Measure U proponent Kurt Groseclose, a former city planning commissioner, called the ballot measure a "locally controlled action plan" and said it was created during a "very transparent" process with more than 25 public meetings.Meanwhile, from the Encinitas Undercover comments:
Opponent Peter Stern called it a "terrible deal for Encinitas residents and a wonderful giveaway for developers," and said it was worse than the city's previous proposal -- the Measure T plan, which voters turned down in 2016.
The new plan, which goes before voters Nov. 6, proposes up-zoning 15 properties in an effort to encourage the construction of low-income housing. Under the proposed zoning, each of the 15 privately owned properties would be permitted to have to 25 to 30 housing units an acre and buildings could be three stories.
At the Measure U debate forum on Tuesday, the Yes on U advocate, Kurt Groseclose, former Planning Commission member, got caught with his pants down. He claimed Measure U does not nullify Prop. A. The No on U advocate, Peter Stern, a lawyer, put the following PowerPoint slide on the screen.The full text is here. The language in question is on page 39-40 of the PDF and reproduced below (click to enlarge).
PROGRAM 3C: Right to Vote Amendment
In 2013, a citizen initiative resulted in the Right to Vote Amendment (Proposition A), which requires voter approval of most land use changes and building heights higher than two stories. Proposition A cannot be modified except by another vote of the people. If a proposed Housing Element does not achieve community support, Proposition A may act as a constraint on the City's ability to comply with state Housing Element law. Assuming that this Housing Element is approved in November 2018, the City will take actions to ensure that future Housing Elements can be adopted in a timely fashion and that requirements for a vote of the people do not constrain the City's compliance with State law.
You can find this on Page 39 in the full text of the measure on the city website. The second time Stern put the slide up Groseclose turned around and read it. Mayor Blakespear took a photo of it with her smart phone. Both were stunned. Obviously neither had read the full measure. On leaving Blakespear looked like the bottom had fallen out of her world.
The most charitable reading is that staff will add enough buffer units in each housing cycle's update to be able to do the following cycle's update without a public vote.
Sadly, in America, MONEY always wins................
ReplyDeleteBTW... If you think anyone on the council wasn't aware of this tidbit think again. If this passes it will give council members the power to rule on a massive amount of potential wealth.
The council absolutely is aware. Any doubts, ask yourself this: what's it doing in there at all? The council has been asked repeatedly over the past few months and sit staring, no response.
ReplyDeleteWhy can't we get an answer out of the city? Kurt wouldn't answer this very simple and direct question last Thursday and again yesterday. Why is that?
The city doesn't "love Prop A." They view it as a "constraint" - read the language in the ballot measure. Tony wanted "to kill this thing" when the Prop A campaign was running.
Didn't the city try something similarly sneaky when trying to sell Measure T?
ReplyDeleteWasn't the city caught in the act, and didn't they have to change the language in the proposal?
Yep, the infamous Section K:
Delete"Any changes necessary as a result of Department of Housing and Community Development and California
Coastal Commission review and certification following the November 2016 vote shall not require a subsequent ballot measure, even if the change would otherwise trigger a ballot measure per Proposition A. The November 2016 ballot measure will expressly delegate the authority to enact changes to ensure a certified Housing Element and Local Coastal Program certification to the City Council. Delegation of authority specific to accomplishing required state certifications is consistent with Proposition A because the voters are asked to authorize it in the comprehensive November 2016 ballot measure.
Same treachery, different Measure letter. T voters were "asked to authorize" a forfeit of their Prop A right to vote.
FU voters are told: "Proposition A cannot be modified except by another vote of the people." Measure U IS the vote to forfeit your Prop A right to vote.
Yes, it's deja vu all over again.
DeleteNo on FU!!!!
ReplyDeleteFU to the City Staff and City Council. Deceptive liars !!!!
Groseclose and Blakespear can crow all they want about the hundreds of hours of public input, but we all know that while they took it, they didn't use it. It's nowhere in Measure U.
ReplyDeleteEven the Planning Commission's recommendation of 35' max height and other limitations were overridden by council, at staff's recommendation.
Groseclose must've had a brain fart when he forgot to call out the two secret developer "stakeholder" meetings among the many he named. They were on his slides, but only the dates showed: Feb. 18 Stakeholder meeting, April 4 Stakeholder meeting. Those were Brenda's two "unadvertised" to the public, developer-only meetings. Surely in the name of the "very transparent process" of which Groseclose is so proud, he would have made mention. Brain fart or intentional? You be the judge.
No on FU.
They know NOTHING about how to solicit, handle, or process data in an scientific or ethical way. They sift through and cherry pick the few comments made by staff and developers and present these outliers as the majority point of view.
ReplyDeleteBlakespear and her family personally benefit by multiplying the number of units she can place on her properties. Don't beleive her.
