Tomorrow's agenda FAQ's:
PROP A SET NEW HEIGHT LIMITS OF TWO STORIES OR 30 FEET, CAN A DEVELOPER PROCESS A WAIVER FROM THIS STANDARD?From the Inbox:
Yes. A height limitation qualifies as a development standard for which a developer may request a waiver.
Government Code 65915(o)(1)
Prop A is not a "development standard," but a general amendment enacted by the voters, not the city, that requires a public vote for any structure over 30 feet, and that is not something the city can get around. The only way to eliminate the Prop A requirements is through another vote of the people.Can there now be any doubt that staff's #1 priority is to force high-density development on Encinitas against the will of the residents? And whose side are your council representatives on, staff's or the public's?
Let them provide a waiver override, then get a restrainer on the entire project.
ReplyDeleteWhat would be the grounds for a restraining order? I like the idea, just don't know enough about the law to know if this would work.
DeleteI think they mean injunction. Restraining order is what my ex got.
DeleteWCV
Prop A defends the General Plan as it was written. It is the city staff, developers and councils past and present who have violated the General Plan.
ReplyDeleteWhat Prop A changes it the WHO. Who gets to decide if a project should go outside of the rules. Is it better to have those who stand to make the most money the worse the project is, or the voters and the majority who live here who love this city and want to protect it?
Prop A IS the General Plan!
ReplyDeleteSorry folks. It's not the city trying to end-around Prop A. It's the reality of state legislation overriding local ordinances and initiatives. Density bonus requires the local authority, in this case the city, to grant waivers to development standards if requested by the developer. Height is a development standard no matter how it was established.
ReplyDeleteSo if an affordable housing developer wanted to build a project but needed an extra floor or two to make it work, they could request the city to waive the current height restriction. And the city would have to grant it unless it could prove legitimate health and safety concerns.
When are you people going to accept that state legislation trumps local?
It's Manife$t Den$ity. And we, the Encinitas taxpayers, are the American Natives to be displaced and replaced.
Delete3:40 PM
DeleteTwo-thirds of the city is in the coastal zone and the LCP which is approved by the Coastal Commission controls what can and can't be done in zoning. The building height is in the LCP. Before you start your little victory dance read the density bonus law where it states that the density bonus law doesn't supersede the Coastal Act. The city had been violating the LCP for at least 10 years.
3:40 that is the whole point of A. Now Barth and her community character destroying overlay zones have to go to a vote. 3 halfwits on the council can't change zoning from commercial to resident giving away local control and inviting 5 story buildings - it will take a vote of the people.
DeleteBut as 3:40 said, can't the developer just appeal to state law to override Prop A.? Not great that the city's rolling over already, but it sounds like the legal eagles are going to be duking this one out...
Delete7:53 PM
DeleteCity of San Diego voters in 1972 passed a building high limit in the coastal zone. Density bonus law doesn't override that voter initiative. Murphy and Sabine aren't telling the truth.
Is there a Godwin's law of Native American Genocide comparisons? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law Jeebus, 5:23, really?
DeleteDoes Godwin's Law apply to the Fulvia Trail of Tears?
Delete6:45 PM
DeleteHow interesting. Even though the legislation explicitly says that density bonus is not an LCP amendment as in:
"(5) All density calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. The granting of a density bonus shall not be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, or other discretionary approval."
But somehow you interpret Section 65915(m) "Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California Coastal Act (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code)." to ignore it.
Besides, the Coastal Commission (CC) approved the downtown and north 101 plans as part of approving the city's original LCP. Both plans allow a height of 33 feet under certain conditions. Prop A overruled that provision yet the CC has not approved the change.
So which is it? You can't have it both ways.
3:40, what does "make it work" mean?
DeleteAw come on, you know: "make it work" = "pencil out!"
Delete3:40 this is why residents exposed city and their untruths during the cardiiff specific plan, The city wanted to rezone the whole area from commercial to residential. The city broguht in big guns and told residents not to worry. The residents outed the charlatans and stopped, for the time being, the city effort to destroy cardiff.
DeleteTeresa Barth was no where to be seen, she did not attend a single citizens meeting or advocate for cardiff residents in any way. Bob Bonde saved the day. Lisa Shaffer also did not go to a single meeting - now the two lecture all of us on participation - they are both frauds who want to rezone and destrot the community character of cardiff
8:52, but the Coastal Commission will approve the change to a 30-foot height limit. Wanna bet?
DeleteProp A allows a 30' height limit....
Delete7:53 PM - Encinitas has no "legal eagle" - more like a quasi-legal parakeet. Tweekie $abine! Parakeet pet of the special interests.
DeleteThe developer should have to demonstrate that his firm cannot "make it work" without the extra two feet, if he is asking for a waiver in height limits. That is key. According to the Government Code, a waiver must be necessary to meet the required number of affordable units mandated by the density bonus calculations.
DeleteThe city's density bonus calculations should NOT be more onerous than the County's, or the State's. Our City can set standards that supersede the State's, but should not do so.
Waivers are allowed through the legislation, which is designed to increase affordable housing. This state legislation does override local law, whether passed by Council or the people. However, the developer applicant has to demonstrate that the waiver is necessary to accomplish the goal for a minimum amount of affordable housing he intends to provide.
If the resultant increase in density results in health and safety issues, as in causing unacceptable traffic, or environmental damage, as in the case of Desert Rose, then those environmental and health and safety concerns "trump" the density bonus law, which is part of Govt. Code.
Also, if the City could demonstrate that the affordable housing the project is supposed to implement is not needed, then that would also be a reason that no waivers could be processed.
The City is dragging its feet on counting all pre-existing affordable housing, including pre-existing accessory units. Pre-existing affordable housing was greatly subsidized by the City for the Boathouses property, through the Encinitas Preservation Association's "partnership" with the City. The City should "partner" with individual homeowners, to allow a FREE amnesty, for those who would come forward to "put on the books," through covenants pre-existing affordable housing, including, but not limited to accessory dwelling units or "equivalent dwelling units."
There should be some kind of incentives for homeowners to set up these covenants on their own homes, as well, if they are owner occupied, and the owners qualify is low or moderate income. What actually happens in this City is density bonus projects, such as the one on Hermes, knock out was in fact, pre-existing affordable housing, usually rentals.
Sorry, last paragraph should read:
DeleteThere should be some kind of incentives for homeowners to set up these covenants on their own homes, as well, if they are owner occupied, and the owners qualify is low or moderate income, or if they rent to low income family members, or just rent out their homes at affordable prices.
What actually happens in this City is density bonus projects, such as the one on Hermes, knock out what was in fact, pre-existing affordable housing, usually rentals. So there often is a net LOSS. Something may look good, in theory, but if it is not actually accomplishing the goals the State is advocating, then the affordable housing to be provided by a potential project's "pencilling out," then the REDUCED AMOUNT of affordable housing actually provided is NOT NEEDED.
