Hi WC,It's no secret that Barth has had contempt for community activists ever since she achieved power via a majority on the city council. But it's pretty amazing that she would express this contempt so brazenly in a broadcast e-mail.
Not sure if you saw this yet; it was sent out by Barth and touts Blakespear's supposed virtues. My own comments inserted below a couple of Barth's sentences.
"While others just criticize and complain, Catherine gets things done."
What a nasty slap in the face to all the hard work residents have done over the years in an attempt to keep the City honest.
As for "criticizing and complaining" versus "getting things done," we know of no council candidate who has gotten more things done for the benefit of Encinitas residents than Julie Graboi, who has been a leader on both the Prop A and Desert Rose issues, and has been a tireless advocate for accountability at City Hall. Blakespear was completely absent from both the Prop A and Desert Rose issues, and only during election season made her first public foray into the obviously admirable defense of Coral Tree Farms.
Barth's blast is highly ironic, because those same "criticizers and complainers" are the same people who not only got Barth elected and re-elected, but gave her the majority by electing Kranz and Shaffer.
When Barth, Shaffer and Kranz were elected, they had the halo effect, and many of us thought that we could retire from going to city council meetings because we had finally provided Teresa the majority she said she needed to get things done.....
ReplyDeleteKeep it coming, Teresa! Get Lisa and Tony to add their voices. That's Blakespear's kiss of death.
ReplyDeleteRuthless and cruel comments from a ruthless and cruel council member. If only Teresa knew how much she and those other two cronies are hurting Blakespear's chances of winning.
ReplyDeleteJulie Graboi has what it takes. She has been at the council meetings and has worked for the citizens of Encinitas.
My vote is for Julie. Blakespear is too aligned with the troika.
Blakespeare has a huge load of money at her disposal. It will be an uphill battle to beat her for Julie. It would be the biggest victory ever if Julie could win....
DeleteLet's follow Blakespear's huge load of money and see where it takes us....
DeleteThis weds the city council will AGAIN spend more time (money ) dealing with the 434 La Veta case. Hmmmm will this ever end??
ReplyDelete9:45 PM
ReplyDeleteThe city had a vendetta.
Absolute fact the city had a vendetta. Another ugly moment from our sloppy city hall.
DeleteAnd what was that??
Delete7am, I agree that I feel bad on a human level, but that it looks like steps could have been taken to resolve the situation. Too bad a mediator can't solve this one.
DeleteI propose however, that since one of the principals was a long time poster on this blog, that we not talk about this issue again on this blog. Too personal, and not cool to give the address. In fact WC, I would remove that post.
Let's move on and hope someone can help them work toward a peaceful resolution. This is someone's house people....
-MGJ
WC,
DeleteSo now we can't talk about items on the agenda, and information in the agenda reports?
There is more to the story than what the city posts there. Vendetta IS the appropriate word.
Delete8:31,
DeleteA vendetta, on the part of:
- The code enforcement officer
- County Sheriffs
- the city council (all members, 2002 - 2014 inclusive)
- 2 city managers
- the city attorney
- the planning/building department and director
- the independent mediator
- the city's outside council
- the city's second outside council
- Superior Court judge Guy-Schall (who withdrew from the case after being confronted outside court)
-Superior Court Judge Stern
-Superior Court Judge #3 (who ordered the renewal of the lien)
- expert witnesses
- the neighbors
- the Appeals Court
- the CA Supreme Court
- the US Supreme Court
- the CA legislature (who wrote the rules on lien interest and forbidding forgiveness)
The enormity of the conspiracy is truly incredible (or, not credible).
This is a human tragedy. We can and should feel compassion. But the owners are the protagonists. They made a long series of really bad choices.
The Marrs would be the first to the podium to complain, if the council was giving money to "ANYONE" else. How ironic is this, now they want free money from the city and don't want to pay their bill - the taxpayers should not have to pay for their legal fees, period.
DeleteIt's like trying to get out of a parking ticket! Except much bigger!!
As is frequently the case on this blog, one of our own can't be guilty of acting badly. Vendetta? It all started when they called code enforcement on one of their neighbors. Only then was it pointed out to code enforcement that the Marrs had an illegal garage conversion. So they rat out a neighbor and then a neighbor rats them out. Tit for tat. But of course, since the Marrs are one of the good guys (so called) code enforcement should look the other way. Code enforcement is only for the bad guys.
