Again, developers are using "density bonus" laws to force high-density developments on low-density residential neighborhoods. Jared Whitlock of the Coast News has the story:
“As far as the density issue, and I know that’s why everybody’s here, I realize you guys want five (homes),” Haley said. “But in order for it to work with us, we’re going to go in and proceed with 10.”Some of the current council members have made statements about challenging density bonus laws, but based on what they did to the Olivenhain community of Desert Rose, we wouldn't hold our breath.
He later said CityMark would work hard to make the development blend in with the rest of the community.
CityMark is in escrow with the property, but the purchase is contingent on the project getting approval from the city. Haley declined to state the sale price.
The city is currently reviewing CityMark’s project plans, according to Roy Sapau, senior planner with Encinitas. Staff members will then look at whether the development could have a significant impact on the environment.
You can see where the city and developers want to put high density next here. If you have lavender or purple near you, be afraid. That's what the city sees as "underutilized" (i.e. "not generating enough revenue to fund our pensions").
And even if you don't have lavender or purple near you, ponder how El Camino Real, Encinitas Boulevard, and I-5 are going to handle all those additional people coming and going.
Got gridlock?
Has any city anywhere in this state successfully challenged the state density bonus law?
ReplyDeleteTo me that's the big question it, because even if we want our council to challenge it, which won't happen, they can go down in flames if the developer sues.
Before you jump all over me as a developer honk, which I'm not, I've fought several developments, it would be great to get some perspective on the first question.
What chance does our city realistically have at challenging these developments with the state density bonus law in place. Is there any other density play that can be made?
Thanks in advance, and I stand ready to help the Fulvia crew.
One last point, for someone to get the property to build, the owner had to sell it to them. Personally, I wouldn't sell to a developer putting 10 homes there. Yup, easy for me to say...
The developer does not own the property. The sale going through depends on the developer getting the final OK from the city to put 10 houses on the parcel. Otherwise, no deal between the seller and buyer.
DeleteRight, but they will sue the city if they don't get approval. Every other developer with similar plans has gotten approval, ie behind La Especial and on Hermes.
DeleteWHICH ONE OF YOU LOCALS SOLD THIS LAND IN THE FIRST PLACE???
DeleteMaybe that can be traced back to Thomas Fisk Goff. They guy who owned it in the 20's when he made the HOLLYWOODLAND sign. If the source of my trivial information knew what he was talking about.
DeleteAnother question to add to the above. Has any city of our size been sued for not going along with the density bonus? And if they have, what happened?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteGood question. As far as I have researched Dr., (which admittedly isn't much) the only cities that have been sued for housing elements are the ones which forbid all new development with moratoriums. (And it wasn't the state suing the cities, it was housing authorities). But I was at city hall one night after a break, and a friend of mine on the LTC board elatedly said that councilwoman Garspar just told her "Now if we could just get a handle on this ridiculous density bonus law". I think if Gaspar championed that push, the world would be her oyster. (You know, if that means pleasing more than 28 people). I still think the proof that this law is inflated is because in 1995 Encinitas was only deficient 500 affordable homes. Today, with only a 12% increase in the population, the requirement for affordable homes has risen over 400% instead rising at the same rate as our population. Therein lies the inequitable demand of the state (or SANDAG?). That is the Achilles heel. And the powers that be (if there must be a quota for affordable homes) should NOT be able to inflate their standards whenever they like, but need to show probable cause for doing so. Maybe the Supreme Court could rule on that.
DeleteAnon 9:11 sounds like Marco Gonzales before he switched sides. I have heard him say many times that the Density Bonus Law is indefensible--so he decided to take on Desert Rose and hasten the ruin of a city that he once protected.
ReplyDeleteOther lawyers DO think that this can be fought. Marco should take on the challenge of doing what is right instead of claiming that it is impossible. Also, he should read the comments on this site. They are not favorable since he has switched sides.
9:11 is me, old Leucadia dude, just trying to get some background.
DeleteMarco's a lawyer, if he could shine up his star by taking on density bonus, ie get some pub, make his firm some money, he'd do it. I assume that's not the case.
He's free to do what he wants, but I wouldn't want to be in a strategy meeting with him on city politics any more...
Dr. Lorri, the only lawsuits come NOT from the state, but rather so-called "low-income advocates" (developers).
ReplyDeleteNote the affordable unit on this lot will not be sold, but instead retained for sale at market rate at a later date,,,the hold period is 30 years, with no oversight as to whether the 30 years have elapsed at the time of sale. In addition, it will rent for $1,800-$1,900 per month. Sound affordable? Nope, didn't think so.