12:20 PM
DeleteYou wrote:
"Also, if the City could demonstrate that the affordable housing the project is supposed to implement is not needed, then that would also be a reason that no waivers could be processed. "
Sorry. Your implication that if the city has satisfied its RHNA numbers it can then deny any density bonus projects is simply wrong. The two are not connected. We could have an overabundance of affordable units and the density bonus option would still be available to developers and the city would still be required to follow its guidelines.
That's not how the Government Code reads:
Delete65915 (d) (1) "An applicant for a density bonus pursuant to subdivision (b) may submit to a city, county, or city and county a proposal for the specific incentives or concessions that the applicant requests pursuant to this section, and may request a meeting with the city, county, or city and county. The city, county, or city and county shall grant the concession or incentive requested by the applicant unless the city, county, or city and county makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of any of the following:
(A) The concession or incentive is not required in order to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in subdivision (c).
(B) The concession or incentive would have a specific adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety or the physical environment or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households."
It's time to break out the torches!
ReplyDeleteAnd pitch forks...
DeleteThere is actually "discretion," as the planners call it, on "interpretation," another of their weasel words. This state mandate crap is not going to get the developers and our city hall as far as they imagine it will.
ReplyDeleteTell that to the Desert Rose neighborhood.
DeleteTwo-thirds of the city is in the coastal zone and the LCP which is approved by the Coastal Commission controls what can and can't be done in zoning. The building height is in the LCP. Before you start your little victory dance read the density bonus law where it states that the density bonus law doesn't supersede the Coastal Act. The city had been violating the LCP for at least 10 years.
ReplyDeleteJeff Murphy and Glenn Sabine's draft handout on Density Bonus is filled with lies.
ReplyDelete8:52 PM
ReplyDeleteThe Coastal Commission is serious about what is written in an LCP. Manhattan Beach submitted an LCP amendment with some references to density bonus. The staff recommendation was to reject the amendment as submitted and instead approve more protective wording which included this -
4. The concession or incentive would be inconsistent with the provisions of the Local Coastal Program to the extent that the concession or incentive would adversely impact coastal access, public recreation, community character, any other sensitive coastal resource, or any other resource governed by Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act.
If the city continues to violate their own General Plan, they will be in big trouble. Prop. A was voted in by the people, and the people shall have the right to vote on height. End of story.
ReplyDelete9:27 not in encinitas. This council led by Mayor Barth told outright lies on the ballot statement - barth doesn't give a crap about the encinitas of today or our community charcter - she is an egomaniac with an inferirotiy complex. i voted vor barth in 2010 and will be walkin-g neighborhoods to defeat her in 2016
ReplyDeleteYes I would do anything to spread the word to get rid of her. Total loser.
DeleteBarth is done this October: she won't be there in 2016.
Delete11:00 I hope the same is true for Gaspar. How can we forget the "flyer" in her 2010 campaign that was paid for illegally? She and her husband didn't want anyone to know they were behind it, but we haven't forgotten. Time for Gaspar to go.
Delete9:37 I also voted for her and believe me I will not for vote her again. She has surely shown her true colors and she is like all the rest --- once you get in the BIG CHAIR your ego gets gigantic. She will find out as the others before her that when you are gone from the BIG CHAIR you are no longer important.
ReplyDeleteI agree. Two terms is enough. Time for fresh meat. Tony and Lisa may be a one term ponies for supporting a failing City Manager.
ReplyDeleteThey all are on borrowed time. We need fresh meat as you suggested.
ReplyDeleteBarth turned her back on us!
ReplyDeleteBarth was erroneously thought to be an independent thinker and champion of the people when $$tock$$ prevailed on the council. He minimized her, so she voted against him as a form of protest. She never did do anything substantial other than that and it was misconstrued by people as her opposing the special interest oriented council majority. Now that everything seems to be in place for substantial change, she shurks the opportunity. It is now apparent she never was what her image was perceived to be - she is inefficient and doesn't want to make waves against those who call the shots - the city manager, lawyer and their special interest cronies.
DeleteDump Barth! The ribbon cutting phoney!
8:34 Spot on!
DeleteDump Gaspar with Barth...
DeleteAll three of them turned their backs on us!
ReplyDeleteState law will rule ,let's start there.A density bonus project is allowed this potential height waiver by law,regardless of Prop A ------ get over it
ReplyDeleteI don't think density bonus dictates height. If they want denser units make them smaller two story units.
ReplyDeleteExactly, 6:56! Two or three extra feet in height should NOT be necessary to have the mandated number of affordable units in a density bonus project.
Deletelets send a huge message to Kranz, and Shaffer, and Muir to get busy and fire Vina, by voting out both no brains Barf and developer bar owner's honey Gaspar.
ReplyDelete7:00 I'll second that.
DeleteVery early on in his job, Gus Vina told one of the "obstructionists" that city councils would come and go, but that the city employees would be there for many years.
DeleteIt is beyond time for this council to show Gus Vina who calls the shots and who reports to whom. Council, you are responsible for providing direction to the City Manager. We are only reminded of this when our City Manager wants to pass the buck for something bad he has done. Please show some backbone and do a forensic accounting before you do anything else. Chances are, you will have many reasons to get rid of him in black and white when this happens.
Let's not forget that all this talk of waivers only applies to density bonus projects. The developer must build affordable units. Even then any waiver or incentive must be justified with a financial pro forma. In other words the developer must demonstrate that without the waiver or incentive, the project would not be financially viable.
ReplyDeleteThe city can always make findings of impacts and :"public health and safety" concerns to deny a waiver There's a lot of discretion in that phrase, especially in the coastal zone. The city has frequently said that no public health and safety concerns exist in order to approve a project, when in reality these concerns do exist. Only if the findings of impacts were frivolous would a judge not rule in favor of the city if the developer sued.
Well put, 7::50! Thank you.
DeleteIt's easy. Just make your high density project acceptable to most of the voters. Problem solved.
ReplyDeleteThe city manager and staff have forgotten who pays their salary. The city manager has been allowed by council to become too big for his small britches, so he needs to be reminded who is in charge. Council, it is your job to rein this small weasel in and we hope you start soon before all hell breaks loose. We are fed up with his dictatorship. He needs to go NOW.
ReplyDeleteNo doubt, the City could find reasons, legitimate or not, to deny density bonus projects. The City does not do that for two reasons: First, at least some of the developers would sue, and the City doesn't want the expense of multiple lawsuits and the risk of losing them. Second, the City wants the added property and sales tax revenue that results from denser development.
ReplyDeleteFrom the City's point of view, hiding behind the state density bonus law is the easy, safer and more profitable way out. To the City, it doesn't matter that the great majority of taxpayers is against the denser development.
Unless council members with the cajones to stand against the state law are elected and form a majority on the council, density bonus projects will continue in Encinitas. Citizens can't unite to sue the City on every project. The deck is heavily stacked against us residents.
