This Wednesday's council meeting will feature a presentation on economic development by a group including the city, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Cardiff, Encinitas, and Leucadia 101 merchant associations.
In an unorthodox arrangement in Encinitas, the merchant associations receive direct taxpayer funds from the city. The arrangement raised eyebrows recently when, during a discussion of the funding, Deputy Mayor Mark Muir asked about the merchant associations' plans for advocacy on Proposition A, creating the appearance that the taxpayer handouts were connected to providing political support for the council.
This week's presentation makes clear that despite Mayor Barth having acknowledged "Prop A passed and the city is implementing it citywide," Encinitas 101 just won't let it go. On a list of "if resources were not a barrier" goals, the group lists "Overturn Prop A at least for specific plans." The reference to specific plans means the areas covered by the downtown Encinitas and Leucadia 101 specific plans, and the practical effect of such repeal would be a mass upzoning of the entire area to three stories. Why is Encinitas 101 so obsessed with imposing three stories all along the coast? Does Encinitas 101 really represent main street merchants, or just land speculators?
The Chamber of Commerce (not funded by the city to our knowledge) also listed Prop A as a "problem that hinder[s] economic development," and the city's own dot-mapping game found three votes for Prop A "uniformity" as a "weakness." Cardiff 101 and Leucadia 101 seem to have been more successful at moving on from Prop A.
The economic development group selected a group of cities with comparable features and issues to Encinitas. Most of the cities on the list have downtowns similar to ours: open, friendly, one or two stories, lots of restaurants, cafes, and small businesses: Laguna Beach, San Luis Obispo, San Clemente, Santa Cruz, Monterey, Ventura, Redwood City, Dana Point. Some have a few three-story buildings just as we have Pacific Station and the Moonlight Lofts, but tall buildings are not a dominant or defining feature of any of the downtowns.
The only major exception on the list is Vancouver, Washington, a much larger city and a major suburb of Portland, whose downtown has a much more major commercial, less retail and restaurant focus.
So what do you want to be, Encinitas? A charming beach town or a big city? Solana Beach or Vancouver? Encinitas 101 is using your tax dollars to advocate for the latter.
I was rather taken aback when I read the wish list. Why are we taxpayers subsidizing Encinitas 101 and the others? If you read through all the wish lists, which include boutique hotels and more bars and breweries, it's all about developers making money by upzoning and raising buildings heights. Gus Vina is determined to densify Encinitas to the maximum to increase city revenues at the expense of our quality of life.
ReplyDeleteTrue!!
DeleteWhy can't city Council see that?
They can see it - they just won't concede it. Anything that provides more revenue to cover the expensive blunders of the past few years years, they support. Morality be damned....
DeleteThere's a fair amount of development interest on the board of DEMA, is there not? Maybe they're thinking more density=more development opportunities and more selling opportunities.
ReplyDeleteWhy are we funding merchant organizations anyway?
John DeWald is the president of Encinitas 101 formerly DEMA? The same John DeWald that build Pacific Station.
DeleteI also heard John DeWald and Marco Gonzalez speak on behalf of the bar owners. Both of the asked for leniency towards businesses without addressing the negative impacts of these establishments on the health, safety and well-being of Downtown residents.
DeleteIs this really the vision for Encinitas that citizens want?
Are we run by alcoholics? Notice who frequents the bars.
DeleteI had a vision last night about 11 p.m. that unfortunately was quite real: a party bus, complete with screaming girls sticking up through the roof nearly to their waists. The bus was turning off the 101 and heading east up Encinitas Blvd.
DeleteThat vision was a testament to vibrancy and a brisk bar business. Those girls did DeWald and Gonzalez proud.
"Why can't people like that just stay home?" - Lily Tomlin.
DeleteJust wait until the party heads to Vista, we'll back to being a sleeply little hamlet...
DeleteRemember about 10-12 years ago when Carlsbad went nuts? That was solved by several C-Bad cop cars stationed downtown..
-El Senor Party Pants
Don't downplay how bad things are here. Carlsbad still sux, btw. Last time we were there the panhandlers were out in full force in the "cute" downtown. Maybe norby can then his attention to that and take a break from pushing vibrancy!
