Coast News:
Blakespear deftly offered detailed answers to the dozen or so questions, while Elliott, a self-described “metaphysical broker,” frequently pivoted back to his desire to build affordable housing for the city’s municipal workforce.
While not offering much detail about the plan, he alluded to building hundreds of units on the grounds of the old Pacific View Elementary School “as opposed to turning it into a garden,” alluding to the current plans to turn the property into the so-called Pacific View Academy of Arts, Culture and Ecology.
Vote out Blakespear.
ReplyDeleteRe-elect Blakespear.
ReplyDeleteI would not characterize her comments as "deft" - more "canned," with much of her commentary recognizable as having come out of planning staff's mouths.
ReplyDeleteMany of her responses ,may have been deftly delivered, but were flat-out wrong. Blakespear (like her idol Shaffer before her) has a bad habit of quoting staff as "experts," even after staff have been proven to be lying.
Too bad the CN reporter doesn't pay better attention to the saga of the HEU and hasn't picked up on the fact that the city is once again spinning a deceptive plan as "the law." Then again, the CN is beholden to the city for its legal ad business.
The last thing city employees need is affordable housing. Their pay scales are well above the private sector averages and the benefits are also.
Deleteanyone notice the banner image to encinitasundercover. At first there is a pretty sunset. But then I saw the street light and adornment of cell facilities. Now I can't unsee it. Do we really litter wireless communication facilities like this in downtown?
ReplyDelete1st world problems
DeleteIn the interest of journalistic objectivity, the CN story is a kind, soft portrait of the candidates and what they said at the forum.
ReplyDeleteWhat the voters really need is a truthful, well-informed, hardball opinion piece.
Elliot is spaced out - let's hear from his dog.
ReplyDeleteCB appeared to have a cloud over her head exiting tonight's heu debate. Her plan doesn't look so good in the light of day. That's what happens when you hand over the reins to "staff."
ReplyDelete“To refute the solipsist or the metaphysical idealist all that you have to do is take him out and throw a rock at his head: if he ducks he's a liar.“
ReplyDelete—Edward Abbey
At least Elliott is strong enough to say that Measure U (Housing Element Update) is a sham, as at most it will only yield 15% affordable housing. 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.
ReplyDeletePROGRAM 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 bottomed had fallen out of her world.
No doubt that this paragraph was put in on purpose in a clever way to fool the public. Otherwise it had no reason to even be in the measure. There is a second Measure U forum on Sunday at 3 pm in the Encinitas Library. You will get a chance to see how Groseclose spins it after saying Measure U does not nullify Prop. A. It's true that the paragraph only applies to a future HEU, but that will be almost 100% of the upzoning done in Encinitas. The paragraph is a Trojan Horse.
The Trojan horse paragraph is on numbered page 1-25.
DeleteThe full text of Measure U is a 142-page PDF documemnt. The fastest way to find a page is to use the PDF page numbers up at the top to click through the pages, not the page number at the bottom of several individual documents within the file. The city uses a format that doesn't allow the reader to put in a page number and go to it with on click.
DeleteOf the 142 pages, only 35 are numbered.
DeleteJust start at the top of the document and scroll down to numbered page 1-25.
Thank you Peter Stern!
ReplyDeleteJust the fact they tried to hide it is terrible.
ReplyDeleteI'd call it sinister.
ReplyDeleteParalyzing paragraph.
ReplyDeleteBlakespear is as clueless about Streetscape as she is about the HEU.
ReplyDeleteI was going to vote for this guy to show blakspear and crew the displeasure with supporting their handling of Housing Element and the support of the mismanaged staff that screws up nearly every project.
ReplyDeleteHowever, this guy comment about affordable housing at the pacific view or anywhere for the City staff is absolutely ludicrous. He's a nut job.
He is a nut job, but Blakespear has proven herself to be dangerous.
DeleteElliott can't put affordable housing on Pacific View or anywhere not zoned for it without the Prop A-required vote, and state law won't let him identify who gets it. There are laws to control Elliott. There are no laws to control Blakespear's conniving.