The lawsuit mentioned in the Murphy/Sabine staff report refers to the one filed by David Meyer of DCM properties. Meyer withdrew the suit once he had an agreement with the city.
ReplyDeleteCities within the coastal zone must follow their LCPs.
ReplyDeleteFort Bragg has this in its municipal code -
4.Any housing development approved pursuant to Government Code Section 65915 shall be consistent with all applicable certified Local Coastal Program policies and development standards.
1.Density ranges described in land use designations of the certified LCP may be exceeded consistent with the provisions of Government Code Section 65915 to encourage affordable housing production pursuant to §65915 of the California Government Code (Density Bonuses). In reviewing a proposed density increase, the City shall identify all feasible means of accommodating the density increase and consider the effects of such means on coastal resources. The City shall only grant a density increase if the City determines that the means of accommodating the density increase proposed by the applicant does not have an adverse effect on coastal resources. If, however, the City determines that the means for accommodating the density increase proposed by the applicant will have an adverse effect on coastal resources, the City shall not grant the density increase.
This pretty much echos what is in the coastal act Section 30604(f). But what does "... have an adverse effect on coastal resources ..." really mean? How do you determine a threshold? Is it size, height, traffic, parking, etc.? Does a 33 foot building downtown on 101 have an effect on coastal resources? The wording leaves a lot of ambiguity.
DeleteThe city determines what the adverse effects are. It's the totally of impacts. A 33-foot building means three stories, which could impact access to the beach, traffic, parking, air quality, CO2 emissions, noise levels. or other things. Downtown is very close to the coastline. The Coastal Commission would not be happy with any project hampering access to the ocean. This finding alone would kill a project. The council only needs the will and courage to make the negative findings.
DeleteThe City likes to say, "if we don't approve the density bonus, we will get sued." It is NOT the State that will sue the City. Like in the case with Desert Rose, it is the developer who threatens suit if the City doesn't accept projects that bend the rules to the point of being harmful and/or dangerous to residents and environmental standards.
ReplyDeleteWe have entered a new era where Encinitas citizens are the ones suing the City because the City has given up their core responsibility of protecting us.
Density Bonus issues are on the Council's agenda tonight. Be there to listen and see what Sabine and Murphy have come up with. Then we know exactly what we are fighting for or against, as the case may be.
ReplyDeleteJust got this from LTC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tusxatAOwnw
ReplyDeleteCouncil meeting tonight, are they going to tell us how they plan to pay for PV??
ReplyDeleteGreat video above...
ReplyDeleteYep. Very impressive and a new venue for communication that didn't exist 15 years ago. Glad the guy showed it at the meeting too. And sympathize with the curly haired lady who basically told the facilitator: "We get it. Developers want to make as much money as possible but this isn't the place for this kind of development."
DeleteMike Strong telling council that CalTrans wants to put EVIL roundabouts on Birmingham dr. Nooooooooooo. Evil, devil roundabouts.....
ReplyDeleteOn the diagrams he showed, there were roundabouts at the Birmingham and Leucadia Blvd. off-ramps.
DeleteStrong says city will have to maintain landscaping on CalTrans upgrades.... But offers no suggestions on how to do this, considering the city can not maintain current landscaping how will they deal with future obligations?? V
ReplyDeleteCity art director Wants more "art" for the city.... Talk about job protection.....
ReplyDelete7:03 reporting vrom inside chambers. barth moved I 5 to front of mtb to benefit her art commissioner freind. far more speakers here for density bonus. Barth vina hope to use art community to raise taxes - barth trying get the art vote / raise taxes on all to reward the arts/ raise taxes pay for pv. Sadly the artists don't know any tax invrease will be sucked up by the machine and spent on consultants like lew edwards. Barth is playing polittics to get ele=ted she knows many residents are lining up agaist her, she is going all in.
DeleteDude, don't post while yer on the crack pipe, please.
DeleteI appreciate the "play by play," 7:03. Don't worry about 10:29. Methinks he doth protest too much about crack.
DeleteGood start Lynn…. try and think before speaking….
DeleteSheila afraid of improvements enhancements opportunity . Says China know best. Says Enc to be a walled city. Doesn't want walls. Can't read own writing. Says freeway in wrong place. Calls cal trans pathetic. Wants oleanders.
ReplyDeleteYou mischaracterized what she said. She made some good points.
DeleteThe wall heights proposed were off the charts insane.
DeleteSheila's the hater of all…. you can hear it in her voice and hear it in her tone!
DeleteEEEke!
Hey, Sheila was the only one who tried to stand up to Caltrans on the one way street that is now Piraeus going south to the onramp at Leucadia...
DeleteI did NOT mischaracterize anything she said. Your ears are bad. She distinctly said she is afraid of opportunity, enhancements improvements. I stand by my previous posting....
Delete7:56 Sheila is right....we will be a walled city. Maybe we should contact China for suggestions on the best way to build those massive walls. Maybe you don't like looking at the nice scenery we have now. Better take lots of pictures because it won't stay that way once this widening project gets going in a few years. Her whole point was being afraid of what is going to happen to our beautiful city. Guess you missed her point.
Delete10:10- all I did was report what she said, I made no reference to my opinion regarding her statement. You need your eyes checked, Reread my posting. Perhaps you missed my point.... Which was to report what she said. See how easy that was.
DeleteMany others are "afraid," and if you're not - well, I've got a bridge to sell you. The walls are the first step to enabling "infill opportunities," among other so-called improvements. Do you live near such an opportunity? If yes, be afraid. If not, shut up and leave those of us who do, alone.
DeleteI will not shut up, you shut up. Don't like where you live ... There are 500 licensed real estate agents in enc and another 165 unlicensed RE agents... Sell !!!
DeleteThis widened freeway plan is a disaster! It will be like driving through a tunnel! All of that pollution will be caught in freeway.
ReplyDeleteGreat speaker! And yes they are trying to make a "GHETTO" out of Vulcan! Just look around and visualize where vulcan is heading, and it's already a parking / traffic nightmare. Go ghetto council! We will all live at the mayors ultra low standard!
ReplyDeleteI agree. Lets put the next section 8 City Mark project next to the VPs of City Mark's house. Oh, but they don't care. They are only in this town to profit off a slimely laws and off the quality of life of existing neighborhood and residents. If you watch that video, you can see the point….. The take all kinds of questions, try and act like they are addressing the concerns, and then slam the density bonus in the neighborhood just like Desert Rose.
DeleteThe only way to slow this is to round down for the time being, lower zoning standards on existing large open lots in Encinitas, and get the law changed.
So what has Gus and City Council down in the last year to support a caucus to change the density bonus law???
Barth reported out that the lobbiest could not do anything since we don't have a certified Housing Element. And who exactly is to blame for that?? Shaffer seemed equally unhelpful, and Tony seemed pleased to pass the buck and ask us to direct our energy towards the State.