Delete"Boutique hotel" is Keith Harrison's dream - Keith Harrison of the erroneous "30 foot trellis" presentation to council when he spoke against Prop A.
ReplyDeleteYou people are naive. This is just how America works now.
ReplyDeleteNot quite: it's "how it works" if you sit on your hands. That's not Encinitas, though, as evidenced by the enormous amount of work Prop A proponents put into its passage and the growing awareness exhibited by residents who voted it in. 12:13, some reason you have for encouraging apathy?
DeleteI will vote next time for a City Council that will trend us towards a cool small beach town like Solana Beach…. Not selling out our beach town for the huge salaries and pensions of City Staff.
ReplyDeleteThat why I voted for Shaffer and Kranz. Turncoats Prop A supporters. Morale of the story: You can't trust people that run for office. Once they get there, they get brainwashed. Put them in the Vina washing machine, turn on hot for 30 minutes, add some development detergent, and they'll come out brand spanking new with a big No on Prop A label on their forehead.
DeleteSolana Beach saw what happens when the 70's stuffed the bluffs with endless condos thanks to out of town developers. Citizens of Encinitas beware, it's still good here but we are at the tipping point. Unite to get rid of Vina and Sabine!
ReplyDeleteOops, Sea Bluff already got in..Until we do something about density bonus and development that is totally out of whack with the existing vibe, ie the Hermes and Daphne developments, we're still going to be screwed..
DeleteEnc would be lucky to be SB. Never gonna happen. Enc is and always will be Mayberry by the sea.
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you move!!!
Delete4:08- just stuff your pie hole with some of Aunt Bea's sweet patatur pie....
DeleteI was going to respond at length, but 5:08's suggestion sounded better.
Delete@Anonymous 12:24. Prop A passed 5,710 to 5,372. That's a difference of only 338 people in a city of 60,994 (per latest census info.). Why on earth do proponents of prop A think they speak for the entire City?! You make up less than 10% of the City. Not everything is a conspiracy.
ReplyDeleteI didn't say anything was a conspiracy - why would you put those words in my mouth?
DeleteYes, Prop A passed by a slim margin, but from No voter comments after the election, many, many "Nos" either meant to or would have voted "Yes," had they not fallen prey to a really dirty and deceptive from the No on A crew.
You had "No" folks running around telling people in the days leading up to the election "A 'No' vote means no, you don't want more development without a vote of the people."
The No team created a flier with fake supporter names that claimed "your neighbors say 'No'" and that you, too, should join them - remember that cute trick? The Council told some whoppers, but many voters said they still wanted to trust them.
Muir tried in subcommittee to force a lie onto the ballot to scare folks into thinking someone could build a 30-foot granny flat up against the property line. He went on the speakers circuit to "educate" HOAs on A. What do you think he told them? Gaspar claimed you couldn't remodel your kitchen without a citywide vote. Barth was on the losing end of an embarrassing (but confusing to the layman) fight over "bifurcation of the city" from the Coastal Commission. Tony decided developer interests should rule.
BTW: you have to look at the number of votes cast out of the number of registered voters, not city population (many people stay home from the polls and babies don't vote). Your false stat "less than 10% of the city" wanted A is beyond dumb.
No to mention that the NO on PROP A spent 3 times as much as the Yes on Prop A side. Money does buy you vote but no amount of money was enough to defeat Prop A.
DeleteWhy do you all think Coast Law group joined DEMA? They are close to the Union, which is on the south side of town. Marco is defending the developer in Desert Rose and more developers. His environmental days are over.
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone know what append with the City and Rossini Creek lawsuit. Just thought of it when Marco's name was mentioned. I thought he had a group that was pro environment. I would have thought he would have sued the City. Didn't he?
ReplyDeleteProp A would of failed if the proponent told the TRUTH! Remember the 5 story building? Most people I talk to today are against Prop A.
ReplyDeleteBS
DeletePlease... Tell us about the 5 story building. I want to know the TRUTH about Prop A.
Delete7:17,
DeleteThanks for asking!
