Wednesday, February 12, 2014

Direct democracy comes to Solana Beach

In a turn of events that echoes Encinitas' Proposition A, Solana Beach voters approved Proposition B last night.

The origins of Proposition B were that residents wanted to be able to use the beautiful, taxpayer-funded community center at Fletcher Cove for events like wedding receptions. But the council, under the influence of wealthy nearby neighbors, put onerous restrictions on its use, including that only one day per weekend would it be open, only two drinks per adult could be served, and professional bartenders had to be hired.

Well, it's hard to believe that so many residents could be so upset about not being able to use a facility for an occasional event that they would go through the time and effort of a successful petition drive, but they did. Prop B would require the facility to be made available to the public for events at least two evenings each weekend, and that no additional alcohol restrictions beyond existing state law could be imposed.

The campaign was bitter and divisive. Opponents railed against the cost and the permanence of a voter-approved initiative. "No on B" signs seemed to far outnumber "Yes" signs in yards. We suspected the No's would prevail based on the public being annoyed at having to vote on, and pay for, something so seemingly trivial. Yet the "Yes" vote prevailed. There must have been deeper and more widespread resentment at the council and the millionaire Fletcher Cove neighbors keeping the facility off-limits to the public.

Government by initiative is messy, expensive, and fraught with problems. But sometimes the politicians leave us no other choice.

25 comments:

  1. I say hey bartender
    Hey hey looky here
    Serve one more two more three more
    Glasses o beer.

    Now if they can get smokers the rights they deserve for using a legal product.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. THe right to smoke is not in the constitution, and the rest of us have had enough of the 2nd hand smoke. SMoke at home and in the car, it's bad enough the rest of us have to foot the bill directly or indirectly when you get emphysema...

      Delete
    2. Then don't sell me butts.

      Delete
    3. right, let's make smokers of a legal product the bad guys but let's make marjuana legal so bad guys arn't bad......................who's going to protect us from that second hand smoke? please.................

      Delete
    4. Then don't buy butts. You're killing yourself and other people, and the rest of us have to pay for it, don't try to make it into an issue of rights.

      Show some self discipline and quit smoking...

      Delete
  2. Good Posts. Encinitas needs an initiative for term limits and to address or rid our City Government of pensions and unsustainable benefits. Its become ridiculous that such crappy managers of public funds make soooo much in retirement that they did nothing to manager.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bang your pots!!!
      Drive them out!!

      Delete
  3. From the county registrar of voters results:

    Registered Ballots %
    Voters Cast

    8,772 3,314 37.78% Solana Beach Prop. B
    39,858 12,888 32.33% Encinitas Prop A

    I guess alcohol has to be involved to get a better turnout.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Damn formatting. The takeaway, turnout for Prop B in Solana Beach was 37.78% while turnout for the Prop A election was only 32.33%.

      Delete
    2. SB has long cared for its community more than Enc. look at their 101. Train below grade, rail trail completed. 101 street scape finished. Enc has a half finished streetscape downtown, no rail trail and any thoughts of lowering the train tracks is met with looks of lunacy. It's no wonder they have a greater turnout.... They care.

      Delete
    3. Is 5.45% really that big a deal? Enough to say Solana cares and Encinitas doesn't? They have only 22% of our population to reach with election news.

      Good points on rail trail, trenched tracks, downtown makeover. No silly, traffic-plugging, one-lane roundabouts. That's smart thinking.

      Delete
    4. So having 5.45% more Solana Beach voters turn out on what is basically a party/drinking issue is nearly the same as 33% Encinitas voters turn out to decide the future of city development because Solana Beach is smaller?

      Delete
    5. Right, but Solana Beach has a smaller population, doesn't it, so you have to adjust the size sample. If Solana Beach was a big as Encinitas, the numbers of voters would be a lot smaller.

      Solana Beach = 13,000
      Encinitas= 60,000

      Prop B

      Pass: 1720 / 51.9% Yes votes ......
      1593 / 48.1% No votes

      Prop A total votes:

      12,867

      Delete
    6. This isn't a sampling exercise. All voters should go to the polls. We know they don't all go and the percentage varies with the type of election presidential/nonpresidential/special etc. It's strictly a percentage. If you were doing a sample survey then the larger population might have an effect in getting a representable sample. We know from experience that special elections, especially on an issue that many voters may not be paying much attention to, have low turnouts generally. This often is an advantage for the more proactive side as they usually get a higher turnout. Whether this was the case with Prop A is not known but it's a reasonable conclusion.

      Delete
    7. 2:12
      Silly additional stop light intersections. And they won't be through until they have as many as Del Mar.

      Delete
    8. Many of Fred's long-term friends are wondering if he's lost his marbles. His statements about the one-lane roundabouts proposed for Leucadia 101 are irrational. They ignore the facts on the ground.

      Delete
    9. and many of Fred's long term friends thinks he is much smarter than the other stupid old non-thinking people that don't realize roads should be balanced for all users. Not just motor heads.

