husbands come across like in this move.

      Kristin Gaspar is popular based on her performance. Barth and Shaffer would be skewered if they ran again--also on account of their performance. I am deeply ashamed that I voted for these two, gave them financial support, and especially that I got others to vote for them.

      Delete
  18. 2:37- Have you ever seen Shaffer's husband? He looks goonier than Gaspar and I am not a Gaspar fan.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 2:48 At least Lisa's husband is good looking.

      Delete
    2. If Encinitas residents are well educated it hasn't affected the level of discourse here.

      Delete
  19. This race will be a lot of fun, only this time, Catherine is a target with an embarrassing track-record, unlike 2 years ago; and anyone who knows Mr. Barth, a ticket-taker from an off-track betting site and Shaffer's hubby, a retired science-teacher, knows that Catherine signed off on this idea most-likely seduced politically by Pam Slater and/or Carol Skiljam, following her latest gross violation of California laws following her replacing half the new appointees on the ad hoc group determining the new Cardiff 'livability' plan, she has finally done something the FPPC can get their hands around. Can you say Kathleen Lees? We know you can.

    Now, you have 3 people running for the same Mayoral votes, Catherine's. Oh Baby! Can't hardly wait!

    And Paul Gaspar was a LOT of help in removing the Rail Trail from Vulcan/San Elijo; now, Mr. Gaspar can hang all the expensive idiocy from Teresa and Lisa around Catherine's neck while she tries to keep her head above water for the next three months; thanks, Cathy!!!

    Everyone into the pool!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is Mike Andreen still alive? What a disgusting,pathetic entity. He's like a shit soup made from the remains of Jack Orr and Lee Atwater.

      Delete
    2. Mikey at the ready! A piece of trash from Oceanside, Mikey makes his living saying and doing anything his developer handlers require.

      Where'd that Chamber of Commerce money disappear to, Mikey?

      Delete
    3. I have no love for Mike Andreen (if it is him) but how is 3:35 PM any different from many of the comments posted on this blog other than the perspective from the other side. If you're going to sling it you should be able to take it.

      If you're going to wallow in the gutter you have to expect this.

      Delete
    4. Oh it's vintage Mikey, 5:34. Over the top writing and chock full of innuendo with no basis in fact. He gives himself away every time.

      Expecting and respecting are two very different things. We always expect him.

      Delete
  20. And that affects his ability to govern how? I see the stupid hour has already started, and we're not even to August..

    ReplyDelete
  21. I see Mike Andreen and his usual dirty bag of tricks are already opened up and in place at 3:35, taking a shot at people not even involved as candidates in the election. This from a guy who was booted out of the Encinitas Chamber, and you can look up the stories on that one.

    Anyone who's not a fool knows that David Meyer, Doug Harwood and the rest of the Development gang would love to hang to that seat so they at least have two people on council to do their bidding.

    See that big golf course up on the hill that's sucking the city dry? You can thank the Gaspars, Muirs and Jerome Stocks of this world for that....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How has Teresa Barth or Lisa Shaffer been any different than Gaspar? Shaffer and Barth signed their names to ballot lies. Shaffer and Barth support destroying existing community character and high density urban development. Shaffer and Barth both support destroying Encinitas natural resources by increasing auto pollution, increasing auto traffic and increasing congestion and carbon footprint. Both Barth and Shaffer are egomaniacs with inferiority complexes. I voTed for each of these self-serving losers who suck at the teat of taxpayers and collect pensions and benefits. I will not be voting for Blakespear. She has turned out to also be an incompetent council person and sadly lacking in integrity and ethics.

      Delete
    2. Not only are they no different, they are worse in their hypocrisy.

      Delete
    3. Neither Barth nor Shaffer could run again because they were both told by former supporters that they would not win and that former friends would work against them.

      I find the move of their husbands running to be in step with the pattern of poor decisions, the betrayals and vindictive behavior that Barth and Shaffer have shown over and over.

      What they have done by getting their spouses into the race is to assure a win for Paul Gaspar. No, I am not a Gaspar fan, but at least his interest in running has been documented for more than a year. Steve and Don come across like tools.

      Delete
    4. I like what they did. They rendered GASpar useless. Its a race and Blakespear camp will and should do what they can to win.

      Remember the $tock$, Muir, GASpar, David Meyers, Ecke, BIA developers profit group hired the clown to harass Maggie..... they deserve the actions to make their stupid Paul stunt fail. Oh and remember Kristen is the CFO of the business. Right with a marketing degree from ASU.... Ha!! I bet she could even balance her own checkbook.

      Blakespear should and will win... which is good for the quality of life in Encinitas.