Thanks for your comment Julie G. We will handle and process this information in a scientific and ethical way.
DeleteIn further review of your comment, we will not hold on to this comment. It will not be public record. Thanks you.
Sounds like a city worker has his process down pat. And, as Shaffer used to say, "it's all about the process."
DeleteI'd say more that they don't WISH to process our input - isn't that clear by now? They see it, they ignore it, they claim it's what we wanted. This has nothing do with knowledge, it has everything to do with greed and treachery.
ReplyDeleteWell said!
DeleteThis ballot measure is DOA.
ReplyDeleteI'm sad to say there are a few apologists, (on Facebook's Encinitas Votes page,) for this poorly thought out plan and name calling towards Peter Stern is disgusting. Is that really necessary, Glen?
ReplyDeleteNot to mention throwing out the city's generalizations like they're to be trusted does not the make Glen look too credible.
DeleteIs Glen a mole for the BIA or Meyers? He seems to know things that only the so called "stake holders" would know.
DeleteThe moderator of the Encinitas Votes Facebook page is a clueless Pollyanna who thinks the City Council is honorable but just makes an inadvertent faux pas every so often. She should grow up, wise up and smell the coffee.
ReplyDeleteHUH??? She provides a forum for everyone to discuss issues, warts and all. She's got over 400 members whom I suspect don't agree with you.
DeleteYou're a spineless coward who clearly wants to hide behind mama's skirts and have her say what you're afraid to.
Assuming no one's putting a gun to your head to read it, you can ignore EV and show us how it's done. We are waiting.
The page reads all goodie-goodie and lovey-dovey, as if the City isn't treacherous. The moderator needs to be hit over the head with a reality hammer.
DeleteYou need to be hit over the head with a "start your own page" hammer.
DeleteWe're still waiting, dude.
Prop U is UGLY. Vote no!
ReplyDelete6:18 and 7:18 You poor thing. You are obviously on the wrong blog here. Now please take your medication and rest. It's OK, tomorrow will be better.
ReplyDeleteOh, this is rich. A hunky-dory moron who posts on EV is calling a realist a "spineless coward." Have some cookies and milk and go night-night. It's past your bedtime.
ReplyDeleteStill waiting on you, spineless coward. Where's your FB page and name behind everything you want mama to say for you?
Delete9:10 You're calling the wrong woman a "spineless coward." You're nothing but a sniveling creep.
DeleteI've decided to testify at the Kavanaugh hearing. I'll risk my safety for the country's well-being.
You're not going to make a peep. Better call yer mama.
Delete9:10 is a defrocked Catholic priest and registered sex offender.
ReplyDeleteTell your children not to talk to strangers.
Back in yer hole, mikey.
DeleteOh how we hate the decrepit Lynn "back in yer. hole, Mikey" comment when she doesn't agree with someone's comment which is oh too often with that hag.
ReplyDeleteWho is this "we?" Many of us love it. And "decrepit?" Nah, it'll never go out of style. Too useful.
DeleteNot Mikey? Back in yer hole, 6:06.
Much better Hag
ReplyDeleteThank you WC for providing a much need outlet for these mentally unstable people who obviously had their toys taken away from them when they were kids and misbehaved.
ReplyDeleteGood one Hag!
ReplyDeleteIs she the lady who talks to everybody as if they're her shrink patients?
ReplyDeletehttp://encinitasguerrilla.blogspot.com/ Well said, as usual.
ReplyDelete6:06am, 8:48am, 10:58am, slimy mikey wrong every time is your modus operandi.
ReplyDeleteYou can't even identify the correct gender of who is calling you out.
You do have an issue with women, even when they have nothing to do with whatever current thread is going on. What a pitiful excuse for a human being you are.
One of these days your despicable behavior will render its overdue cost. Karma can be a beyatch. The rot inside you will eventually have its say.
When that day finally comes, and it will, there will be little compassion for what you so richly deserve.
Liar. Typical response from the long winded hag. We all know who you are.
ReplyDelete5:49am. Just who is the liar slimy mikey?
ReplyDeleteYour 'we' is comprised of only you.
We indeed.
We definitely know more than enough about who your are and what your character, or rather completely lack thereof, represents.
Your attacking women who have nothing to do with responding to your disgusting diatribes is the same old, same old, tired lowlife tactic that in your imaginings has no relation to truth.
I am man. You are not. I will defend these women every time.
Right. Have a good one hag.
ReplyDeleteVote NO! Anything with the word "Measure" attached to it coming from Encinitas is DOA!!
ReplyDeleteAmen to that!!
ReplyDeleteThis city management is selling Encinitas out like a Ho.
She’s a saint yogi not a Ho!
Vote no on any measure this manager try to snake through.
I got to agree with 11:22. Pimp out Encinitas to sell her to the train of developers and special interests. Disregard people who love her and who actually live here.
Delete