DeleteThey like to discuss representative democracy in terms of their right to make the decisions they want even when they have broken campaign promises. Yet they don't carry through on the responsibility part that is to represent the interests that the voters bring to them and represent us to the State. We have a council of place holders and victims who can't do anything except follow Vina's direction.
Jerome Stocks loved to say that the public didn't understand our form of government when they were critical of him. The public elected him to take care of the city and after that the public should go away. Other than saying it nicely, are Barth and Kranz any different?
DeleteStaff is confusing? (speaker comment) They are the worst c students that ever made a pension grade job. Abusive, arrogant, uninformed, that is the baseline for employment in Encinitas.
ReplyDeleteSeems like Jeff Murphy is not interested in even considering looking into other cities that have rounded down and not up on base density. It really is apparent that the staff is directing and leading the Council, not the other way around. As I watched this meeting, I thought "the council is frustrated with staff, but not enough to do anything about it." The City of San Diego doesn't pay much attention to density bonus and the only reason Jeff Murphy they don't is because they haven't been sued! Really! Then Jerry Sodomka gave the Council the ordinances from the city of Los Angeles, stating they round down on base density and round up on density bonus, as that is how they interpret the law. Murphy said he couldn't speak about about Los Angeles, but only about Encinitas, where we round up on both. Man, if the City planners are not already on the take with developers, they should be. Council asked questions and got no answers. Murphy is a good as Sabine and Vina when it comes to not giving answers. And the Council takes it. If I were king, I would have fired his ass right on the spot. I'm pretty sure he is not union so they could have done it. I think someone also mentioned a roundabout on Birmingham. Did anyone else catch that, or was it a mistake and they meant Santa Fe? Cannot imagine where they would put a roundabout on Birmingham. Did anyone else hear this?
ReplyDeleteYes, this Birmingham roundabout allegedly will be installed by CalTrans. The city will maintain its landscaping. Another roundabout being forced on us without a public needs assessment?
DeleteI don't know, maybe a roundabout near the freeway entrance/exit could work at Birmingham? Is that considered a major arterial? This I-5 expansion will need to go through the Coastal Commission. Unfortunately, San Diego is now represented by Greg Cox, who seems pro-development, from my personal take, and my sources. You know, the fox guarding the henhouse . . .
What was precedent setting re the I-5 expansion, is the City through accepting the overlay that SANDAG has created, and giving up our right to process our own Local Coastal Program Amendment, are forced to live with whatever SANDAG can push through the Coastal Commission . . .
This Agenda item was moved up, in part, is to encourage people to make public comments, since we won't be going through our own LCPA process. Staff could have made time for that, but it's so busy making Strategic Planning presentations.
But we can go to the City's homepage, under the News, or Spotlights, I believe, to get links to where we can submit comments.
A couple of speakers who talked about a different agenda item, the Urania speed cushions, as traffic calming solutions, stated the roundabout at Hymettus on Leucadia Blvd is very dangerous for them, too close to their driveways.
Speed cushions seem like a MUCH better alternative than roundabouts, to me. They were not an alternative considered with respect to the 101 Streetscape through Leucadia.
Speed cushions are those rubber things on Devonshire. They're designed to slow traffic to 15 to 20 mph. Fire trucks straddle them and don't slow down. Ambulances can't straddle them and have to slow to 15 or 20.
DeleteSpeed tables would be better for 101 than cushions. They're about as vertical as the bumps on Orpheus, but they're much longer. From edge to edge, the dome is 20 to 25 feet long. They slow traffic to about 20 to 25 mph, and they don't knock your fillings out as your go over them or cause your car to drop parts in the road.
Lynn,
DeleteYou really need to open your mind about roundabouts. You ignore facts and look like an idiot. I know, I know, We know you don't care about looking like you don't know what your talking about.
As far as speed cushions and tables. They really don't work nearly as we'll as roundabouts and I don't want to be going up and down, up, down, up down all the time …… (unless I'm not driving and I'm in a private setting off course).
Get your facts straight, learn to think, organize and consolidate your thoughts into a logical point, and then write and speak them in under 50 words.
You have zero credibility with me, because you just repeat the same rambles all the time and your opinions are not logical.
Anonymous at 6:21 AM:
DeleteWhatever you may think about the merits of roundabouts, in many traffic calming situations they are inappropriate. There simply isn't room for them unless the city condemns land to give the needed turning radius. The city can't afford to maintain the streets, let alone condemn property for roundabouts. It's speed bumps or speed cushions.
Take a drive down Rubenstein and Summit in Cardiff. The city installed some pseudo-roundabouts of questionable value. The neighborhood is responsible for landscaping maintenance. One is even one-way.
You will get a glimpse of the future that awaits us all.
Fire trucks can straddle speed cushions? Even if thay can, seems cruel and unusual for the sake of ambulances to put half a dozen of them on the longest of only 2 streets accessing a hospital on Devonshire. Wonder how many speed bumps there are in Encinitas that force emergency vehicles down to 15 mph? Anybody on Crest Dr. or Orpheus upset about delayed emergency times with those plentiful humps? Trucks take the worst pounding going over those and speed bumps. I was however behind the double fire truck going through both roundabouts on Leucadia Blvd earlier this week and wanted to see how difficult that might be for it. Neither driver climbed a curb or apron at 15 mph.
DeleteNext time you see an emergency vehicle with lights and sirens blaring, check out their actual speed. Their sirens give an illusion of going well over the speed limit. The only ones I've seen at warp speed are cop cars.
And yes, the psudo roundabouts on Rubenstein aren't roundabouts at all, but I agree they're strange. Lastly, I doubt a roundabout will be put on the rollercoaster portion of Birmingham, but they can work well with freeways. I know the stop signs are a drag in that area always having to stop by the freeway no matter which direction you're going. But lets do first things first.
Fred-According to an email Teresa sent back to me when I asked about roundabouts at Birmingham she stated that it was part of the widening of I-5. I cannot imagine exactly where these roundabouts could be put without endangering a lot of lives. Does anyone know more? I am not necessarily against roundabouts, as the one on Santa Fe seems to work pretty well. But the Birmingham entrance to I-5 seems like a strange place to even consider one or more of them. I have emailed Mike Strong to find out more, and when he replies I will pass it along for those interested..
DeleteDr. Lorri, How would slowing down and not having to stop all of the time at the proposed site(s) endanger lives?
DeleteThe cushions on Devonshire are in segments with flat spots between them. The tracks of fire trucks are wide enough that the wheels go through the flat spots, so no speed decline is necessary.
DeleteAmbulances and cars don't have wide enough tracks to spread to the flat spots. This was mentioned last night about the "traffic calming" coming to Urania. Slowing ambulances was called a "trade-off."
The islands on Summit and Rubenstein in Cardiff are absurd and maddening. Get those damn obstructions out of the road!