Plus,with regards to the 30 year rule, someone mentioned that if they lease the property to 5 unsavory renters in a year or two, then the property would go back to them to do what they want with it (well before the 30 year limit). I don't know if this is accurate or not, does anyone know? Right now, it is hearsay.
ReplyDeletePer the city's website: The property is 2.25 acres and has two addresses. They are 832 Hymettus and 378 Fulvia. Zoning is R3. Owner is Cope Family Trust, 111 W. Avenida Gaviota, San Clemente. The developer is CityMark. It's the same outfit that stuffed 10 houses around a cul-de-sac off Daphne. The parcel was a little under an acre. The street took about a quarter of an acre, so the 10 houses are on about three-quarters of an acre. It's a density bonus development. One of the houses is called affordable, whatever that means.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, if anyone is curious who owns what property here in Encinitas, go to encinitaslive.com. Months ago I was told at the counter that the city no longer had those records but one had to go to San Macos to get them. I guess that changed. Good.
DeleteYup, that's a good resource Fred. Again, it takes to parties, a developer and someone to sell to that developer...
DeleteOwnership and lots of other information about any address in Encinitas is at:
Deletehttp://myencinitas.encinitasca.gov/MyEncinitas/
Freddie, the people who misinformed you about the records are among those you're helping screw up Hwy 101 through Leucadia.
2:40
DeleteRight.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThank God Bruce Ehlers is only semi-employed and has all the time in the world to drive the six miles from his home to Fulvia on Saturday to tell everybody in Leucadia how to run their lives and about how he once was a 'Planning Commissioner': butting in to other people's business as usual. Of course, he never mentions 'why' he was removed from the commission or all the violations of local and state laws he has been found guilty of since he moved to Encinitas. What a tool.
ReplyDeleteI like Bruce and think by the flavor of your comments, your a tools.
DeleteI hope Bruce runs for Council and I hope you get sick to reflect your terrible attitude.
Bruce is a good dude, as far as I've seen. Nice low blow, his employment status has nothing to do with his character.
DeleteAs for the violations, either post the background, or shut up. Bruce hasn't been on the planning commission in a long time, but he still cares about our community...
6:06 such anger and hostility, attack attack, why? You fear Bruce, you know his common sense leadership and respect for citizen property rights threaten your for profit speculation.
DeleteBruce Ehlers is a highly regarded engineer and executive who works long hours and flies all over the world representing the company he helps to manage. If anyone is "semi-employed," it sounds like it is Anon 6:05 projecting!
DeleteWhat is it that all of the developers do with themselves when council members and planning staff are not available for backroom deals meetings?
So tell me, what has the City done or doing to get the State Law changed?
ReplyDeleteUntil the law is changed, why doesn't the City, just downzone all the City zoning densities for large vacant lots 30% to offset state law density bonus?
Some times its the simplest solutions that work the best.
6:22 that wouldn't benefit the proifteers, speculators and our appearily corrupt and complicit council. Instead out council led by Barth and Gaspar is seeking to upzoneup zone the city to increase state control of zoning not local control. Barth is an egoists who has done little for taxpayers of our town. What a dissapointment.
ReplyDeleteI can't wait to see the candidates for mayor. This is going to be fun!
ReplyDeleteBarth and Gaspar will be there. 6:22, I like that idea, try to get everything "mid-zoned" is the concept I've heard. Not sure exactly what it means, but something to take the density bonus out of the mix.
DeleteAnon 8:16 (Marco) please stop trying to protect the council and push you own ageneda and theirs. They have gone on record saying that they "might have to change zoning." There is nothing that says that they have to do this, and they know it. These comments are just part of the misinformation machine.
DeleteAnd you can bet your bippy that "might have to change zoning" means "might have to upzone." The closer to the election, the more the "might" will turn to threats of "have to," designed to frighten the public into approving.
DeleteDownzoning is not an option for this cash-poor town, thanks to bonehead council (past and present) actions.
dude/dudeette at 9:09, I'm not Marco. He may read the blog now, but he's not posting after Desert Rose.
DeleteI'm not trying to protect the council. Density bonus is the freakin' law, you're not getting around it, the last council didn't and future councils won't, whether here or in other cities. If you have info that says cities have and/or will have a way to oppose this present it.
I live in Leucadia chief, I've dealt with all the dust and weird smells and Ayds and Gish on Hymettus, the dust and street destruction off Vulcan at Dramm and Echter and some of my friends live near the other CityMark property behind La Especial. The last one if a prime example of using the density bonus to ram houses in there and destroy the unique feel of our community.
I would add one more element to the developer cycle. Someone has to sell it to the dev, then there's the developer and then there's the end buyer.
Quit buying this crap, people. The developments on Phoebe and Hermes are an abomination, the lack of spacing, the looks on the Hermes one, the straight FU to the surrounding neighborhoods.