      Way to go Fred, for keeping your mind fresh.

      not like those others who refuge to change even their old stinky underwear.

      Delete
    10. Fred's as sane as the next man (and I'm nucking futts), but that's irrelephant.

      Nothing crazy about roundabouts, except not admitting they save lives...

      Delete
    11. 3:40, I agree with you.
      Somebody was trying to make the point that a higher percentage of people turned out for prop b, than prop a. in Encinitas.

      I merely made the point that since there are a lot fewer people in Solana Beach, you can't make a 1 to 1 comparison.

      The takeway you pointed out is correct, most people don't vote and they sure don't vote in off year or special elections.

      -Mr. Greenjeans.

      Delete
    12. The point is not roundabouts as a concept. The point is that four one-lane roundabouts are planned for a four-lane highway and that three of those are crammed in a half-mile. The fourth is 1.2 miles south.

      In a 2.4-mile project, approximately 1.8 miles have no roundabouts. After spending $20 million of taxpayer money, approximately 75% of the highway would keep the speedway and T-intersections character it has now.

      On top of that, there would be no significant increase in parking spaces and no new spaces at all four blocks north and south of Leucadia Blvd.

      Instead of ranting mindlessly about the project, it might be a good idea to find out what it actually involves.

      Delete
    13. And for these reason n 101 should be the shit hole of n county coastal??? I don't think so. Sorry you do.

      Delete
    14. 8:38, where did 11:06 state what you concluded?

      Delete
    15. A Tale of Two Cities/Solana Beach's Prop B versus Encinitas's Nanny State Deemed Approval Ordinance

      Yes, it is ironic; the voters in Solana Beach organized and passed this initiative 'B' because they wanted to be able to use the old scout house to hold weddings and anniversary parties where beer and wine 'might' be enjoyed. The adults in Solana Beach believe that adults can celebrate where spirits are present and the two 'Nanny's on the Encinitas City Council believe they no better: hence the creation of the Deemed Approval Ordinance, which takes the bad behavior by just two 101 bar/restaurants as an excuse to restrain business and hopefully force them out-of-business so the Self Realization Fellowship will have more opportunity to buy up 101 properties: which placates the 3rd St. neighbors, but lessens the property tax and added sales tax revenue that underwrites the city's finances.

      So, Yes, the D-A-O might quiet a part of downtown, but in turn those properties will no longer be generating property tax nor the very 'sales-tax revenue' the new council majority is suddenly interested in increasing.

      This D-A-O approach becomes a vicious circle and not a very well thought-out one. The council would do better asking the Sheriff's Department to come down hard on the two offenders and then call it a day: currently you have the Planning Department putting any and all use-permit requests for restaurants on a side-track to nowhere; because Barth and Shaffer are obsessed with 'alcoholism'...

      ... and the deputy mayor who uses her 'day-after council meetings personal newsletter' entitled 'Don't Blame Me' to literally 'rabble-rouse' asking voters to attend planning commission hearings with the express intent of denying a 'wine and beer' permit to a new business, turning to the public because she couldn't convince her fellow council peers to see things her way; anyone watching the Mrs. Kravitz-like Duo of Barth and Kranz closely will agree they are determined to take everyone's cars away so folks have to walk or ride a bike to a night out for dinner. (Tough on a family of five; wheeling up hill and down from Olivenhain to the Coast) But, a family of five rolling on towards Hwy 101 will be able to snack on edible organic weeds planted in the sidewalk cracks as part of the council's 'urban forest' if Barth and Shaffer have their say.

      Imagine all the north county homeless making a 'bee-line' towards Encinitas to enjoy their 'salad days' in between a daily bath in the Pacific' and a sunset dessert plucking dandelions or fresh mushrooms alighting on dog park leave-behinds in one of our unlighted recreation-areas. Uhm, 'Bone Appetit!'

      This 'D-A-O' is Barth and Shaffer assuming anyone and everyone who asks for an alcoholic beverage at dinner, or at a private party, is going to run riot and be throwing braziers on 3rd street residential porches. The D-A-O has been a stalking horse by the Council for the SRF from Day One.

      What's Next?

      The Week after next the public will see that the council is focusing economic development on visitors and tourism: it'll be lip service only, then they'll turn right around and put new restraints on 101 businesses that cater to those same visitors: and the D-A-O will dissuade the very tourists the Council are depending on: much like the council's confidential plan to monitor average daily traffic around Calle Magdalena when 'In & Out Burger' opens, with Mrs. Barth and Mrs. Shaffer watching closely with an eye towards dragging the burger joint back into chambers to try and adjust/force hours of open operation down/less, even though the council, planning commission and traffic commission have all approved the operational plan.

      Business friendly? To misquote Shakespeare,"Get thee to a Nannery, like Encinitas"

      Delete
  4. Baseless generality once again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its because they can't think an original thought on their own.

      What Lynn will reply with the same garbage she spews every reply.

      Blah, Blah, blah…..

      Delete