Here's the city-funded facilitator Peder Norby leading the city's official ERAC committee to general agreement to recommend 4 to 5 stories:
first minute of this link
WCV
From a NCT article:
ReplyDeleteThe planning commission reviewed the "deemed approved" ordinance for the bars and other establishments. Felker, Groseclose, Brandenburg, and Shannon recommend to the council NOT to approve the ordinance and that the council should wait until at least February 2015 before doing anything. O'Grady voted against postponement.
Only O'Grady got it right. Hang out on 101 tonight and see for yourself. This is not what citizens want!
ReplyDelete4:14 - Prop A proponents got the 5-story threat straight off the city's website. Go cry to the city for putting it out there, not Prop A supporters.
ReplyDelete"Most people" you talk to? Let's see how many combinations and permutations you can come up with from Jerome, Andreen, Meyer, an Ecke or two, Gonzalez, and Harwood. Regular folk are only affected by A in that they don't have to witness Pacific Stations from Cardiff to Leucadia, back to four corners and at Strawberry Fields, for starters.
Something tells me regular folk do not have a problem with A.
I agree, 4:44. Many people were confused by the City's and the Political Action Committees' and non profit business associations advocating against Prop A. And the point of WC's post, here is that the non profit Encinitas 101 and Encinitas Chamber of Commerce still are advocating against it, subtly or overtly. And they have done so without reporting their lobbying on their Federal Tax returns, as far as I have been able to discover. Federal Tax forms of non-profits are to be publicly disclosable. All lobbying activities must be disclosed to the IRS.
ReplyDeleteIt amazes me how pro-development people, including Council in its ballot arguments and the City Attorney, Glenn Sabine, in his non-factual and NOT impartial analysis, attempt to twist the numbers.
Yes, definitely one has to go by the number of registered voters, not the number of residents, many of whom are children and non-voters, when discussing the margin of win for Prop A and the voter turnout.
And had there not been so much confusion caused by the false propaganda and unreported lobbying of the No on A gang, there would have been a HIGHER turnout, and more Yes on A votes.
At last week's Council Meeting, I had asked that the business association non-profits should have to go through a thoroughly vetted process of evaluation, just as all the other non-profits do in our city, for Community Grants. I told Council that on 1/31, I had spoken to Supervisor Dave Roberts about this exact subject, and he completely agrees.
The City looks very questionable when it subsidizes its sponsors, those very organizations who sponsored the State of the City Address event, where the public was expected to pay $20 per head to attend. Traditionally, the state of the city address was at least repeated at City Hall. Apparently, this year, Mayor Barth isn't bothering to give a State of the City Address?
When the City discusses "Economic Development" at next week's Council Meeting, it may as well just cross out "economic." What they are really talking about is insider privileges and subsidies for developer associated businesses.
The best way to balance our budget isn't with more and more unwanted development, which our road maintenance and water infrastructure, also sewer infrastructure can't support, but a hiring freeze at City Hall, and reduction in number of employees, through attrition, also by cutting the earnings of those making over $100,000 per year by 20%, down to $100K. Some individuals could leave, and some of those same employees and contractors should not be replaced.
In answer to my requests re vetting the 101 Mainstreet groups with all the other non-profit groups, Kristin Gaspar and Mark Muir seemed willing for there to be more competition. Unfortunately, so far, all of Council wants to keep the "economic development" or commercial groups that are non-profits, separate from the excellent evaluation process which all other non-profits must go through in order to qualify for Community Grants. That isn't right.
The MainStreet Associations are and always have been vetted and apply for community grants using the same forms and methods as any organization. E101 is Not trying to gut anything. The MainStreets sponsor over 200 civic events that are a positive benefit to all of us.
DeleteIt is amazing how much misinformation that is consistently offered by the above ubiquitous poster and others on this blog.
Encinitas is a lovely town.
Thanks, but when you good people put repealing of Prop A in the Specific Plan areas, "for starters," that's a gut. You guys fought it last year (Propzilla), you're at it again. When the No on A folks came out with all the Main Street logos on their propaganda, all you fine associations claimed you never authorized the use of the logos, then sat quietly back down...although DEMA never made that disclaimer, come to think about it.
DeleteThe "misinformation" you're whining about came from DEMA with the others in tow. Gut is the name of your game.