Roundabouts are not the panacea that their advocates trumpet. Go to Christmas Circle in Borrego Springs. *That's* a roundabout!
The dinky little twirpy things on Leucadia Blvd. and Santa Fe, and proposed for 101 in Leucadia are barricades in the roadway. When the traffic is even moderately heavy, they don't serve their purported purpose. People stop in all directions, waiting for somebody to make a move cause nobody knows who has the right of way.
When traffic is heavy those dinky roundabouts cause gridlock. Putting those one-lane twirpy things on four-lane 101 is particularly idiotic.
When the traffic is light on L Blvd and Santa Fe, drivers speed around the dinky, poor excuses for roundabouts, barely slowing down at all.
Traffic tables – not bumps like Orpheus or cushions like Devonshire – are a much better solution for slowing traffic in almost every situation.
Besides the Birmingham ramps, Strong's diagrams also showed roundabouts at the L Blvd ramps, but he said nothing about them.
A better idea is not to widen the freeway at all. No more lanes, no sound walls. A wider freeway will only bring more development and more people. The construction period will be a decades-long nightmare.
Reducing the population by attrition and a declining birth rate is the best solution of all.
2:17 PM
DeleteRight on. The reason for widening the freeway is for more development.
The public and private powers that be want all of Southern California to be Los Angeles. It has something to do with resolving their feelings of inadequacy.
DeleteFred: I am concerned because the new fire station is right at the corner of Birmingham and this new roundabout proposal. I have emailed Mark Muir to ask about response times. Personally, I don't have a problem with the roundabout at Santa Fe, but the ones on Birmingham seem problematic. I will find out more, before I send a message to the City.
DeleteI agree, 12:53. Thank you for educating me about the benefits of speed tables, and the disadvantages of speed cushions. I know the speed limit has already been reduced to 35 MPH on 101, through Leucadia. The three year traffic study provided by the City on 7/18/12 didn't show a need for a greater speed reduction according to collision statistics.
DeleteHowever, if we must have further slowing on our major arterial, speed tables would be preferable to speed cushions. I think I was prejudiced by their name, speed cushions . . . sounds softer than it would be, in reality. Emergency response time for ambulances is actually very important. Many more emergency calls involve the need for EMTs, than fire engineers . . . I believe Mark Muir did ask questions about ambulance response times at the Council Meeting yesterday night.
Dr.. Lorri,
DeleteIt doesn't make sense to me that a roundabout would be at Mackinnon and Birmingham (where the fire station is), but further east a few hundred feet where the off and onramps to 5 are, (along with several stop signs that inhibit traffic flow). The lights at M & B are green going east and west most of the time and when they're red its only for a very short duration.
Fred-The new Fire Station is not on Mackinnon anymore. It is further east, right up against the freeway. Also, there are gas stations and business in that area. I really don't understand the photo very well, so I will withhold too much comment until I do.
DeleteKeep your thoughts in a private setting. Lynn is as star in Encinitas and has facts well researched.
ReplyDeleteAahhh haaaaa haaa!!!! Good one!
DeleteThat right, Run Lynn, Run…..
I will donate $10,000 to your campaign….. where do I send my check?
I will not expect an answer until 5:30pm when you get out of bed.
Not about Roundabouts....
Deleteyou didn't keep your thoughts about lynn being a star in a private setting. She comes across as a nut.
DeleteFunny but gross!
Delete6:31 Why not put your money where your mouth is? Lynn would be an excellent candidate for council. She takes the time (without pay) to research the issues. We all have learned a lot from her. Obviously, you haven't. I also respect some of the other speakers who take the time to speak at the meetings, including Sheila Cameron, Donna Westbrooke, and Andrew Audette. Wish they were all on council.
DeleteAnother wasted opportunity for City Council to fire Vina.
ReplyDeleteI am starting to think, they are not capable of leading this City.
If they were, they would fire Vina at the next City Council meeting and start the true cleaning process for Encinitas City Hall.
It is sad that this blog is the best written record of what occurred. When will the open government council bring back summary minutes so there is a written record?
ReplyDeleteYes, there is video and audio. Nobody has the time to listen to every entire meeting. Only the privileged have the time to go over all the video. Saying, "just go watch the video" is the modern "let them eat cake."
Jerome got rid of summary minutes to make it harder for the public to track his decision making and the points brought up by the public, which made him look bad. Points brought up by the public make the current council look bad. That's why they don't want the information recorded in the official written record. Jerome made the decision but Barth, Schaffer and Kranz don't want to fix it.
Oh, lets not forget that Barth wanted to make sure her personal objections could make it in the written record. She didn't even think to seek that for the public. Being in the video wasn't good enough for her. Insightful.
Funny but gross!
ReplyDeleteAgain last night, we saw how the City Manager is running things. Did he think the council and the public would be so stupid to fall for his trick about getting council approval to hire that survey group for $100,000? He tried to sneak it in, but it didn't work. Council --- you do not have to be afraid of this man. He does not pay your salary, nor can he fire you. He is not on the same level as you. You have the authority, the power, and hopefully the guts to take this guy by his little neck and show him who is boss. We need a strong council to represent the best interests of this city and the people who put you in your seat.
ReplyDeleteVina needs to be FIRED now!
ReplyDeleteWell, since Teresa doesn't come to this "cesspool," we need to take it to her. Letter-writing campaigns or just single letters to all council members do make a difference if only because they know folks are watching. And for everyone person who is communicating with the city, what was it someone said last night? "Armies" stand behind them, and that bears repeating when you do write.
ReplyDeleteState Assembly (District 76)=Rocky Chavez
ReplyDeleteState Senate -Mark Wyland.
Let's flood them with emails and let our voices be heard about Density Bonus. Hopefully this is not old information, but it is what I found on the Internet. If these are not our elected representatives in Sacto, please let us know.
Dr. Lorri, with all due respect, the city should not be packing us off in the direction of Sacramento to do its job. Teresa made some weak statement about not geting anywhere with the state government agencies, Lisa said the same of SANDAG, and they made us sound like a bunch of lieabouts for not taking up the charge. What was it Lisa said? Something about writing back a lot of folks and telling them to contact the state?
DeleteI'll contact the state after Encinitas gets its own house in order. That report by Murphy was pretty pathetic. The council needs to tell planning/Vina/Sabine to knock off the developer handouts and then we'll talk about a march on Sacramento.
All the Murphy hires have been pathetic. Stay away from them. Must be Murphy's law.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteA bit more from Lisa Shaffer about the roundabouts at Birmingham.
ReplyDeleteThere are 2 roundabouts planned for the I-5 interchange with Birmingham. Mike Strong can send you to the diagram or you can look at the City website for tonight's presentation – one of his slides had a diagram. The presentation isn't there yet, but should be in the next day or so:
A 10 AM press conference this morning at Pacific View announced the purchase price of the school. It's $10,000,000. The zoning will stay the same, the old school house will remain, and terms must be settled by May. Tony Kranz and Marla Strich made the announcement. Kranz was the only city council member present, although City Manager Gus Vina was there.