      Delete
    5. 6:59 AM, if the move by the husbands of Barth and Shaffer was designed to help Blakespear get elected (and it was, duh), why are you so bent out of shape by it? It's a brilliant play to defuse Gaspar, not a power grab by these guys or their wives.

      Delete
    6. 6:59 "What they have done by getting their spouses into the race is to assure a win for Paul Gaspar."

      Speak for yourself. There are plenty of us out here who would NOT vote for GASpar even if he came tied with a pink ribbon around him.

      Delete
    7. Barth and Lisa unethical dishomezt me-first Lisa Shaffer are no different than Stocks. Barth and Shaffer kept information form the public. Barth and Shaffer signed their names to ballot statement untruths, Barth and Shaffer looked the other way when the city manager actively worked against the public good. I not only voted for Barth , I walked neighborhoods for her. Barth and Shaffer are are known to me as mean spirited, dishonest people. I am no fan of Gaspar, however as of today Paul would be my choice. Barth, Shaffer and Blakespear all present themselves as one thing but are in reality something else.

      Delete
    8. 5:52 nailed it perfectly.

      Delete
    9. I'm a fan of Gaspar. Both of them, actually. I've talked politics with both, and the meaningless aspersions any some about them being "developer friendly" are unsubstantiated by the record. Kristin was in the minority voting against a Rail Trail that would bastardize the rail corridor, while the "environmental" camp of Blakespear, Kranz and Shaffer were practically salivating at the prospect of turning up the soil and creating an Orange County-esque complete street along San Elijo and Vulcan. Paul was against the east side alignment for all the right reasons - it was an unnecessary exploitation of limited open public land when a trail could be placed atop existing, developed infrastructure on Hwy 101, and for much less money.

      Delete
    10. 8:05,

      Gaspar and Muir also voted against allowing general office use in agricultural zoning (Kranz Shaffer Blakespear for).

      And it was the same split on Jolina Way neighbors vs an El Camino Real property owner expanding his parking lot closer to their backyards.

      Delete
  22. Don't forget Kranz. He rode in only because of Shaffer's ethics. Well we have seen how ethical they are! What we don't need in the future of Encinitas.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Yes, the two husband/retirees both look in comparison, what was it someone on the council described as Oh yes, 'opportunistic'.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I assume you all are waiting to pull papers to run for mayor/council. After reading all this expert opinion and criticism of current and prospective council members I would expect many of you to jump in the fray. Where is everybody? Now is your chance with the mayor and three council seats up for election. Or is it safer on the sidelines?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's safer on the sidelines . Thx

      Delete
  25. OK let's be real. Neither one of these men are going to run. Catherine must be in on it as well, hoping to dilute Gaspar's chance of winning. The reason I say this is I can't believe they would not tell Blakespear, as they are best friends. If they run, who is going to finance it. Catherine will get the Democratic coronation and Gaspar will get the Republican coronation plus a hell of a lot more money by their own PAC. As for voting records, all we can do is look at what their wives voted for, as all 3 of them have no experience. They probably have inside information from their wives, and could use it(delicately for course.) If Kristin does beat Roberts she won't have time to coach Paul too much. On the other hand, Teresa and Lisa will have all the time in the world to make sure they and their husbands get out and about to all the functions it will take them to be Mayor. Catherine is running from a safe seat, so technically she could have said Yes to this deal, as she will still be on the Council. Catherine flipped one too many times on the Rail Trail to be trusted. That will be the argument of the No rail rail people. And Paul did reach out to them. So, he has that vote sown up. And these are people who are not in favor of growth. It was a brilliant play by Paul in my opinion. Catherine cost us a great deal of money by flipping. And, if she knew that it might go back to the east side, because of SANDAG and the NCTD she personally had nothing to lose. We lost a great deal of money. I didn't vote for Gaspar, but for Shaffer and Barth. I won't make the same mistake twice. This is devisive, and if they don't run, and it is an effort to dilute Paul, I don't like it. I've watched a lot of Councils come and go, and besides Stocks, I have never seen two more devisive women as Barth and Shaffer. They are bitter, old, women (sorry top the older women out there who are not like this), but they are. They are also egomaniacs, think of Barth Grove, who could really care less about our community. They will be supported by Leichtag( and I am Jewish so not playing that card except to let everyone know I have no beef with Leichtag in general). I was going to vote for Catherine, but she has to know about this, and she has not said otherwise, anywhere. Just my 2 cents for what that's worth these days.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What a stupid spin. Catherine did not cost us any money and you are an idiot . Total waste of typing .....

      Delete
    2. 12:20 PM, Are you AWOL? Asleep with open lids?

