It has only been a few months since our new City Council took office.Pick up a copy of Coast News this weekend and read the whole thing. Dietmar lays out plenty of evidence of backroom dealings as usual.
We, the tax paying citizens, had great hopes that the new council members would bring fresh air and light into city chambers darkened by shameless backroom dealings.
Recent council meetings have shattered that expectation. It is now only too painfully obvious that pro-development and special interest groups still hold their 20-year-old stranglehold on our public resources, expecting to reap huge profits on taxpayers’ expense and feeding on the public trough, while destroying the unique character of our five communities forever.
In related news, the council has written the opposition to Right to Vote, and still has not committed to showing us their alternative before the vote. Bait and switch, anyone?
I'm SO DISAPPOINTED in Tony Kranz and Lisa Shaffer. They both LIED to us. I walked door to door for them was used as a tool to carry out their lies and mis-representations.
ReplyDeleteSHAME ON YOU TONY AND LISA!
I will never trust you again - can't fool me twice.
Sabine apparently has Kranz intimidated already - who run Barter Town???
DeleteSabine is Master Blaster or is the City manager?
Deletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hgq4w4dqKsU
I don't agree with Ditmar and don't think 10:46 is being fair.
ReplyDeleteThe council has No goog choice.
There is good intent in the initiative but bad consequences and the urgent need to act is not here anymore. There is no option to change any part of the initiative. As it stands, the bad outweighs the good.
So far, not ONE reason has been given as to what Prop A will do that is negative. NOT ONE EXAMPLE. It's all "could be", "maybe", and "I worry".
DeleteI'm worried about this place looking like Los Angeles. Why aren't you?
I'm voting "Yes".
I'm voting YES too, in June, to support the public's right to vote on upzoning, and to support our current General Plan and Encinitas Municipal Code (EMC). I wish the Desert Rose Community every success in suing. Desert Rose neighbors didn't get due process of law, and neither did neighbors living adjacent to North 101 who don't want lane elimination for motorists, but want a dedicated bicycle lane in the Railroad right of way to be extended AND maintained north to La Coasta, as is already on the books for Hwy 101, beginning, South, at Chesterfield, according to the Bicycle Masterplan from 2005, just updated and approved by the Planning Commission on 1/17/13.
DeleteCouncil doesn't trust the actual people in the neighborhoods to vote; we can no longer trust Council. Shaffer and Kranz are not fulfilling their campaign promises to facilitate neighborhood self-determination, but are "selling out" to expansionist interests.
Shaffer and Kranz - Trojan Horses for the special monied interests. Muir and Gaspar - totally worthless boobs. Barth - doesn't know where her loyalties lie. Get rid of them all!
ReplyDeleteI agree with Anon 10:46. Kranz and Shaffer supporters were used as mules for the Building Industry when we went door to door and showed our friends and neighbors their campaign promises and asked for votes and donations to support these canidates. Why didn't we just keep out donations, stay at home, and vote for Stocks and Forrester? The votes would have been the same, and we could have used our time and money more gainfully.
ReplyDeleteOne of the hardest things for many of us is that we have to face our friends and neighbors, and we have lost personal credibility because our elected council members have lied. It bothers us that we supported dishonest people, and many of us feel betrayed. It reminds me of how Republicans who voted for Bush felt when they found out we went to war with Iraq on no factual evidence.
Where the council goes from here, I have no idea!
The facts do not support your position.
ReplyDeleteMike?
Dump Kranz and dump Lisa. They sold the same hope and change that people got suckered into in 2008
ReplyDeleteI think they voted the right way on the issue. Why waste tax dollars on a lawsuit that you know your going to loose.
ReplyDeleteIf Olivenhain and other communities don't like what happened, they need to get busy and get the Density Bonus Law Changed.
Quite your whining and do something.
Council is WASTING $350,000 or more on a Special Election, when it could have adopted the initiative outright, and THEN placed the measure on the ballot in 2014 at the General Election for about $30,000 additional, INSTEAD of spending the now predicted cost of $400,000 for a special election!
DeleteThe City was ALREADY SUED in the 90's for our General Plan supposedly not providing enough opportunities for affordable housing. Joel K., the same guy who provided the pro-development "impact report" through Rutan & Tucker, defended the City of Encinitas and prevailed in that case, which was published, at the Court of Appeal level, thus providing Case Law precedent . . . Just as Escondido has not faced lawsuits after that city enacted a similar measure, after an initiative, the City of Encinitas would be EVEN LESS LIKELY to be sued, as we ALREADY WERE, and the homeless and migrant worker advocates, LOST.