ReplyDeleteDoes that $10 million include the golden bridge? Or unicorns?
Delete10 million. Really! Did Kranz and Vina happen to say where the money is coming from?
DeleteVina is setting up metal detectors on all doors at city hall. Everyone, except the employees, will be required to turn over all their loose change.
DeleteHas Kranz, Shaffer, and Barth heard of malfeasance in office?
DeleteKranz was asked about financing. He said it was uncertain. Reporter Barbara Henry asked why $10 million. Kranz said it was to stop the auction and get the deal done.
DeleteThe story is now on The Coast News website:
https://thecoastnews.com/2014/03/city-to-buy-pacific-view-for-10-million/
and Baird looked like the cat that ate the canary
DeleteI think Baird ate Vina
DeleteI hope a golden goose came with it. WTF was Tony thinking? What a loser on this one.
DeleteI want to know why, after Strong admitted we could say "no" to the I-5 widening and seemed to indicate there would be at least some degree of success, why a minute or two later the council snapped right back to yapping about wall decor and who would pay for it.
ReplyDeleteWas I imagining things, or was "no, thanks" an option?
Strong said we could say no to the sound walls not the I-5 widening. You must not live near the I-5.
DeleteThe I-5 widening was never evaluated under the Encinitas LCP. If Caltrans follows their traditional widening the walls will be ten feet from residents bedrooms. No to widening the I-5.
DeleteSorry, I left out the sound walls part - my comment applies in that case. Interesting though on the LCP...don't suppose that's something we'll see the council/staff pursuing.
DeleteCouncil agreed to let Caltrans file a consolidated LCP amendment with the coastal commission for all the corridor cities although they have the right, if I remember correctly, to contest individual elements.
DeleteYou can say no to the I-5, but if Caltrans wants that thing widened, it's happening. When has a freeway widening *Not* happened in Southern California?
DeleteSandag and Caltrans can send that money south. When has a freeway not happened in Southern California? Pasadena.
DeleteJust looked at the presentation materials and given the scope of the project (yes, we have to live with widening I-5) it's not a bad start. I understand the roundabouts at Birmingham and believe it would improve ingress and egress to the frwy. The sound walls don't bother me too much - they're actually very beneficial to the affected neighborhoods. The new McKinnon bridge is nice, and dumps out at the park - how convenient. Anything helps at Santa Fe, and I'm not too sure what is going on at Enc Blvd. Leuc Blvd too - are they getting rid of the S turn on ramp? I love that thing!! I like getting rid of a light at La Costa. Overall, a good effort - given that I-5 will be widened.
ReplyDelete- The Sculpin
Sculpin-Do you think that the response times from the Fire Station located on Birmingham next to the freeway will be affected?
Delete8 years ago or so, southbound traffic on 101 in the morning was insane. A LOT of cut-through traffic was going onto Melrose ave. Signs were installed making that illegal in the morning hours. Tickets were given, and the incidents of cut-through traffic diminished some.
ReplyDeleteNot long after that, Solana Beach and Del Mar BOTH added one lane to freeway 5. It greatly increased circulation and encourged commuters using 101 instead to get back on the freeway. Back-up traffic on southbound N 101 is a lot less now than it used to be as a result and that means less cut-through traffic occurring on Melrose and Vulcan as well.
I think widening 5 one lane through Encinitas would further diminish cut-through traffic here for commuters and ease commuter traffic congestion on 101. But the really congested roads are not 101 but at Enc. Blvd and Leucaida Blvd twice a day. You'd think it was last minute Christmas Eve shoppers between 4 and 6pm backed up from the freeway to Vulcan Ave. An extra lane of the freeway will ease that congestion as well and anytime you keep cars from idling you improve air quality as well.
It's 8+4 for the freeway. Two new lanes in each direction.
DeleteSomeone else told me it was even more than that. Anybody have a reference?
DeleteIt started as 8+6, there was a huge outcry that included protests against taking a lot of private land, so they cut it back to 8+4. I think that's what they wanted all along, but they floated 8+6 first so when they cut back to 8+4 it looked as if they were making a concession.
DeleteThe key is having a matching set of lanes from Oceanside to Del Mar and vice versa. When there is a reduction of lanes, you have a choke point. The choke point north on the 5 has gone from the merge, to Via de la Valle and now to Manchester where you lose a lane.
DeleteSouthbound things improved when they added the extra lane getting on at Manchester, which removed a choke point. After that you have the extra lane through Solana Beach.
One thing they really need to do is at a separate exit lane at Palomar Airport to remove the backup that comes from all the people exiting there.
Cut through traffic has greatly diminished in Encinitas for several reasons: A.) The extra lane in Cardiff B.) The recession and less people working (and retiring early) and c.) for awhile a spike in gas prices.
-Mr Green Jeans
I haven't had a chance to look at the Birmingham roundabouts yet, but will the Fire Dept. which is located right on Birmingham by the I-5 have any trouble getting their trucks out?
ReplyDeletePlan is to rebuild fire house entrance, cost unknown at this time, estimate somewhere between $1.5-2.0 M dollars.. City on the hook for 80% of that...
Deleteare you talking about the new station that cost $6.3M to build-
DeleteYes
Delete2:40
DeleteWhere is such a plan to rebuild the new fire house and the estimated cost you mention?
I would guess the two roundabouts do not change either MacKinnon Dr or Villa Cardiff Dr, but the on and off ramps to the freeway only where now everyone has to stop. The speeds of traffic approaching the fire station from the freeway wouldn't be any different than they are now unless they're slower. Currently two garage doors from the fire station exit onto Mackinnon like they always have. There would be no reason to move them as far as I can tell.
The old fire station exited onto Mackinnon. It's now closed. The new fire station, a half-block to the east, exits onto Birmingham, opposite the gas station, between Mackinnon and the southbound on and off ramps.
DeleteThe two proposed roundabouts will be situated on each side of the freeway bridge where the on/off ramps hit Birmingham. It will be a bit of a tight fit, but no changes in the new fire station will be needed.
I first heard about these proposed roundabouts four or five years ago. I've attended all the CALTRANS/SANDAG meetings. There's nothing new here, except the concept is further along. I spoke with Arturo Jacobo, head engineer of I-5 expansion, about potential problems, such as the limited area and the slope. At rush hour it won't be easy to get through the intersections, but it's not particularly easy now. Better? Certainly different. Sort of like a circus with two carousels
Yup, just drove by it yesterday and noticed the old and new fire stations. I'll check it out again when I drive by today..
Delete-Mr Green Jeans
Thanks 6:43, I know there's a new driveway behind the new station but I haven't checked it all out yet. And yeah, I think even exiting onto Birmingham will not be hard with sirens, lights and cars having to stop that are only going 15 mph uphill.