10:51 above outlines in great detail how the city sneaked in a clause that means if you vote yes, you give up your right to vote. Vote NO on U to preserve Prop A.
Apparently, this little detail was news to Blakespear, highlighting why she is a dangerous person to have conducting our business. Her reliance on staff is frightening. It means they are running the city. They're unelected and are proven liars, something she chooses to ignore.
Now she's got Kurt Groseclose up there doing her dirty work. He looked blindsided the other night more than once.
Folks are starting to call it Measure FU with good reason.
Where does it say that Measure FU will undo prop A? This is appalling. And if true would show that the CM has no control or is deceitful - or that CC has no control or is deceitful. Take your pick, all bad and all means cleaning house starting in mid-November.
DeleteRead 10:51 above, 2:01!
DeleteI see the heartache. It clearly should not have been in the measure, but it doesn't change the prop a text from the general plan, does it?
DeleteI don't think it usurps prop a entirely. But yes people should vote no just in case.
Whoever wrote the measure should be
In plain language: we know we need a vote of residents to give up their right to vote. Here it is in Measure U, under your noses, but written to obscure the fact. Vote No is right.
DeleteWhoever wrote this section got the full blessing of the planning commission and council. They are not your friends, they are not "listening," they are not "taking your input," they want you out of the equation. They want to work unfettered with their developer "stakeholders."
Remember Kranz exclaiming back in 2013 of Prop A: "I want to kill this thing."
Wake the heck up people, the city has it in for you.
Elliott knows next to nothing about Encinitas, city government and its history, but having him as mayor would be very entertaining.
ReplyDeleteCal Worthington and his dog Spot - might be worth the laugh track to get him in office.
DeleteI agree. I’m going to vote for him just because the existing status quo is so damn bad . Supporting a complete incompetent management structure that’s screws up everything they touch .
ReplyDeleteAnd his little dog can replace the city manager. What a joke he is!
DeleteThe city manager is a woman.
DeleteI think the poster means the guy who is running for mayor.
DeleteYeah I know, I was just having fun with the poster. There are, as 8:42 wrote, laws in place from letting Elliott run amok.
DeleteBlakespear buddies up to Gonzalez and "good guy" developer Harrison, lets staff run the show, and excels only at ribbon cuttings. I'd elect a cardboard box over her.
Photo op!!! Blakespear at one point waltzed alone in wearing full cycling regalia and settled in next to Mosca. Guess she wanted to be seen and check on her mouthpiece Groseclose.
ReplyDeleteYes, all of 5-15 minutes, then she ghosted the event. I was in the back row and saw her clown suit. Pathetic.
DeleteHow about Kurt's list of lies? The old, tired "we're just planning for high density - doesn't mean it'll get built" line. Yeah, right. Developers are in the business of building, but they're going to stay home and sit on their hands.
ReplyDeleteHis biggest came when he dug into the Prop A clause. And we all know it takes a vote of the people to reverse our right to vote - which is exactly what we'll be doing! If it doesn't remove our right to vote, what's it doing in there?
I could go on, but dinner calls. Someone else can take up the baton, get in line - there's a long list of choices.
I observed Elliott and he seems like a very sweet guy, and I think this campaign is simply giving him a social life and something to do and his dog is nice. Maybe he'll meet a nice lady and settle down with little Coco. He certainly isn't going to win, but at least he was at the debate and stayed the whole time unlike the other two council members. Vote NO on Prop U.
ReplyDeleteThe nullification paragraph in Measure U only applies to Housing Element updates. This is the reason the upzoning for L7 from R-1 to R-3 is included as a separate upzone. It's not necessary for the HEU, but separate from it. A tripling of density, and therefore profits, is a nice gift to a developer, or stakeholder, as Brenda likes to describe them.
ReplyDeleteIt may "only apply to housing element updates," but that is the bulk of all upzoning in Encinitas.
DeleteAnd it is to be expected that a developer would hold back applying for a permit and instead ask to be included in a housing Element update to avoid a single/project public vote. The council will simply rubber stamp the request.