It won't happen, but I can dream. How do you like that response, 10:38?
sorry, 9:09, not 10:38
DeleteOf course all this could be solved if the protesters got together to buy the land, then they could keep it as is. Hey, I'm just saying.... Money talks.
ReplyDeleteThere were people at the meeting who tried to buy the property, and broker Doug Harwood, it appears, never delivered the offer to the owners. If this is true and this is illegal, Harwood should lose his license.
DeleteGo through another broker......
Delete8:48 - is it possible that Harwood is a part owner in this? If so, the offer was presented and rejected. Regardless, it is not "illegal" for a broker to not present an offer to a client. It all depends on the instructions from the client - as in "don't give me any offers under $X, or "any offer has to be all cash", or. or, or.......you get the picture.....
Delete- The Sculpin
Agree with Sculpin, the rules of real estate are as slippery as the agents themselves. Lots of back room deals, where properties are offered to buddies.
DeleteIt's all about maximizing the dollars on the property from the seller, and later on the developer.
Anon 10:49 sounds like Marco is posting again.
DeleteSculpin is Harwood. Now we knowwwwww.
Delete11:20. Not Marco. What part of my "take" sounds like Marco? Realtors you know are slippery. Too much guessing on this blog.
DeleteI don't think a lawyer with a big new firm to support has time to post on this blog.
Let's all hug and agree, we'd like developments that fit into the character of our neighborhood without density bonus.
There, we can now have some cocoa and watch Captain Kangaroo...
If I had more work right now, I wouldn't have the time.
11:29 - Ha! Now that's funny! I knew Doug back in the '80's - did a few deals together - but that's it. I moved on to bigger and better things, and he stayed local. He lives in a better house than I do, but I think I have more land - not that that means anything.......he's older than me, too.
Delete- The Sculpin
Sculpin is Stocks .
Delete2:29 - That's not so funny.....I have worked with Stocks back in the day when he was involved with some non-profits and his political ambitions were in their infancy. He was a pretty stand up guy then. The rest is history, as you see fit......
Delete- The Sculpin
Sculpin is Bond.
DeleteBond isn't awake past 7:30...
DeleteDon't brokers have a fiduciary duty to present all offers to their clients??
ReplyDeleteYes, they do.
ReplyDeleteMore than one neighbor made an offer on this property over the past year + but none wanted to build more than one, max two homes on it. You can all connect the dots from increased density to higher parcel selling price and what that means to the broker. There was no "other broker" to go through, as Harwood held the listing.
And FYI, Harwood is on team Stocks/Bonds/Gaspar/Andreen....
DeleteFolks, this is real simple - money talks. The neighbors (also greedy developer types because they're building homes, aren't they?) couldn't get to the sellers price because they were not using the land at its "highest and best use". That's really the only dot to connect - anything else is poppycock!
Delete- The Sculpin
Sculpin, the voice of Olivenhain developers! You are one reason that people in other communities don't like Olivenhain!
DeleteHow would you know?? The law says that Harwood has to present ALL offers. Some owners would rather sell to someone they like for less money if they want to preserve a neighborhood. These owners didn't get that chance to consider other offers since it looks like Harwood wanted to be a double agent and make money on both the buyer and the seller.
Agree, but like that's never happened before? It happens al the time, Pollyanna...
Delete11:17 - no it doesn't, and you're delusional! A lot of real estate changes hands "off market", so to speak. If the property is under contract with a broker, and is listed on an exchange, then yes, the broker has an obligation to INFORM the seller of the offer. But if the seller has included in the contract that they will only entertain offers with specific terms, and the offers don't include those terms, they don't get presented.
DeleteAs for your feelings about Olivenhain, I can only assume that your present state of delusion has contributed to it greatly.
- The Sculpin
Scuplin-
DeletePlease share how you know other unnamed buyers "couldn't get to the sellers price" . As you said this as fact you either know inside or information or are a teller of untruths. Which is it? Your credibility is on the line- do you have it, or not?
What was the price of the oher unaccepted offers?
How far below the selling price were the other unaccepted offers?
When were the unaccepted offers made?
I think the saying Scuplin is put up or shut up- please back up your statements.
12:11 - I have a brain - do you? It's called an educated guess. Assume you have a 10 acre parcel you want to buy. Clearly you'll make more money if you put 30 homes on it than 1 home. The 30 home plan would have a very different impact on the community than the 1 home plan. However, there is a point where the developer would be agnostic about the product; maybe 18 smaller homes vs. 9 estate homes would yield the same return. I'm assuming here that there is equal demand for either home. Still, either plan would affect the community character differently. So these neighbors wanted to buy the land - they didn't because (I assume) they didn't meet the sellers price. And they didn't meet the price because (using my example and the assumption in anon 10:36's post) they thought that both the 9 home and 18 home plan would still have a negative impact on the community. And they weren't ready to absorb the premium paid for lesser density on their own. It all boils down to basic underwriting of a real estate deal.