So someone here is talking about the $114K in legal fees Menlo Park had to pay? Can't you see how that is so much less than the Special Election costs, THAT THE CITY COULD HAVE AVOIDED?
Tony Kranz initially did the right thing, by suggesting we adopt outright, with Council pledging to put the same (or a slightly modified version) on the ballot for the 2014 General Election! Expansionist interests got to Tony Kranz, it seems.
Kranz says he "changed his mind" about having signed the initiative because, if enacted, it could waste the time of those who worked on our Specific Plans. Those plans were put into effect BECAUSE OF THE 4/5 Council majority loophole, which the initiative will repeal! But the only part of our Specific Plans that would be changed are those parts that are now INCONSISTENT with our General Plan and our zoning code. Right now we are out of compliance with state law because of those inconsistencies.
The initiative would bring our GP and our Specific Plans back into consistency, would bring our City back into compliance with State Law. Council should NOT hide behind the alleged "risk" of being sued, when it knows, or SHOULD KNOW, that the affordable housing issue has already been successfully litigated by the City.
anon, 8:29, you can take over someone else's log-in name, (anon with a lowercase a: copycat!) and complain about others' so-called "whining" all you want. You're wrong on this. You support expansionist interests, and you don't support the neighborhoods, including the Desert Rose Community. The City of Encinitas, in the Desert Rose case, has again denied due process of law because no Respondent, representing the Planning Commission's findings AGAINST the developer was allowed at the public hearing(s) before Council on that matter.
Council's yes vote on Desert Rose affects all of the five communities. By state law, the council had the means and the right to reject the project based on public safety and environmental concerns. The council didn't even consider the ramifications of their vote. How could this council believe that the new residents would find that a narrow uphill dirt path through burning brush was an excellent decision by the council? Public safety, council - get your head out of the sand. Precedent, council - get your head out of the sand.
ReplyDeleteEnough with the fear of developer lawsuits running this town! God forbid something tragic comes out of the firetrap the Council approved for Desert Rose and the City will be hit with lawsuits they couldn't have imagined in their worst nightmares. The safety issues raised by the DR community were significant, but the Council plowed ahead And ignored them anyway, with Gaspar's fear of dirty glass allotted more consideration than safe fire escape.
ReplyDeleteSome call the Council's actions fear of litigation. I call it negligence.
Gaspar's concern over a dirty glass wall was something straight out of a John Waters movie.
ReplyDeleteI don't know what their thinking was but maybe the Council decided to wait and see what the majority of Encinitas voters wanted. As of March there are almost 40,000 registered voters in Encinitas and only just over 15% signed the initiative. While impressive, it's hardly a majority. And it was the initiative people who wanted the special election. They could have waited until the next City election.
ReplyDeleteMy understanding is that closer to 20% of the registered voters signed the initiative?
DeleteCouncil COULD HAVE ADOPTED OUTRIGHT and then put the same or a similar ballot on the ballot for the General Election in 2014 for possible repeal of the already enacted measure. We would have had a little over a year to see what the speculated "consequences" and possible "ramifications" could possibly be of adopting the initiative as written.
As the attorney who wrote the initiative has explained, once adopted, the initiative is SEVERABLE. That means that if by some remote chance any part of the initiative is found to be invalid, then the rest of the initiative, including ELIMINATING the 4/5 Council Majority vote allowed on upzoning loophole, including amending Specific Plans or updating our General Plan, WOULD STILL BE IN EFFECT.
10:52- I call BS. Your post makes no sense. They made the right call and we all know it. I don't want our City Council wasting precious money that they don't have. When is the City going to address the huge pension debt and start on all the capital projects that are needed through our City?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 7:31 AM, you speak for NO ONE BUT YOURSELF. We don't "all know it!"
DeleteMost people who followed what is going on with Desert Rose and Council's recent bad decisions know that actions based on fear or "risk" of litigation against the City BY DEVELOPERS are actually based on speculation, conjecture and manipulation of the facts, tweaking of the record.
We are all also concerned about pension debt, but you are throwing that in here to distract from the discussion of Council's poor choices, poor leadership and bait and switch tactics.
The council didn't make the right call. The council was negligent in their duty to protect residents and the environment.
ReplyDelete7:31: Don't you get it? The pension and debt IS addressed by the the City every time they bend over backward for developers at the expense of residents.
ReplyDeleteCompromise safety so we can all pay for City-driven debts racked up with eyes wide open? I think not.
Needed City improvements went to pay for the Hall park (17 accts raided). Keep your eyes open for taxpayers ultimately footing the bill to make Desert Rose safe. Of course, the developer will be long gone by then.