7:53, you are wrong with respect to the rebranded Mainstreet Associations "using the same forms and methods as any other organization." There is a SEPARATE community grant evaluation process that other non-profits must go through
DeleteWhy don't you list all the Civic events that you sponsor? Many of them are of positive benefit, but you also make money from vendors that sell their wares at these events, or from participants in the events.
The other non-profits funded by the City through the Community Grant program and the Mizel Family didn't come out in support of Council's and building industry special interests advocating AGAINST a grassroots initiative. You used your organization(s) to lobby against Prop A, online, in newspaper ads, in mailers and flyers, and then tried to deny that your logos were used with your permission.
Why didn't you file suit against the Political Action Committee(s) that used your logos without your permission, then?
You may "use the same forms and the same methods" in applying for your subsidies from the City, but you do NOT go through the same vetting process. You are not vetted through Jim Gilliam and the committee, which gave us a presentation at the February 19 City Council Meeting, whereby Community Grant funds are matched DOLLAR PER DOLLAR by the Mizel Family Foundation.
It's amazing how much misinformation is consistently offered by a few members of the Boards of Directors of these business associations that feel they have special privileges, posting on this and other blogs. These same Directors are ubiquitous, giving commercials at Council Meetings, pushing their self interests, praising Council and staff, obsequiously for their every action, yes men and women who want to keep the gravy train coming.
I am grateful that E101 supports a community arts and learning center. But I had not heard anyone refer to a proposal, before, for an arts and science center. Still, some of your wish list is excellent. My concerns, as they relate to WC's post, are listed by E101 as follows:
12. Overturn Prop A at least for specific plans.
13. Omnibus man to walk builders through maze of planning permits.
The ombudsman on your "wish list" sounds like another wanna-be 101 "Czar," the term coined by Stocks and Dalager. He was another subsidy to the business groups, paid by the City, as Councilmember Mark Muir had pointed out at a City Council Meeting.
Get a compatent city attorney and manager for starters.
ReplyDeleteIn answer to the question above about the illegal discharges into Rossini Creek:
ReplyDeleteThe City of Encinitas, USS Cal Builders, Inc. and the San Diego Water Board Prosecution Team are currently in confidential settlement negotiations. At some point there will be a public hearing, however the negotiations turn out.
You can check the status at the website:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sandiego/water_issues/programs/compliance/acl_complaints.shtml
I had heard that the City missed an important deadline in terms of responding to the Water Board. How can they negotiate if they did not respond in a timely manner?
ReplyDeleteCan anyone shed light on this question?
The operative word is "negotiating." The fine has been imposed, and the city is trying to negotiate it down or eliminate it. That's allowed under the rules. No guarantee that the full fine will not stand. The water board will consider that the city missed an important deadline.
DeleteThere is a good chance the full fine will stand. Then the city and Cal Builders must decide how much each pays. There could be a lawsuit between the two.
I just looked at the State files and cannot tell if the City missed a deadline or not. Does anyone have more information than what is online? Thanks.
DeleteThe people who's parents were born here please raise you hands,every one else must leave or call your self a NIMPY or NEWBY.
ReplyDeleteNo one is saying that, but you, 7:56. Encinitas is a lovely town, but our City government needs to make some positive changes. There is no reason that the various, newly rebranded 101 Mainstreet Associations cannot be self sustaining. Council should not be in the business of subsidizing its political sponsors, special interests pushing a high density development agenda.
ReplyDeleteDon't look for that to happen anytime soon.
ReplyDeleteDEMA wants to overturn Prop A? Let them try. We'll be ready with pitch and forks, and feather and tar for Vina.
ReplyDeleteblah, blah, blah...
Delete12:39 = sad, angry developer or developer shill.
DeleteThanks for the post, WCV. And excuse me. But per-capita, Encinitas already rakes in far more taxes than does Chula Vista. Their population is four times ours, yet brings in little over twice what we do. And why is Chula Vista even being compared to us? Because they have a Redevelopment District Agency?
ReplyDeleteI'm sure there are a lot of nice people in Chula Vista, and we're all lucky to live in Southern CA, but when comparing CV to Encinitas, they have twice as many murders; 5 times as many rapes; 6 times as many thefts; 10 times as many auto thefts and 10 times as many robberies. But I doubt those stats will be on the screen Wednesday.