      $350K for BIA lawsuit, plus, another $300K for settling with David Meyer on Density Bonus; add the $600K wasted on the attempt to prove everyone wrong about getting PUC approval for the Montgomery Underpass... and being proven wrong, again: those are just for starters, there's plenty more AND one wonders if she is still planning on running for Mayor as a fiscal conservative? So, not 'stupid spin',12:20 PM, you just don't know what you are talking about... which on this blog, is no surprise. 9:51 makes a pretty persuasive case, not in total agreement, but certainly not far from the truth, so, math not being my strong suit, but that's $1.35 million dollars spent frivolously by the tantrum-throwing councilwoman.

      Delete
    3. 1:35 Blakespear did not make these decisions solo. She had plenty of help with some other council members. Please stop spreading lies and bending the truth.

      Delete
    4. 1:35 PM

      First, settling lawsuits aren't wasted if you believe continuing to fight them will result in even more costs with little probability of winning. By the way, the BIA lawsuit was the result, in part, of residents pressuring the council to amend the density bonus ordinance. Second, the original crossing at Montgomery was an underpass but that has been changed to an at-grade crossing which is still in the works. The only issue is whether it would be part of a quiet zone but to be included the quiet zone would have extend from Chesterfield to at least E street.

      Delete
    5. Let's put the NO in NOvember. Vote for NObody for council or mayor.

      Delete
    6. Blakespear is very good. She has my vote.

      Delete
    7. Clearly, Tricia Smith, Catherine Blakespear's mother and fellow vampire, is on this thread talking up the catastrophe that is her daughter. Or could it be her aunt, Rosemary KimBal? Both of these ladies like to get on public forums, failing to disclose a familial relationship, and sing the praises of the failure that truly is Catherine Blakespear.

      Delete
  26. When Blakespear flipped on the Coastal Rail Trail that cost us about $500,000 that we had already given to SANDAG. She could have voted earlier when Muir and Gaspar voted No for the east side, but she, Lisa and Tony voted for the trail to be on the east side. Later, after many Cardiff citizens founded the NO rail trail she changed her mind, and then Tony went along with it too. I am not positive if the number $500,000 is correct, but the other part is.

    ReplyDelete
  27. 5:58, you just conceded that all your noise about the alleged half million dollars may be incorrect. Geez... such a waste. Please explain in detail how Catherine cost "us" (who, the taxpayers?) $500k. When were the checks written and who were they given to?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Sure, 6:38 PM, even tho it won't do any good to document the wasting of over a million dollars in less than a year, led by Catherine; you won't believe it, but the press and FPPC will; generally, here is what actions she took and what these actions cost, the result being ONLY a waste of money.

    The BIA lawsuit, 6 private property owners that were caught retroactively with the Density Bonus changes from July 14, 2014, was a coupla hundred K for 6 site owners and the legal costs of the BIA; a couple of hundred thou went to the outside legal operative Barbara K. then, once those were paid from the first suit, at Catherine's insistence on more litigation, she and Kranz and Shaffer went right ahead and tried to do exactly the same thing concerning the 6 changes that Barth/Slater-Price had insisted on in 2014: boom, 2nd Suit; Meyers files suit, Catherine, Tony and Lisa not caring about wasting other people's money, continue to insist on illegally rounding down, boom, Gov. Moonbeam backs Meyers, along with Sacramento legislators, the State Attorney General and they tentatively approve AB 2051 and Catherine decides to settle, $125K to Meyers for legal bills, another $200K for Barbara Kautz, it'll take a little further work to find the name of the vendor that was paid the $600K for the Manchester/PUC debacle, but you get the general idea.

    Because she does not believe she is personally and financially responsible for wasting the tax payer's money, she and Kranz and Shaffer continue to 'waste' the tax payer's money and justify it. Zealots like you might agree that Catherine's wasteful committing over a million dollars without needing to and without any positive results, all for the limiting of five or six housing units out of 22,000 citywide is honorable, but most hardworking folks will not agree with you and will communicate their disapproval on Nov. 8th, 2016.

    This new attempt by Catherine to take-over this new Cardiff livability group to force the CRT onto Vulcan has finally provided the public with grounds to prosecute her over state election laws.

    Even if documented proof of everything and everyone involved in misspending over a million dollars, unnecessarily, you would defend her.

    But there's more, you'll be able to read all about it when the complaint moves up to Sacramento and the FPPC.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whoa, whoa, whoa. "The BIA lawsuit, 6 private property owners that were caught retroactively with the Density Bonus changes...."