DeleteI can't believe the antics the Marrs pulled. No wonder the legal fees are high as they had to keep coming back because the Marrs wouldn't cooperate.
The city council should not lift the legal fees. To do so would be an announce to all those who get cited by code enforcement that it's okay to ignore and behave insolently because the city will finally cave.
Karma is a bitch.
The Marrs are screwed any way you look at it, any forgiveness on the part of the city would be considered income by the IRS. They would have to pay taxes on the forgiveness....
Delete7:57, I know, but they could all try again. This shouldn't be a topic of discussion on this blog. None of us can erase history. Everyone involved could have done a better job, been more reasonable.
DeleteI hate to see them lose their house, even if they may have brought it on themselves by a series of bad choices.
Let's move on, unless someone's a lawyer and can help them out...
The city cannot forgive the debt. That would be an illegal gift under state law. That receivable is listed as a public asset on the city balance sheet.
DeleteThe city did not file the lien right away because that triggers mandatory interest charges and unforgivable debt. They used the threat of lien as leverage to compel a mediated settlement. When the property owners rejected the 2007 settlement, the die was cast.
There was a good reason for the Marrs to reject the settlement. Let's not forget too that the city engaged Rutan & Tucker to carry out its legal work. Let's not forget that that was the firm that had no problem doing the city's dirty work for it on Prop A...intimidation, anyone?
DeleteThere is always a good reason to reject a settlement. That's the nature of a mediated settlement; no one gets everything the want.
DeleteThere are also good reasons to accept a settlement. In this case, keeping one's home would be a good reason to accept.
Clearly this one got away from the Marrs...hindsight is always 20/20. That doesn't take away from the city going above and beyond to punish. The average citizen would not have received such treatment.
Delete1:12 PM
DeleteGoing to the Rutan & Tucker well once too often.
1:36 PM
Whether or not they accepted a settlement, willfully carrying on with their antics served no purpose and caused the city's legal bills to inflate. Trying to be their own attorneys was another foolish move, especially at the appellate level.
As owners of the property, they are responsible that it meets code whether or not they were responsible for any changes. If the previous owner did the garage conversion without getting a permit, whether or not it happened before or after city incorporation, then I think the Marrs have grounds to file suit against him, although it may be a question of the Marrs not doing their due diligence when they bought the property. Saying that, I realize few people would think to check whether something like that had been properly permitted. In the end, the Marrs, as the current property owners, are on the hook for the code violation and the party the city will cite. If the construction was done improperly, it may constitute an unsafe condition which needs to be corrected.
I don't think the city levied a fine on the Marrs, just the legal fees reimbursement.
1:58 PM
DeleteThe average citizen wouldn't have pulled the antics that the Marrs did. They brought it on themselves. The city didn't go above and beyond to punish the Marrs. If it were me I would have asked the judge to hold the Marrs in contempt. I'm surprised they didn't given how the Marrs willfully and repeatedly disregarded the judge's instructions.
M'okay. No one takes issue with the Marrs "antics" as being the root cause of their issues. However, there were legal irregularities from the beginning. Putting Rutan & Tucker on the job alone smacks of intimidation and retribution out of proportion, or do you think their hiring was appropriate?
DeleteIf one follows the rules, then there shouldn't be a problem. If you don't know what the rules are, it is easy to find out. In any case, it is too bad that this case has gone this far for so long.
Delete2:02 - can't go "to the Rutan & Tucker well" often enough. They are the go-to firm when you want a heavy hand that, as we saw with Prop A, has no problem coming up with lists of "maybes, shoulds, and coulds" that the City has no problem interpreting as "definitely, shall, and will." They are a high-priced firm that produces what the City asks for, and as a taxpayer, I don't appreciate paying their bills.
Delete2:37 PM & 2:41 PM
DeleteRutan & Tucker is the firm that won the Hernandez case back in the early 90's. That case challenged the adequacy of the city's housing element specifically:
"Generally, in three causes of action in the petition filed July 27, 1989, the petitioners contend City's general plan adopted March 29, 1989, unreasonably restricts housing opportunities for poor people through a variety of exclusionary residential policies. The petition relies on provisions of the state Planning and Zoning Law (Gov. Code, fn. 1 § 65000 et seq.) and particularly requirements for the housing element of the City's general plan (§ 65583) and the requirement that zoning provide for least costly housing needs (§§ 65913, 65913.1)."
So if the city didn't prevail in that case, Prop A might have been a non issue as the city would have had to adequately rezone for low cost housing years ago.