Like the twice failed small scale "Shuttle Bus" and the twice failed grand scale Redevelopment District Agency, Encinitas should not again attempt to hire an Ombudsman (nor an "Omnibus Man", whatever that is). The last man who told us we needed an Ombudsman was Ted Krines from Tiburon back in 1993. Ted was given $40,000 by the city to write a 40 page document telling Encinitas how we could become a "Can Do City". Sure, there was some obvious good advice. But the solitary most important part according to Ted, was to hire and Ombudsman to entice and facilitate new businesses moving to Encinitas.
The city took his advice and a position for an Ombudsman at the city went out for public bid in at least one newspaper. 6 or 7 people applied. I helped evaluate their resumes. But when Ted himself applied and wanted $120,000 a year, the whole thing smelled fishy. No one at all was hired and not another word about it was spoken.
Looking at our track record since Ted back in 1993, we've accomplished all these things in 20 years WITHOUT an Ombudsman or Redevelopment District. These are just off the top of my head and probably just scratch the surface of additions:
* Leucadia Blvd completed
* Encinitas Ranch developed
* A Golf Course added
* Moonlight Beach developed
* Cottonwood Creek restoration
* Encintas sign restored
* Cardiff Kook erected
* Carpentier Park embellished
* Wine Steals
* Viggilucci's
* Cardiff Library built
* Thousands of homes built
* Downtown Streetscape
* Downtown Library rebuilt
* Leucadia Drainage improved
* Numerous Amazing Parks
* Encinitas Ranch
* New Fire Stations
* Televised City Council meetings
* City website
* Scripps Hospital Expansion
* Lux Art Institute
* 3 Mainstreet Associations with over 200 annual events
* Improved beach access
* The Coaster station
* Countless new taxi businesses
* Hundreds of new businesses including:
REI
LA FITNESS
HOME DEPOT
TARGET GREATLAND
OFFICE DEPOT
BEST BUY
MICHAELS
BIG LOTS
PAPA JOHNS
VERIZON STORES
ATT STORE
FED EX KINKOS
PIER 1
WAL MART
WALLGREENS
ROSS
WHOLE FOODS
PET SMART
PARTY CITY
STARBUCKS
STARBUCKS
STARBUCKS
BARNES AND NOBEL
McDONALDS
SUBWAY
STATER BROS
KOHLS
FROGS
TOTAL WOMAN SPA
THE MEN'S WAREHOUSE
JUICE STOP
and a world famous SURFING MADONNA
Add to that thousands of new homes, and I'd say we've ended up with one hell of a "Can Do" city. But that's not good enough now, and we need to entice new upscale businesses to come to town by hiring an Ombudsman? Then what's the difference between a Can Do mentality and a mobius strip of never ending development? The only goal is to never stop building and I don't think that's the vision the majority of us have for our city. Thanks anyway.
Nope. WC has it right. This is a ploy to gut Prop A when they call it a stumbling block to economic development. If the Planning Commission or Council would really like to see a stumbling block to economic development in action, look no further than the 3 story bankruptcies on 101 and the inadequate parking they provide for their tenants, merchants and customers.
Fred, while this list is impressive: most of the readers of this blog would vote today to stop 90% of it: and with much of the council discussion over the CIP involving increasing costs to these businesses and removing parking from them to increase bicycling, certainly the 4 business communities are more imperiled by this council than any of their plans for 'economic development': plus, in a city that makes 90% of its income from property tax, only a fundamental misunderstanding of this fact would lead a council person to assume increasing sales-tax would allow a city to do more than it already is. They do not understand where the city income comes from and until that happens any action on their parts will most likely do more harm than good. Shaffer said two weeks ago,"We need to ask ourselves, who are we, what do we want, what can we do to achieve it?" The answer obviously is that we are a north San Diego beach town that functions as a bedroom community now that farming is no longer the prime business here. The scary part is Shaffer, being reasonably new here, doesn't recognize this. She wasn't being rhetorical in her questions. She really doesn't know and apparently neither does the Mayor.
DeleteFinally, the three members of the new council majority voted to put a sales-tax increase on the November ballot: is there any other action over the last year that is more indicative of a disconnect between Mayor Barth and the Encinitas voters?