DeleteThere, is it really that hard to think something like this through, or do you just like reading your own posts.......
- The Sculpin
Scuplin you never provided an answer. Clrealy you don't shinola from shaffer and your bogus claim that neighbors could not meet the price of the seller is an untruth and pure speculation and opinion ypu wants us to beleive if fact.
DeleteSculpin, you should realize that "highest and best use" is not about most profitable per acre, in terms of dollars. Quality of life is actually beyond mercenary value.
DeleteJust as "best management practices (BMPs) does not equal how best to get away with shoddy construction, shoddy inspections, and shoddy accountability.
well look who finally woke up?
DeleteIt's about profit per acre to a developer, that's the point. The Sculpin nails it here, it's how they fund the real estate deal. He clearly has some expertise in the area...
DeleteFor those of you who thought "oh cool, a new Encinitas newspaper, delivered free right to my mailbox" need only look at the full-page ad on the back to know the source: Doug Harwood, and inside others of that ilk, including $tock$ and Ga$par.
ReplyDeleteIt's called the Seaside Courier, owned by former SD councilman Jim Madaffer and featuring and opinion piece by Alice Jacobsen. Light on content, heavy on ads by Doug Harwood.
DeleteAnd the Gaspars!!!
DeleteExpect heavy density increases and upzoning by the Council.
ReplyDeleteThe city's unfunded actuarial accrued liability in pensions in June 30, 2011 was 126.6%. The city is in deep trouble.
correction - the unfunded actuarial accrued liability as a percentage of payroll is 126.6%
DeleteCheck out on Del Mat is handling the density bonus thing. It's on Page 10 of this week's Coast News. Also an FYI- both Marco Gonzalez and Dave Peck from Coast Law group troll this blog. I know this because Peck sent Dr. Lorri a nasty email on a comment she made. Marco also trashed her in a FB message. They are attorneys, so i guess I should not expect much. Be careful out there. They are on the Hospitality Committee. And if you haven't already noticed, there are still more bars coming to town, as well as Party Busses. There is a Pub Crawl for the boys and girls club either coming or already has been here.
ReplyDeletet alre
Isn't Trolling when you post comments on a blog just to bait people, by making inflammatory statements.
DeleteBetter to say they read the blog to see if they're mentioned.
All I can say is if they don't like the heat, then don't get involved in suits like the one over Desert Rose.
I am under the impression that 'trolling" a blog means reading without posting?
DeleteNo, that's lurking.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteYou're right, 10:30; I stand corrected.
DeleteCredit to Wikipedia here:
Delete"In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally[3][4] or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[5] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion."
Most of Gaspar campaign money comes from out of town attorneys and developers she is bought and paid for.Good friends of Daviad Meyer ( scum bag developer),Jerome Stocks and last but not least Mike Andreen.
ReplyDeleteIn 2010, 66.4% of Gaspar's campaign funds came from addresses outside Encinitas.
DeleteA lot of those through professional doctor/dentist medical associations, and non-profits. I don't know what percentage was through Building Industry Association interests.
DeleteMany locals who funded and worked for Barth/Shaffer/Kranz feel uber betrayed. If KG came out against the density bonus law, and came out for general amnesty, to count more existing affordable housing, or POTENTIAL affordable housing, that would be revolutionary. It could actually help to keep our city more laid back.
It seems inequitable that non-elected officials can set quotas. The State sets the mandates, but SANDAG, through the cities' planning departments, sets the quotas required. Jeff Murphy is playing along with density development interests, by not implementing the amnesty so many people have promulgated, including Teresa Barth. Planning is probably lagging because they are busy doing visioning Powerpoint Presentations for Gus Vina. There is only so much money. Strategic Planning is not necessary to set common sense priorities. The "dream machine" cabinet team is not popular with the rank and file, imo.
Gaspar should support the Desert Rose community, to separate herself from her dark twin, Bi-Mayor Barth, and to show, in deed, true colors of community service, before self.
Mothers do serve their families; she could do both; granted that would manifest as a miracle, to many. Christy Guerin flipped. Kristin Gaspar could flip the opposite way.
KG has said she doesn't believe in stopping something already "vested" as having permits, already being "in progress." I think that's part of the challenge with Desert Rose; so many issues are presented as a "done deal," when they aren't. The system is cheated, and so are the taxpayers.
But let's not give up on hope. In Aesthetics, we learned truth can be stranger than fiction . . . We'll wait and see who announces. Who will run for Council, and who for mayor?