      The 6 property owners were given special dispensation by being singled out to enjoy additional market-rate units by rounding up on base density, contrary (at that time) to city code.

      You got it exactly backward, bub. Nothing illegal about rounding down. Plenty of other cities do it. But you knew that.

      Delete
  29. 5:58 try reality. It hurts sometimes but results in better memories.

    Try and straighten up and rejoin the conversation when you can understand common logic.

    ReplyDelete
  30. When the majority of three selected the east side option for the Cardiff rail trail, SANDAG spent taxpayer money in the design phase for that option. SANDAG had originally spent money and presented to the public both options. Many months later the council reconsidered the vote and the majority switched to the west side option.

    The $500,000 figure has been put out for the cost of the engineering work wasted on the now abandoned east side option. SANDAG is demanding a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with city to settle the question of responsibility of who pays for the wasted work. The council majority rejected it. This is where we stand now. Is Blakespear to blame? I put the blame on the whole council, but especially Shaffer. She's the SANDAG rep and has stubbornly worked for the east side option. She is still working behind the scenes. I was told she was at the rail corridor advisory group meeting last night sitting with her SANDAG buddies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 5:50,

      Thanks for attempting to clarify the record. A few clarifications if your clarification:

      • The 500K figure was thrown out in the form of a question from Mark Muir to SANDAG, on how much money had already been spent on planning and engineering the east side alignment before Council reversed course. SANDAG did not have a figure, and did not confirm or reject Mark's guess--but that's all it is--a guess.

      • The MOU was not to recover sunk cost in the east side planning. The MOU was about additional regulatory and financial risk caused by the Council reversal. Specifically, Coastal Commission might not approve the west side, or that approval might take so long that we miss deadlines associated with funding grants.

      The MOU was SANDAG's attempt to put Encinitas on the hook for additional costs that might arise as a direct consequence of the reversal.

      Delete
  31. Here is my beef with Catherine. Te Council agreed to hire a consultant to put together a list of people they thought would be good for the Rail Trail Corridor Advisory Group. For some reason, that I guess only Catherine and Kathleen Lees from Leucadia understand, Catherine decided to change up the group, eliminating some people and adding others who had applied to be on the group. Example is Richard Risner of Cardiff, who is a landscape architect, applied and was accepted to the group by the consultant. He was a voice for the No Rail Trail folks in Cardiff. I personally know, and I know he would have been great for this group. For reasons, again unknown, when Catherine presented her new group to the Council, he was taken off, and Chris Swanner, also of Cardiff and the No Rail Trail Group was selected. They are good friends. Both were furious, and Chris has since resigned from the group. So, it begs the question as to why Catherine took it upon herself to change up the list, only speaking to Lees about it, and present a new list to Council. The vote for the new list was Gaspar-NO. Muir abstained because he thought the whole thing was sneaky (my words not his), and the other 3 voted Yes. So, why did we even hire a consultant? I have no idea how much that cost, as the City has not yet sent back the CPRA request that I put it to see how much this consultant cost. And, did she violate the Brown Act by talking with both Lisa and Tony to get them to vote Yes? That, we will never know. 5:50 is also right. In Lisa's newsletter she tells of being at the first meeting of this new group and yes, she supports the east side even to this day. Maybe that is why she wants her husband to run, so she won't be out of the loop on it. If Catherine gets the Mayor position, expect her to put people she likes on SANDAG and the NCTD. Gaspar is looking better to me than ever, and I voted for Shaffer, Kranz and was going to vote for Blakespear. I don't believ in conspiracy theories, but his is way over the top, even for me. It would be interesting to know why she picked Lee's to share her new list and, to the best of my knowledge, no other citizen. If there is anyone else who saw the new list, I wish they would come forward. And just in case you are not aware of how we know Lee's knew, she spilled the beans that the City Council meeting where this was discussed, in oral communications, before Catherine had even introduced her new list.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You do know the blog software allows you to make paragraphs.

      Delete
    2. 11:07- So sorry. I do know that, but was in a hurry to go to work so I just rambled. Please forgive me. Won't happen again.

      Delete
    3. Don't worry about it, 11:18. Glad to read your perspective.

      There's something inherently unfair about the list, besides the fact that the NO on east side alignment is now unrepresented, when that was why the alignment was changed. Also, some of the so-called "stakeholders" are doubly represented. I believe the consultant said no to commissioners being on the committee for that reason. Now they will be present, but not voting members?

      But other people who were selected are members of more than one stakeholder group, such as members of the bike/ped group (created by Leucadia 101 Mainstreet Association) and the Yes on east side alignment, or a member of Leucadia Town Council AND the Board of Directors of L101MA.