DeleteSomehow I think there will one day be jail time for some of these charlatans at city hall, especially some former suspects. Too many suspicious things have gone on for too long. Forensic accounting anyone?
ReplyDeleteLet me play Gus for a moment: "We don't use the word 'forensic'."
DeleteHas the city announced how they plan to pay for PV?? Where's the money coming from??
ReplyDeleteMore liquor and pot sales tax, plus higher density, plus deferred maintenance, plus higher permit fees for residents. Oh did I tell you your City Council want to increase your taxes?!!!
DeleteWTF? Why did they buy the school site. This was not a City issue.
These clowns are just like Jerome $tock$…. Idiots.
Wait, it's legal to buy pot in Encinitas?
DeleteIt's legal if you have a medical marijuana license.
DeleteAre there actually dispensaries in town? the last one I remember was in Leucadia near the old Builder's Supply, but I think they got run out of town 4-5 years ago...
DeleteTony learned how to crap a golden egg….. now he better learn how to sell it.
ReplyDeleteThe school district said they would stop the auction at 9.5 million. Why did the city give them an extra .5 million. YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME!
ReplyDeleteTony has lost his F'ing mind.
ReplyDeleteLisa told me that the city hasn't decided what they will eventually do with Pacific View. I thought it was dedicated to the arts. I guess i was wrong.
ReplyDeleteLet's hope not. There's no hope for this money losing property. Really now, if it was to be a profitable arts center don't you think EUSD would do that??
DeleteEvery penny the city pumps into this rat hole is money not going to fit your roads, safe sidewalks for children or pay off debt.
You have that right the last thing I want to do is subsidize a bunch of people fingerpainting.
ReplyDeleteFix our roads or you will all be voted out of office. And fired that loser city manager
The poster above should use the handle "The Road Warrior"....
ReplyDeletewell- Encinitas city hall under Barth and Muir is Barter Town and we do need another hero - "you need somebody to drive that tanker - talk to me"
ReplyDeleteYou myopic morons should go back to watching Fox News to reinforce your ignorant biases. Buying Pac View was a good move, and it will become a successful arts and community center that will eventually pay for itself. The only big problem is that the City paid about double what it should have. Blame Baird, the four other extortionists and the absence of cajones at City Hall.
ReplyDeleteSo who are the real myopic morons?? Those that watch Fox News or those that over pay for a useless piece of property.....
DeleteHow long is " eventually"?? Can you give us a time frame?? Thank you, now I'll go back to watching Fox and friends.
Delete9:27 waht does Fox news have to do with Pacific View? With all respect your comments reflects how an individual can become so ideologic that they lose their common sense and see things as others want them to see them and not as they are.
DeletePV is not a gray or green issue or a GOP DEM issue or a Fox News MSNBC issue
It is a local issue where neither the school board or the city worked in the best interest of the public- kind of like how Harry Reid Nancy Pelosi and John McCain and John BOehner are not working in the best interest of the public.
Your common sense is you write "the only problem is they paid double what they should have" Your uncommon sense is that fail to hold the accountable or to oppose the waste and corruption in how taxpayer money is spent-
I guess it easier to blame Fox new - rather than blame all 5 council members incompetence to force through legal means EUSD to adhere to state law and protect the interests of residents.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThe city should have spent the money on roads and removing utility poles.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhat we can focus on now, is getting the School District to carry the loan for 30 years at ZERO percent interest. Then EUSD would have the revenue stream it said it wanted when past Superintendents said the Naylor Act didn't apply and did an appraisal for $13.5 Million, based on rezoning to mixed- use-commercial-office-residential and the assumption that the property was to be exchanged for a different commercial property with a revenue stream.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Govt. Code, the Naylor Act should have applied when the property was initially leased to the City, and the playgrounds and fields were paved over, but Doug DeVore and Lean King, said, no, we're going to exchange, not to sell. They left out the fact that the Naylor Act applies when open space, which was part of a public school, is no longer being used as a school, and is "disposed of" through a LEASE. It is the elimination of open space at a former public school, and the Board of Trustees' authorization to do so either through LEASE or through selling the property, which triggers the Naylor Act.
Because the City and the School District have colluded, through past Council Members and City Managers and Superintendents and Trustees, to avoid the mandates of the Naylor Act, which is legislation enacted by the State Legislature to preserve part of previous public schools for open space, then the terms of the agreement should also include not only that the property would not be rezoned from public/semi-public, and that the Old Schoolhouse would remain, but also 30% of the land must be held, in perpetuity as open space, including fields, playgrounds and/or community gardens, for public use, and public art installations.
The State Allocation Board will be reviewing whether or not money from the sale can go into EUSD's general fund. That was the pretense of the "deadline pressure" that Baird applied to say he had to break the closed session promise for exclusive negotiations with the City, go to the press with our confidential closed session opening bid, and announce an auction. We still don't know, and probably never will know if there were ANY actual sealed bids.
Our inexperienced Council got played. But we can turn lemons into lemonade in many ways. We can have a wonderful community arts and learning center. We can do damage control and get the best terms possible for the loan. If we could get zero percent interest over thirty years, then the school district would get its desired revenue stream, could replace more of its temporary classrooms, could put more money into technology, and we, the taxpayers would avoid the huge cost of debt service.
The revenue stream to EUSD for $10,000,000 over 30 years = 360 payments = $27,777,78 per month. That could be doable with sound fiscal management.
DeleteFor one thing, contracts with all Farmers' Markets could be renegotiated. The Wednesday downtown Farmers' Market could be moved to Pacific View, eventually. The Sunday Farmers' Market at Paul Ecke School could give part of the money, from vendors rents to a foundation that would be leasing Pacific View. I guess I will have to put in a CPRA request, again, as no one is answering my question, who is the manager of the Farmers' Markets? Is it the full time Director of L101MA? I know managing requires work, but L101MA should not be getting two thirds of the pie. Because I was informed that one third of the vendor rents goes to L101MA, one third goes to the manager, and one third goes to the PTA? That is the contract that needs to be renegotiated. I'm sure the PTA would be open to this, too. And now that Peder Norby is gone, who negotiates or renegotiates these types of contracts?
If one divides Gus Vina's salary of $226,000 per year, which includes his life insurance policy, but doesn't include all his other benefits, including health care and pension, by 12 months, one arrives at $18,833.33 per month, to pay for ONE city employee, that most of the public thinks is doing a terrible job.
DeleteCouncil is getting played by Baird and Vina. The Board of Trustees is enamored of Baird, and the public is getting played by our public servants.
The only problem is your comments make no logical sense
DeleteYou forgot to tell us that Norby doesn't receive a pension....but at 10:52 am we know it's still early for you.
DeleteRight, but if you get someone else for city manager, and let's assume they're the greatest person ever, you're still paying them in the neighborhood of $230k a year.