I suppose we can hope for the best, prepare for less than . . . not sure what the worst could be, but Stocks has to be in the top two or three, seems to me.
KG has benefitted by Stocks' absence. Distancing herself from the appearance or assumption that he was her mentor has helped . . . There will be less of a plurality split, this time, as only one seat will be open on Council, and one, for Mayor.
KG would be very wise to support the Fulvia neighbors and friends, too. I'm not sure how the neighbors can prevail against density bonus requirements, now. Apparently Council wants to have no certified housing element, because it won't act on amnesty, so far.
DeleteIf it could be done in '91, it can be done, now. We incorporated Encinitas five years before to slow and control growth. We have been saying for years, we are almost "built out," but density bonus opens up new worlds of profit to "highest and best use" in terms of dollars, developers.
10:51
Delete"If KG came out against the density bonus law, and came out for general amnesty, to count more existing affordable housing, or POTENTIAL affordable housing, that would be revolutionary."
Fully agree. But I wouldn't limit that opportunity to Kristin alone.
Yeah. Lynn supports Kristen, $tock$, and Andreen, and scum bags.
DeleteI guess I should have figured.
I think many of us, including me, appreciate Lynn's comments. She is telling us things that I know I don't have the time to look up. And, yes, people can change. I remember when Guerin voted with Maggie to not have the tattoo parlor in Cardiff. The 3 unwise men, overruled them, but personally I was shocked that Guerin voted with the residents of Cardiff that I was representing when I spoke. Kristin has potential to do the right thing. However, if she is being helped by developer money than we probably won't see much from her on those issues. Many, many years ago I was approached by someone who we all know, in the development community, to run for Council. I was much more active back then. We met for lunch and I was asked if I was interested in running. This was in March of that year. I had to give san answer buy April so they could start the ball rolling. The caveat was that on all matters not related to development, I could vote any way I wanted to. On development issues, it was implied that if I didn't vote their way, they would not support me in the next election. Since Kristin is a Rotarian, and most Rotarians are business owners, and such, they have an agenda. They do awesome things, don't get me wrong, but they re the business owners of our community. When I bought my VW Beetle from Herman Cook, he came out and spoke with me directly and asked if I might be interested in joining. I wasn't willing to commit every week to a lunch and all of the other things that they do, so I declined. Most are very nice people, and volunteer for almost everything. But they are business people, so their interested are also taken into account. Nothing wrong with that if the community is also taken into account, in my opinion.
DeleteDr. Lori, thanks for the info. I am one to not buy the "Business Community" angle, and what I mean by that is the concept that it has to be business vs. business haters or the non-business community.
DeleteI would wager that in the U.S. we're all in the business community because we're all heavy consumers, we all buy VW's, go the Henry's, buy whatever. To me it's a false narrative.
Nothing against you here, I totally understand where you're coming from. For me, it gets down to people trying to preserve the somewhat small-town feel of Encinitas, vs. Developers who will max out property density. It's more complicated than that, but that's how we understand it.
Gaspar would not be in the "game" if it wasn't for the Rotarians, aka the Development interests in this town. To my knowledge, she did not have the local, grass roots background of a Maggie or Sheila Cameron. That's ok, there's a lot of different ways to get into politics.
But as she would say, it's the elephant in the room. She has yet to take any positions that contradict here strict development background...
And for purposes of full disclosure Lynn, would you or would you not benefit personally from an amnesty with regards to potential existing low income units?
DeleteExcuse me Dr.Lorri, do you charge for your time as a therapist?? Or is all your work pro bono?? If you charge so much as a nickel for what you do, then YOU are a business person. A selfloathing one but a business person no the less, but not one on those evil business Rotarians, which is nice for them I suppose.
Deleteanon7-11, if you want to preserve the small town feel, buy up all the land and keep it as is. I'm sure one of those evil Rotarian developer friendly real estate agents will be glad to be your broker.
11:17. I like many others, understand that open land will be developed. But it would be nice if developers could work with the community to keep the scale and looks within our community character. I know, it's too much to ask, take a look at Citymark's dev on Daphne and then the one on Hermes for example. In the aesthetic and spacing categories, these are what as know as "shit".
DeleteThey're prime examples of using the density bonus to ram in as many units as possible on a small piece of land. To whit, "It Ain't what you do, it's the way that you do it.".
As for business, I made my point. We're all in business, we all contribute, so whenever I hear crap like Maggie/Teresa fill in the blank is "Anti-Business", I just laugh. That kind of stuff is like kindergartner's calling each other names.
There's nothing wrong with Rotarians, but in this town, the big money, developer backed $ comes from that group. Follow the money, it's all in black and white who gave what to who come election time...