11:07 AM - So true.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand what Barth means when she talks about preserving a 'small town feeling' with corrupt, big-town city government. When they talk about sustainability, they are talking about their salaries and their pensions. Gus Vina is the biggest welfare queen of all.
ReplyDeleteDid it occur to anyone that the whole Planning Department and many other positions could be replaced by Kelly girls? At least we could go to their company managers and see them fired, and we wouldn't be stuck with pensions!
We thought we were getting a new council who would fire dead wood, but they have only empowered city staff to be paid more for doing worse work. Shameful!
Let's not overlook Vina's royal consort Mark Muir. Norby's not doing too poorly sucking up tax dollars, either, at $105K/year for a part-time job.
ReplyDeleteNorby to run for county supervisor against Bill Horn. Boy o boy once you get a taste of the govt teet you can't get enough.
DeleteDon't forget Kristin Gaspar's push to give taxpayer money to Mike Andreen's organization. Gotta pay Mike something for writing her council script.
ReplyDeleteTrue, even if it does make her sound like she's off her nut.
ReplyDeleteIt is hard to discuss the disappointment that so many former supporters of Kranz have noticed.
ReplyDeleteThe Building Industry and spent $20,000-$30,000 sending out terrible flyers about Tony and called him every name under the sun. Kranz and Shaffer supporters reached out to voters and made personal appeals to voters not be swayed by these attacks.
Our reward for doing a little TOO good of a job in helping to get Tony and Lisa elected was for them to support the same developers and the BI, who had spent a small fortune to shoot Tony down!
I hear a range of names to describe this council like, "The Cowardly Council." For me it is like a Twighlight Zone Council since it is so obsurdly detatched from reality!
While people talk about Tony as a traitor, Lisa seems to be a stereotypical professor who is brilliant, yet her pride blocks any application of common sense, and it blinds her from the purpose of the job to represent Encinitas citizens.
This was a wake up call for our city council. Give them a chance. Would you be happier if Bond and Stocks were still there? I mean, really, think about it.
DeleteShaffer as the professor?! Academics are renouned for credibility in theoretical situations, but inept in real world scenarios. I saw a 90 year old business go under that had a famous economist on the management team - he was worthless! The only place his theories worked were on paper. Is Shaffer one of these? The euphoria is fading very fast on this new council.
DeleteThey had their chance.
ReplyDeleteA vote of no confidence for this council because -
ReplyDeletetheir idea of public safety is a fire excape route on a narrow uphill dirt road through brush;
they plan to increase housing density by removing the midrange density per parcel and build to the maximum; they want to reduce environmental protections to help the developers ---and on and on with their new schemes.
I take back everything I've said. I completely support the Desert Rose Community, and urge everyone to vote YES on Prop A, the right to vote on upzoning initiative.
ReplyDeleteI think Council voted incorrectly on Desert Rose, and before that, to defy the Coastal Commission. I am reversing myself and I now agree that the dedicated bicycle lane should be expanded and maintained that already exists in the railroad right of way, all the way north to La Costa, giving back the northbound lane on N101 that was taken away from motorists.
I apologize for accusing people expressing their sincere concerns of whining; I apologize for hiding behind my anonymity to bully certain individuals here and on Leucadia Blog, attempting to discourage, distract and drive away those who disagree with my previously expressed views.
I've had an epiphany! Maybe it's a sign of rebirth and new growth, with Spring. God bless the neighborhoods and good neighbors, everywhere!
APRIL FOOLS....
DeleteNice try.
No, I mean it. I had an epiphany; I'm back on the wagon; I urge everyone to VOTE YES on the initiative, and to support pre-existing residents in our neighborhoods, including Desert Rose and residents adjacent to N101, who do not want one of our highway lanes eliminated for motorists, and who do want the dedicated bicycle lane in the railroad right of way to be maintained and expanded, completed as it should be, North to La Costa, already on the books.
DeleteKLCC are fools every day!
ReplyDeleteCity Manager Gus Vina has laid the groundwork for his desire to have a public relations director. Clever Mr. Vina definitely put one over on the Council. They think it is their idea.
ReplyDeleteGus Vina is his OWN public relations director! Every decision he makes is predicated on how it will enhance his personal power. He simply uses the Council and OUR MONEY to do this. Fire Vina and let him find a different city to bankrupt since we will be his 3rd!!
ReplyDeleteWhat a clueless City Council.
ReplyDeleteThey need to DO the right thing, not hire someone to gloss over their terrible decisions. How do you put a PR spin on the $350,000 election, or the $1.2 million wasted on the General Plan consultant?
ReplyDeleteThey are bleeding money like crazy, so the natural solution is to borrow and spend more. NOT!