Lisa Shaffer — As Houlihan’s hardworking heir, Shaffer appears to have earned a lock on a seat.
She owns an impressive academic background — environmental science and business ethics — and she’s been in campaign mode for a long time, smoothing her liberal-leaning message.
I’d be shocked if Shaffer doesn’t find her way to Maggie’s old chair.
[...]
Encinitas will return to its natural 3-2 split, a balance that reflects the city’s divided ideological soul.
The mystery, to be solved in November, is whether the new majority will lean right or left.
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Logan Jenkins: Shaffer will win one seat, Kranz, Stocks, Muir will compete for other two
Jenkins in the U-T:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It looks to be a tight race between Kranz, Stocks, and Muir. Last night on the refinancing and new borrowing for the golf course, Muir and Stocks just lost all the votes in the Encinitas Ranch area by ignoring the speakers from the HOAs.
ReplyDeleteBarth made a substitute motion, seconded by Muir, to continue the agenda item to give homeowners more time for their negotiations with the city. Muir got cold feet and withdrew his second, and the substitute motion died. The council voted 3 to 1 to proceed post haste and screw the homeowners. Gaspar had to recuse herself. Stocks got very angry when HOA rep James Greco tried to make some additional comments. Stocks banged his gavel and was close to throwing him out when Greco wisely retreated.
The grape vine is saying that the HOAs will be filing a law suit.
Did they actually ignore the speakers? Or did the speakers' points simply not persuade them?
ReplyDeleteRob,
ReplyDeleteYou tell us. You almost never add any new information to the conversation. Here is an opportunity. Go watch and tell us the answer.
Jerome and the rest of the council often fail to respond or openly consider what speakers add to the conversation. That's how you know you made a good point. Dumb and easily dismissed points are skewered openly.
No, that's a stupid suggestion. Just answer the question.
ReplyDeleteRob, watch the video replay and learn. It's always easy to tell when a public speaker makes an excellent point. The speaker is completely ignored. Jerome Stocks is a master at skewering any public speaker if one little detail is wrong. There is an example last night during Oral Communications. Watch what happens after the speaker comments on the Maggie banners and Jerome then "corrects" the speaker. All Jerome can offer is his interpretation of events. Those who were involved in the brouhaha know differently.
ReplyDeleteThere's another example when a different speaker, during the Hall property/Moonlight Beach bond public hearing, made the statement that Lease Revenue Bonds require a revenue stream from the proposed project to make the repayments. The legal consultant, the bond consultant, Jay Lembach, and the council ignored the speaker and never refuted the speaker. Why? The speaker is correct.