11:17- Actually at this point in my life most of my work is pro bono for military men and women who have PTSD. However, I guess I did not explain myself try well. I am not anti-business. And, yes, when I had a full practice, and was much younger:))I did get paid and I was a business. In fact, I still have a City of Encinitas Business License. My point was to suggest that there could be a compromise that would benefit ALL. Personally, I haven't seen any work/live structures in Encinitas that I have liked, or think, did both. They are in Cardiff, Main Street Encinitas, and other places in Leucadia. Businesses employee people, which for most of us means a job and income. There has to be some change, but what they change looks like is what I think I am asking? I don't know the Harwood situation. I do know that my husband and I attempted to buy a property my dad lived on in perpetuity, because his wife died before him. She left it to him until he died, and at that time it would go to her brothers and sisters. They disliked my father so much, they would not sell to me because my last name was Greene. We offered what they were asking, but to no avail. So, an owner can reject an offer, at least in Oregon, even if the price is exactly, or even a little higher (as in our case) if they choose to. Ao as someone else said, "Why are locals selling out to people like CityMark? If they need the money, perhaps they could do a little research first. But, so many properties in this area are owned by people who don't live here, they have absolutely no vested interest in preserving our community character.
DeleteI think most of the out of towner money game from Paul Gaspar's PT friends. He is on the P.T. Board in Sacto.
ReplyDeleteKristi step father was a contractor/ developer
ReplyDeleteThe bottom line is we can/need/must do better than the Gaspars of the world. Public service on the council is a real responsibility, not one where we have fun and dress up in super hero outfits and read prepared statements all the time. Even James Bond would agree with that...
ReplyDeleteEncinitas has lots of successful professionals and executives in different fields, but they are all understandably focused on their careers and personal financial responsibilities. These experienced, qualified people don't have the time or energy to serve on council, or even follow what's going on at city hall.
DeleteSo look who we get on council: a retired fireman, a retired professor (blinded by the light of the real world outside of the ivory tower), a physical therapist mother of three small kids, a photographer, and whatever Barth did. Nothing wrong with any of those pursuits. But none of them prepare someone for the management skills needed to deal with the real issues of the city. The people on this council are overmatched compared to what they need to be able to do. Unfortunately, the prospects are not good for getting anyone on council who is really skilled and equipped to do the job.
I think it's ok to read prepared statements, and I've been advised to do so, myself, as I tend to start several thoughts at once, without bringing them all to a neat conclusion.
DeleteCome on, Lynn: Gaspar's statements were not prepared by her. Stocks/Meyers/Andreen told her what to say. Stop defending her!
DeleteYou cannot compare your own statement prep for better delivery to Gaspar's mouthpiece function for developer interests.
DeleteI know many successful qualified people that would make excellent council members. None of them want to have their lives picked to pieces by backs stabbers and do nothing's that post on weenie little blogs like this. Therefore we end up with socitale life manipulators and govt teat suckers.
DeleteKeep your campaign promises, and no backstabbing. Go back on your word and you have a problem, even on weenie little blogs.
DeleteWho knew Shaffer would be unable to think for herself and Tony would favor his friends over residents? Now we know, and now we complain. That's kinda how it works.
8:04- so you're ok with socialite life manipulators and govt teat suckers provided they keep their word??
DeleteNo, but they've been known quantities since day one. It's the folks crying over poor, misunderstood, unsupported Kranz-Shaffer-Barth I have no patience with.
DeleteFolks who defend those three are applying the "backstabber" label to the wrong ones; those three properly deserve to be called backstabbing.
8:04- If only what you said were true. Not everyone can keep campaign promises as usually they don't have all the information before they get elected. You can look at any President to see this. They learn more and they often have to turn right or left, depending on the situation. However, I do think when there has been an initiative that has passed, like Prop. A, that they should do their very best to go with it, and fight for it. Even if it means seeing what the consequences might be. I actually did not vote for Prop. A, but if I were on the Council, I would make sure I did everything I could to protect it. The City might end up with a lawsuit, but the citizens would know that it was because of a democratic process afforded to us in this State. Heck, we are being sued by the State for environmental issues from the Park, so why not roll the dice for density bonus. I am having a hard time finding a City that has been sued for not complying, despite all of the "fear tactics" that have been used by lawyers, guns and money, as Warren Zevon would say.
DeleteThe "didn't know beforehand" excuse is old, especially when you find it's quite often a case in Kranz' case, as an example, of telling people this/that person "is a good guy" because he grew up with them/coached with them/fill in the personal blank.
DeleteWarren Zevon was a werewolf from London.
DeleteWell, that was the Danny D appeal, supposedly, that he was a good old boy and grew up here.
DeleteWe have had council people with full-time jobs, but it is hard to serve and work at the same time. I salute anyone who at least takes the time to run and serve, even if I totally disagree with their politics.
