Covering civic issues, news, and the secret life of Encinitas
Mr. Meyer, move away. Very, very far away.
Oh boy, another potential big extortion/payout to Meyer from the city. Will Blakespeare have the courage to stand up to this?
Yes, because judges make rulings based on the amount of courage demonstrated by the litigants. Court proceedings are not unlike Festivus feats of strength.
I other words.... I am going to be the town bitch because I did not get my way because I am a self Entitled punk ass who keeps failing. You are not impressing your Ecke overlords, you are embarrassing them Meyer.
Perhaps it is time to craft a housing element that doesn't require upzoning or a public vote.
Without upzoning or increase in height, a public vote is already not required.
The new City council has already taken the stand that some upzoning is required to meet HCD requirements for the HEU, so the City is presuming a new public vote will be required.
We're all well aware of the efforts the new council has to make another run at an HEU. The question here is: will they cave to Meyer - again??One wonders what the Eckes have to say about him.
I say we recall any Council member who agrees to overturn the election results. Of course meyer wanted T to pass: it would have been a blank check to the dude. But giving the baby meyer his way every time he throws a tantrum is a bad and expensive way to govern.
If he donated to the same people that approve a settlement then there will be a law suit, a criminal one.
I would rather pay the court fees than give one more dime to Meyer and his cronies, including Mcarco Gonzales, who thinks the Council should overturn the will of the people. The people voted Yes on A and NO on T. As long as this is still a democracy, then that is the way it is. If this Council decides to overturn A and T, I think we should recall them all and start again.
I have a feeling the majority will agree with you, 11:33. Time to put up the hand to Meyer.
I'm confused.I thought there were NO legal consequences to a no vote on T. I was told the DCM lawsuit only required that we have a vote, which we did. Is it possible I was misled?
You were not misled. Go to the city website and watch the very last part of Wednesday's city council meeting where the city attorney gives his report of the receipt of the email from Meyer. He says there's a difference in interpretation of language. This means if Meyer pursues his lawsuit, a judge will decide and there could be appeals up to the State Supreme Court. Nothing has ever stopped Meyer from suing. He usually gets his way with a generous settlement from the council. The city doesn't take him to court. This time they should.
And our city attorney loves the extra change he makes milking this stuff. Happy for any and all lawsuits. Time for real legal help.
Flaming torches and pitchforks...NOW!!!
Is the Settlement Agreement from Case #37-2016-00002342 available to the public? I guess that The City agreed that they would bring themselves into alignment with State Law but if the public mandate is do not align, then aren't the voters saying - take The City to court - which is what Mr. Meyer is doing. Now isn't The City obliged to represent the voters and counter-sue the prick?
Counter sue for what?
ya, you're correct - more appropriately, The City is obliged to defend the interests of the voters. I got a little carried away... sorry.
4:32 (aka Marco), ever trolling and acting the big know-it-all.
Is this it? http://www.ci.encinitas.ca.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=7874
It seems pretty clear to this observer that the City of Encinitas acted in good faith to comply with this agreement. The Density Bonus stuff was railroaded through and the Housing Element stuff was also taken as far as the ballot in compliance with Proposition A. However, The City does not seem to have the right to agree to override Proposition A. This whole ball of mud is likely to have to go to Superior Court and beyond. I love watching a good fight!
3:46,There is no "best efforts" clause in the settlement agreement.
10:53 - huh?
3:46 said "acted in good faith," as if that counts for anything. A "best effort" contract is one where a party is required to try their best, but the outcome is not assured. The city settlement agreement with DCM isn't one of those contracts.
Are you saying that the city agreed to accomplish something that was not possible. For instance they could agree to send a cow over the moon and if it could only reach low orbit they would be in default?
I don't understand how one person can expect a vote to be flipped so he can make more money.The City seems intent on getting legal advice from lawyers who work for the building industry, so of course we pay Meyer and the BIA to go away and give them their way every time.The Council members who signed this agreement painted themselves into a corner, but that should not be our problem. Residents voted in good faith and should not be disenfranchised because of a bad deal made on bad and biased advice.Residents, once again, may be the ones doing the suing if the council won't do the right thing by us.
Good idea. We should sue for neglecting road repairs while wasting dollars on the trophy life guard palace. Council needs to see where their decisions against citizens can lead them. Although they are expert in navigating potholes.
The trophy life guard tower just got more expensive for someone. Its construction area was washed out in the recent storm.
Meyer is a repugnant, greedy dirt bag. He thinks he can override majority opinion thru litigation - the entitled arrogance of the rich. He is a blight to the community and should be fought off, not settled with.
Meyer sounds like a great candidate for the Trump cabinet. Does he know how to tweet?
He knew how to have Yes on T crapola sent from his business address. He'll know how to have someone tweet crapola for him, even if he can't figure it out himself. Dude will do anything for a developer's buck. "Environmental attorney??" The joke's on him as everyone laughs every time they hear him described that way.
Meyer isn't an attorney. You are conflating him with Marco Gonzo.
Right, whoops...easy mistake to mix them up...they seem so interchangeable.
David C MeyerPO Box 234293Encinitas, CA 92023(760) 753-0413
David C Meyer1448 Paseo De Las FloresEncinitas, CA 92024
Write the Council and let them know you expect them to defend STRONGLY with an attorney whose heart and mind put residents first.Remember: Barbara Kautz, whom the City has been using, first said our rounding down on density bonus was "defensible." She then flipped on that opinion - no reason given - and advised the Council to give the BIA and Meyer their way, plus a fat check for their trouble.Kautz is biased and needs to go. Find someone who knows how to put up an effective fight for residents, not developers. They're out there. Whether the City wants that for us is another story.
They don't want their invitations to the Ecke Christmas party cancelled!
You got that right, 12:03!
The suits slimy Meyer and the BIA were settled by the city putting the housing element on the ballot. That and nothing more.Nothing prevented them from coming back again. We paid them and here they are again. It is past time for council to have a spine. We fulfilled all obligations for their suits by putting the plan on the ballot.The Eckes name will forever be stained in our community by them allowing David to continue, as if they could have any effect on his despicable pursuits to profit by degrading the community he lives in.Like Marco, he has no problem crapping is his own yard . Even dogs, when given the chance, will try to leave their deposits outside of their own yards. As for Meyer and Marco, the thought of despoiling their own, never enters the picture.