No.
12:39, I agree with much of what you share, but if you were talking about Encinitas when you stated, in a city that makes 90% of its income from property tax," I think that number is exaggerated. I know that Encinitas does make more revenue in property tax than sales tax, but I had never before heard that property tax revenues are 90% of income? You could be correct, on that, however; in which case, thank you for educating me!
DeleteBut even if it's not quite as lopsided, adding a .5% increase in sales tax is not the way to go. At least the public will be allowed to vote on that; I don't think it will pass . . .
Fred, thank you for your post, but the fact is that Peder Norby was a kind of ombudsman for 101. He was at first given the name 101 Czar, by Stocks and Dalager, but that was officially changed to 101 Coordinator. I am glad he has gone on to greener pastures in Carlsbad.
However, the fact that for so many years he was making $100,000 plus, should be counted as another subsidy that went to the now rebranded, thanks to Norby, 101 Mainstreet Associations.
We appreciate the organizational skills of these business groups, but the fact that 200 annual events have allegedly been held, while good for business, should not mean that in addition to the monies paid by vendors and event participants to the various business groups should also be supplemented by direct City subsidies.
I thought it was wonderful that the Surfing Madonna Run gave money back to the City. That was truly altruistic, and I commend Mark Patterson and all involved, including the runners who paid their fees.
Where can we find a listing of these 200 annual events the business groups sponsor? Are you counting each event, such as the Artwalk, since its been sponsored, so for multiple years?
I believe many of the sponsored events, are revenue makers for the sponsors. Are you counting Sunday Farmers Markets? I believe a greater percentage of that money should go to Paul Ecke Central School through the PTA.
I sincerely feel that all ersatz chambers of commerce should be self-supporting through events they do sponsor, and through membership dues. If they get grants, they should compete with all the other non-profits groups that are evaluated for Community Grant funding, which is matched, dollar per dollar, with the City, by the Mizel Family Foundation.
Many cities do not subsidize business associations directly. They are indirectly sponsored by street fairs, monies from vendors, Farmers Markets, etc. All cities in North County have grown. Some economic development is a positive, for City revenues, but the revenues gained must be balanced with maintaining our community character and quality of life.
For someone who chooses to not get involved with joining in with any civic groups that offer positive elements to our community you sure spend an inordinate amount of time telling them what they should do and just bitching and bitching and saying things that are not true.
Delete2:58
DeletePeder's mission as 101 Coordinator was only for a few years and focused only on the coast. True, there were aspects of what he did that may overlay the duties of an Ombudsman, but an O position would have been city-wide and most of the projects and businesses listed above had nothing to do with Peder's job as as 101 Coordinator. - save for making Encinitas more desirable than it was. Also, the O job was a permanent city position and Peder's an entrepenuer who was contracted year by year. Did I mention he's a super nice guy and did a lot for us? If his vision of Downtown Encinitas attracts also a bad element, he's not the one to blame. There are laws about being drunk in public, disturbing the peace. indecent exposure and peacing in public. Peder's not a Sheriff. There are simply more people here than there used to be and with that comes more problems. I think our successful two story law that was passed keeps congestion here at bay. That taller projects will be approved by the public when they see them as a healthy benefit to Encinitas. But to divide and conquer Prop A one area at a time in a city that cannot and does not provide needed parking is not good for businesses, residents or visitors.
Fred, you have GOT to get that on record and in front of potentially (gasp) non-EU readers. Present at Council on Weds, please.
ReplyDeleteChula Vista is a major city with a quarter of a million people, while Encinitas is one-fourth the population. At the Encinitas council meeting on Wednesday residents will suffer through a presentation by a representative from Chula Vista. Chula Vista has big financial problems, but at least there is some discussion of it in that city.
ReplyDeleteFrom the Chula Vista website -
In January of 2009, the Chula Vista City Council authorized a budget reduction plan to address projected shortfalls in the current fiscal year and next fiscal year of $3.9 million and $20 million, respectively. This budget balancing plan is in addition to the City’s previously implemented budget
reduction plans. These previous budget cuts are already impacting delivery of services to the community.
Council is wasting time with the strategic plan for economic development.