Honestly, I don't think we will ever have any satisfaction with a council in our town as long as questions of appropriate density, traffic flow and pension levels are alive in our community. And that's probably ok...
I'm not defending her, just sharing my perspective and understanding. For some of us, prepared statements are better.
ReplyDeleteWe don't know, for a fact, who prepared her statements. You are using conjecture to speculate otherwise, although you may be making educated suppositions. ALL of Council had Rutan & Tucker's Kuperberg and City truth twister Sabine as ghostwriters for their bogus ballot arguments.
KG graduated with a degree in Broadcast Communication, or something similar? She is probably proficient at writing her own prepared statements.
Wholy Shit. Broadcast Communication degree is known as the easiest dregree to get. I solute KG for getting so far. Nice for someone with little real ability.
DeleteRespectfully, if you're using a prepared statement at council, you either need to do more editing of your notes, or prep your speaking with a few run-throughs to work on the conciseness of your presentation.
Deletebroadcast communication is one of the easiest degrees out there.
Deletewhat she really graduated in was MRS.
She used her assets to land Mr. Gaspar. That is her resume.
the rest is she is a developers, $tock$ pawn.
What's your degree? But you can't own your own expertise anonymously. It's ok.
ReplyDeleteRegardless, KG can write her own prepared statements. Too bad she hasn't served on Council under good leadership, to date. Councimembers are all, individually and collectively responsible for their failures in leadership.
Since we "had to have one," a communications specialist may help soften the image of members' and staff's betrayals, if Marlene can really convey, in a effective way, what the public has been unable to convince Council are the ethical and financially prudent courses of action. Instead of trying to shape opinion, her job should be to report it, to Council.
Communications specialist needs to convince council that citizens, activists, are members too. Community members can reshape council, if we put our combined efforts and imaginations to work.
Sorry, but that's a serious "apologist" maneuver for Lady Revlon. She hasn't served under a council with good leadership? Really? That's just not a legit excuse.
DeleteCould it be she's not really prepared to do the kind of critically thinking needed, on issues like PAcific View, the Golf course, Hall property etc. etc.
I would posit that she and she alone has to take the heat for her own failures in leadership. If we're going to hold Kranz, Barth and Shaeffer to that standard, then KG has to be held to the same standard.
No apologies, here. As I said, Councimembers are all, individually and collectively responsible for their failures in leadership. They all have made some big mistakes re Prop A, and their unanimous consensus that City Manager Gus Vina is doing an excellent job, while avoiding opportunities, before promised, to solicit public input. Barth, Shaffer and Kranz haven't kept their promises about enacting a Sunshine Ordinance. At least Gaspar and Muir voted not to go back to having secret subcommittee meetings despite our new policy and protocol.
DeleteCan't agree with you on giving Gaspar and Muir any "props". I haven't seen anything out of them as far as advancing the agenda of our city in any positive direction. Muir to me is up there to represent the firefighters and their union, and the past ties to Stocks, Bonds and the heavy development interests of the city. The heavy firefighter presence at his inauguration, where preference was given to his supporters in attendance, should tell the story there.
DeleteGaspar was approached the way many other people have been approached in this town, to run on the pro-development ticket. Someone mentioned that earlier today, on this very blog. A grass roots campaign was not where Gaspar came from. Her supporters don't get up at 4am to flyer houses.
Prop A. is going to be a contentious issue here, in the future and during coming elections. Density is just not an issue that can be easily dealt with in a city of 60,000 + where the average home price is over $500k and developers are fighting like dogs for the remaining open pieces of land.
Personally, I would have like to see coordination between Prop A and Tony, Lisa and Teresa. Both sides will have their take on what did or didn't happen in that conversation. the bottom line is nothing really happened, and now we're still trying to sort out the state mandated housing mess.
We'll see if we get the leadership we need in the next 3 years, otherwise we vote again to see who else wants to step into the ring.
I don't agree that "the bottom line is nothing really happened." What happened was huge. It was huge to wage a successful grassroots movement. If the public can be educated, by flyers and word of mouth, then we can vote stand up and stand together by voting NO on increasing density by zoning up OR out.
DeleteTony, LIsa and Teresa have done NOTHING re "coordination" and Prop A, except to before coordinate their false arguments against it. Then, when they lost their battle, they simply said they didn't want to look back, but to go forward. Tony, in the subcommittee meeting before the election, was all all ready to send out supposedly "impartial educational materials" to garner more votes against Prop A. There was to be a FAQ section on the City's website, too, with more deceptive BS through Rutan & Tucker and the City Attorney. At least Muir nixed that. He said he had an epiphany. I was at the subcommittee meeting when he said it.