DeleteMy take is at least get someone good if you're paying top dollar. The problem with Vina is they kind of cheaped out and took a 2nd tier candidate. Do I want to pay that much? No. I say about $150k max for a city of our size, but good luck making that happen.
-Mr Green reduction...
Salaries and benefits for civic workers are excessive, particularly for the Administrative set. Vina proves that huge salaries don't mean you have the best - it just means that the employees have control of the civic purse strings. $150k max for city manager makes sense - you'd have candidates lining up for that offer. To do this, it takes a city council that serves the best interests of their community and who aren't manipulated by their employees. Our "new" council seems to be incapable of making the changes necessary.
DeleteDump Barth.
$150K??? You must work in govt somewhere, you freely spend others funds. This city is on cruise control , all the drama is created by the city to justify their outrageous salaries. I'm thinking no more than .... Oh, $65K. Any more and you have a city manager looking to creat problems to feed his/ her ego. No thanks.
DeletePS- plenty of hardworking business owners in this city that don't earn more than $65K AND could do a better job then mr. Vina.
Government employees do make way too much money. City hall is over staffed and it seems like most of them aren't qualified for the positions they have. Ignorant reports come out of the staff and they never seem to be able to answer council's questions when asked. They all look at each other and have an "outer space" look on their face. Final answer is always "we'll have to get back with you on that." Then, the issue dies, never to be heard again. What a gig they all have. We can save a ton of money by reducing staff, thus, reducing costs to us taxpayers.
DeleteYou're not going to get a city manager for $65k, captain fantasy. I'd be happy with $100k, but that isn't going to happen either. Ranting about getting rid of Vina isn't going to make it happen. It didn't get rid of Kerry Miller or Phil Cotton, who were both somewhat dubious as well. Just sayin..At least get somebody competent who's on board with getting pensions and costs under control. The big money at City hall goes to the firefighters, who to a man make over $100k per the links WC posted last week. The average is probably more like $120k, with some higher than that. We're talking 30-35 salaries at $100k +. You do the math...
DeleteEveryone should watch the last city Council meeting on video. Andrew Audet for mayor!!!!!
ReplyDeleteYES, Andrew Audet for mayor. Andrew, if you are reading this. Please run. We need you.
ReplyDeleteTony and Mark are big pussies. We need someone. Andy to clean up City Hall.
ReplyDeleteAndy will not put up with a little Napoleon shit at all. Mark and Tony like getting spanked by Guss every day.
Please run Andy!
I seriously will campaign for you and get you plenty of support financially and better support
11:58 Pussies is correct. Muir has to be careful not to let his blood pressure get out of control, so he sits there in a "numb like" state. We need someone with more vibrancy, stamina, and GUTS. Andrew is our man.
ReplyDeleteMuir has the GUT - does that count?
Delete2:02 Yes, but the wrong kind of GUT. And what is with those vests? That kind of garb was out ions ago. He needs some fashion advice. But, truthfully, for his health's sake he needs to shed some weight.
DeleteAndrew would win from my polling. Would be great if he ran!
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, Andrew, like a lot of us that might actually be better than what we have, also have some form of nonsensical criminal record that will be used by the Lincoln Club. Andrew has the Fair Political Practice B.S., Dr. Lori has a string of activist charges, Lynn (if you want to consider her) has the City's stupid accessory unit lawsuit, and the list goes on. All of these would come out big time if they tried to run. I'm sure there are more people, and maybe they don't have anything law enforcement charges but the monied people will find something else. Look what they did to Tony with their "Tony behind bars" glossy mailer. No one who is any good hasn't done something to probably get them into trouble with the law. I know Dr. L was around when the Freedom Riders were in the South. That is one of the reasons she defended Filner so much. He was a Freedom rider. She also marched with MLK and got arrested at one point. Actually she has been arrested several times for similar protests. And, even though I think she would be a good councilperson, I also know she wouldn't have a fighting chance of winning. As she puts it, she is unelectable. I don't think Andrew, as much as I like him is electable either. Can you see it now? Andrew and Kydd, together in a jail cell. Bullshit-yes. Reality to politicians-NO.
ReplyDeleteWell, the dark side will always try and use something. With Maggie, it was the clown, and stopping to help pets, with someone else it was clean needles, with Teresa it was something that I can't recall. Tony had the guy in his face that they put on youtube.
DeleteIt's all a distraction, the 3 b's if you're familiar with them. If the word is out on the quality of the candidates, or people are fed up enough, that crap won't work. It works in close elections where people don't vote. Specifically, the off year elections. So look for that garbage to be trotted out. Frankly, I don't think any of the above's legal issues would detract from a candidacy.
That said, I don't think any of the above are thinking of running, so it's a moot point.
I do have to make a Filner comment, and just say that too many people covered up despicable behavior for too long. Wrong is wrong, and the outing of Filner was at least 20 years too late. We have to stop with the moral equivalency, no one's perfect, but sexual harrasment doesn't go.
-Mr Green Jeans
Maggie was already elected after Meyer put the clown on her. And most people love animals. Andrew's alleged violations may be more than infractions. And, Dr. L's also may be more than infractions. I don't remember anything about Teresa, except the thing about sexual harassment by members of the Council and that was after she was elected.
DeleteBs-
ReplyDeleteNo one would care about a few infractions ...
What this council and past council have done are much worse.
Andrew will win Mayor I predict!!!
Gaspar had a bad mascara day!
ReplyDeleteMuir was caught with his big ol butt hanging out putting illegal signs out, Tony was caught about to pound a nazi and both were elected. everyones got a few infractions… big deal… its not like he stole millions from the public tax rolls and gave it to the City Employees and himself like Jerome $tock$ did in 2005.
ReplyDeleteAndrews are man and he will win Mayor and kick City Council into shape and clean up City Hall.
Thanks for saving our City Mr. Audet!
Green Jeans- One point about Filner. I appreciate 1:40's comments about me and most of it is true. However, the suggestion that I supported Filner is not true. I supported "due process". As most of you know, I am a psychologist. The only way I can legally break the confidentiality of a patient is if there is child abuse; they tell me they are going to kill someone and I believe them; or if they tell me they are going to kill themselves. The exception is if there is a court order directing me to disclose whatever has been said in my office. The reason I wanted Filner to go to court, instead of what happened, is that I did have information that I could not reveal because it was said in confidentiality in my office. What was said to me, would have shed a different light on what was going on. That is all I can legally say about that on this subject. I would never condone sexual harassment, as I fought for those laws. One of my many arrests for activism is fighting for those laws before they came one the books. Please do not think for one minute I condone any sexual harassment that Filner may have done. I don't. There was just more to the story and that was never allowed to be told because it never went to a courtroom until the damage to Filner had been done. By that time, it was too late and too expensive for Filner.
ReplyDeleteStep up Andrew! Its your time. You can win!
ReplyDeleteFinally, Green Jeans, I know who you are. Gave yourself away in the last post. Had me stumped for a while.
ReplyDelete