      Brian Grover, because he works for Dudek (is he also a member of one of the Maintstreet Associations?) and is very active with the Bike/Ped Committee shouldn't really be on the Traffic and Safety Commission, in my opinion. This is for the same reason that the Director of Encinitas Mainstreet Association was not chosen for the Environmental Commission.

      Also, to my knowledge, William Morrison, who is running for Council, is on both Leucadia Town Council and Leucadia 101 Mainstreet Association. The "stakeholders" represented are a very incestuous group in terms of their being affiliated with more than one group.

      What has happened is that the populist perspective, the real stakeholders who are local residents, who worked hard to get the alignment changed, are now completely unrepresented.

      Blakespear did not violate the law to discuss her new list with Lees. But the Cardiff group should have been the first to be consulted.

      The Coastal Commission has every right to question why the railtrail would begin in Cardiff, where there is already a dedicated bike/ped lane on 101. But rather than an unwanted east side alignment, Council should have considered implementing a rail trail bike/ped lane, SEPARATED from the highway, further north. That would be much better than forcing five unwanted one-lane three-way T intersection roundabouts upon locals who, by and large, don't want them.

      Those that say they do want them are the same "stake-holders," that are being subsidized by the City, which is also subsidizing more development, higher density, along the rail trail corridor, because it's a "transportation corridor," while at the same time trying to take away part of our Historic State Highway, eliminating one lane in each direction, through road obstructions.

      Bicyclists are not safer through roundabouts. More collisions with bicyclists occur in intersections with roundabouts than in those same intersections prior to the roundabouts' installation. In the current plan, all bicycles would have to funnel through the five one-lane roundabouts, in addition to double the number of motorists. This is a bad plan.

      The Bicycle Masterplan Update was taken off the agenda, years ago, with no explanation, and with no rescheduling. That plan did call for a separated rail trail corridor through Leucadia. Apparently, all the research that went into the BMP update has been "put on hold" and disregarded.

      Brian Grover has a conflict of interest because his employer, Dudek, profits by getting a great deal of business through the City. He has a pro-development agenda, which supersedes traffic and safety concerns.

      Delete
    4. 7:56,

      It's hard to take you seriously when you can't even recall the names of stakeholder groups properly:

      • No Rail Trail
      • Yes Rail Trail

      Also, the No Rail Trail group is I represented because they chose not to be represented and gave up their seat. We can't force them to be represented if they clearly don't want to participate.

      Delete
    5. The no rail trail group is the no east-side alignment group. It's hard to take you seriously, 7:52 a.m., when you pick at inconsequential trivialities and ignore all of of the relevant issues raised by 7:56 p.m.

      Delete
    6. The No Rail Trail actually was happy with the west side decision by Council, all of Council with the exception of Shaffer.

      The No Rail Trail group appointee resigned because he, and apparently the rest of that group, thought the stakeholders selection pushed by Blakespear, Shaffer and Kranz, was unbalanced and unfair. Many agree.

      Delete
  32. 7:56-

    Your points are all weak. You sound like the loser Assream.

    Stay in Oside and enjoy your lower quality of life and property values Jack Ass. Assream = Jack Ass.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, but to my eye (ear) 7:56 PM doesn't sound like Andreen. You may not agree with the post but how about ditching the juvenile name calling.

      Delete
    2. No, 7:56 isn't Mike Andreen.

      Someone who wants what most locals don't want, five one-lane roundabouts in a row on Historic Highway 101, is attempting to deflect all the issues raised by 7:56 using false logic and ad hominem attacks.

      Your vile only shows you have no answers or explanations, only reactionary spewing of incorrect assumptions and mean-spirited false conclusions.

      Delete
    3. She's sidelined, Jerome/Mikey.

      And if you didn't know that - which you do - she has a very distinct way of writing that is not 7:56's.

      So in that post unfavorable to your side, wasn't there.

      Delete
  33. Andreen deserves all the "juvenile" name calling and then some. Anyone who's seen him in action knows he does not deserve any consideration or respect.

    Agree 7:56 is not Andreen, because he has very specific, unhinged-sounding writing style that reveals how his inability to think clearly or intelligently.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ha, so annoyed just thinking about him I meant to write: "...he has very specific, unhinged-sounding writing style that reveals his inability to think clearly or intelligently."

      There. You get the idea.

      Delete
  34. Encinitas politics has become a clown show. The debates should prove interesting, as all these morons make fools of themselves. Fortunately for them, only 0.0000000001% of voters attend or care.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course you're too smart to run for council because people might think you're a fool as well. Why would they think that?

      Delete
    2. Because it takes a fool to recognize one?

      Delete