We can succeed only if we learn from the past, live in the present, and plan for the future, with hope and strong motivation. Prop A's passing should not be diminished.
I don't feel the betrayals by Lisa and Tony, who signed the petition to get elected, then "changed their minds," will be forgotten; nor should they be. Although Lisa and Tony (and Muir) are not up for reelection, Teresa was part of the false ballot arguments AND Lisa and Tony's deceptions. Teresa also deceived us about replacing Glenn Sabine and enacting a Sunshine Ordinance were Tony and Lisa to be elected.
Ah yes the world according to Lynn ,only she speaks the truth.
ReplyDeleteIf it rains, they keep Ga$par indoors - they're afraid she'll look up and drown.
ReplyDeleteThe Fulvia property was never placed on the MLS - why?
ReplyDeleteWhy should it be?? Obviously the sell and buyers are happy with the price MLS or not.
DeleteJust shows the intent to keep out buyers until the "right" one was identified so by the time that deal is inked, everyone else has been shut out of the running. But you knew that.
DeleteLook, really pay attention citizens because density bonus will wreak havoc like these citymar developments.
ReplyDeleteIt already has, go check behind La Especial Norte. This has been going on the last 10 plus years, if not longer...
DeleteAnd those shit boxes on hermes.
DeleteThis council is spineless. They use these terrible examples of reasons to do it again instead of being responsive to the mistakes made in the past. Show some backbone and say NO to the Fulvia developers.
DeleteThe Hermes and the La Especial were on the books before current council. They can't deny the Fulvia dev. unless it violates zoning or something else. Density bonus is state law, repeat it after me...
Delete10:49, 8:07 was just asking a question. You sound a little defensive there. ;)
ReplyDeleteNot defensive at all, thousands of properties change hands w/o MLS listings. 8:07 sounds as if this is illegal or unethical, casting dispersions on both buyer and seller.
DeleteConsidering multiple calls to the broker went unanswered over the past year plus....
DeleteNo seller is obligated to sell to any buyer, get over it. But perhaps you didn't offer enough.... Hey here's an idea, as the houses go up for sale buy them all then tear them down. Thereby satisfying you need for an empty lot or vacant property. There is a solution to this problem, it's called CA$H.
DeleteYes...offers attempted, no go. Something seems not on the up-and-up here, enough to get 120 people on the property in agreement that this one may not be passing the sniff test. Some of these folks are in the development and construction industry and feel something is wrong with this deal.
DeleteConsidering an entire neighborhood will be permanently and negatively affected by this overbuild, "get over it" is a rather flippant attitude. Perhaps you'll feel differently when this happens near you and then decide it suddenly doesn't smell right.
Check out the "underutilized parcels" map that WC included the link to above and see if you live near or on a targeted property. You may learn the real definition of NIMBY the hard way: Next time It Might Be You.
What doesn't pass the sniff test? If you lived near that property, you know it was going to be developed. If the zoning is ok and they go for the density bonus, the die is cast. I live over by La Costa, and all the former greenhouse lots here are being developed. Only 2 remain, by the flower shop and on Andrew.
DeleteI feel your pain, but if you can't nail the developer on a large violation of the law or process, you're going to have a tough time. Want to slow them down, hit them with an EIR request for the property.
Harwood knows what he's doing, developing Encinitas is the guy's gig...
10:37- the solution to your problem is 6:39. Read it again.
DeleteWe'll see.
DeleteAll of you people who's parents were born here raise your hand !.the rest go back to were you came from.How stupid do you sound.
ReplyDeletesuper senseless comment.
DeleteDITTO !
DeleteIf you don't build out and prop A says you can't build up it maybe one of the unintended consequences of prop A. Just say'n
ReplyDeleteNo unintended consequences. Just sayin'.
DeleteThe sky is by far more developable than any plateau, and that consequence was resolved with Prop A. Building out is limited by zoning, not a consequence or expanded by Prop A.
ReplyDeleteDid Prop. A say there could be no rezoning? I wasn't sure about this. If it didn't, couldn't the City just up zone?
ReplyDeleteIt wouldn't surprise me for the city to successfully change anything they can with zoning here, but that could only regard out-zoning not up. Prop A rewrote zoning height limits and that's why you should have voted for it. Especially with terms like "under utilized lots" becomming a new catch phrase in city documents. The concept of "over utilized lots" is of course absent from concern. But I think most of us realize that OUL's work contrary to a safer and more functional business and residential community and that is why A passed.
DeleteYes,Prop A passed buy a very small margin----------- thank you
ReplyDeleteYes, a very small margin. But still an impressive accomplishment with all the trickery, propaganda, community pillars, out of town special interest groups and Kiing's money walking solidly together in lock step to defeat it.
ReplyDelete