So now they are the intimidators and all around bad guys? Please. Your search for villains weakens your argument.
2:41,
DeleteAll R&T did was file a lien. I get that you don't like them, but our judicial system doesn't allow litigants to veto who represents the other side.
I have never personally been involved as a litigant in either civil or criminal court. If it ever happens, I plan to select the most aggressive, talented, and intimidating legal representative I can get, then try to settle before my lawyers take everything.
3:17 - All I'm saying is the city had a wide-open choice of law firms. R&T is high-priced, heavy-handed, and over the top for a simple lien filing.
DeleteAs for R&T's suit on behalf of poor people and the housing element, well we all know that that's about as altruistic as Buddy Bohrer's identification of himself on the ERAC as a "low-income advocate."
4:03 PM
DeleteHow has R & T been heavy handed? I don't know what their rate is. R & T defended the city in that suit they weren't the litigants. And as 3:17 PM says, you want to hire bulldogs as attorneys.
12:07 PM
DeleteYou want an example of a true gift of public funds. Try the sales tax Caltas never paid back to the city taxpayers. Over $100,000 dollars. That debt was carried on the city budget for a few years then quietly removed.
4:07 - I am saying that R&T are a heavy-handed firm to begin with - for Prop A, they were considered the "developer's choice" for their willingness to stretch the improbable to a near-certainty to make the customer happy (Vina and Co.). You think they were objective where the Marrs were concerned, or acted as they did on Prop A and made the customer happy? I know what I think.
DeleteAnd yes, the Carltas sales tax deal that disappeared into the sunset is a true gift of public funds, yet no one on any council - including current one - are willing to look into it.
Delete1:58 is completely wrong. If you know nothing about this subject please don't post.
DeleteI am 1:58 and suspect I know more than you.
DeleteI also know Glen Sabine has made over $100,000 on the Marr's case. This illegal unit was built before we incorporated. How many more illegal units are out there that have never had liens put on their property? Be careful folks, you could be next. So why are the Marr's singled out? They don't have the money to hire a pricey attorney so they tried to do it themselves. That should not be a crime, and should not automatically make them lose. I think it is a travesty when Sabine makes $100,000 just because they didn't like the Marr's attitude.
DeleteCode enforcement is usually a result of citizen complaint. They don't go house to house looking for violations. It was the Marrs who called code enforcement on one of their neighbors. When code enforcement was investigating the Marrs' complaint they were informed of the Marrs' illegal garage conversion. I believe one of the neighbors did that and it might have been by the neighbor who was the target of the Marrs' complaint. Tit for tat I guess. Living in glass houses and all that.
DeleteThe Marrs weren't singled out. They started the chain reaction. Then they greatly compounded the situation willfully. They continually portray themselves as victims.
That shtick gets old.
You're wrong, 9:35. Are you Randal Morrison? You think you have so much inside info? That's the opposite of what happened.
DeleteA developer turned in the Marrs. Previously, another developer, landlord, went down the block and turned a bunch of people in, once they had got a low income permit for their own property. Then there was a complaint filed with the City against the developer. A couple bought a property, in 95, which had a pre-existing garage studio. The Marrs still have their garage, studio is separate.
The complaining developer who were owner occupants, at the time, but have not been neighbors for many years, attached the studio to a pre-existing shed, formerly with a dirt floor, then claimed that there was a pre-existing one bedroom granny flat They connected the shed to the studio with a "breezeway." Then they built a eight foot high fence along the alley to shield the construction from sight. No one complained until they turned in a bunch of their neighbors. The developer eliminated all off-street parking, when they put in the fence. Before there was offstreet parking, accessible from the alley.
The Marrs don't owe the city a dime for its outrageous attorney fees.
The State Legislature didn't write any rules on a city being unable to settle through the affordable housing policy. The U.S. Supreme Court wasn't involved. Sheriffs were only involved in a raid; warrant was never returned. No trial on the merits. The whole thing was a kangaroo court decision. Yes a travesty all right. The City is accountable, but the lawyers think they're home free because the statute of limitations has run for government officers. It could go on, in perpetuity, being indefinitely renewed, against defendants who were denied their basic rights, according to our some corrupt lawyers, including some corrupt judges.
DeleteYou don't know what you're talking about; you don't know what decisions were made. You don't know anything except what you want to believe.
Barth has not accomplished one thing unless creating a dysfunctional mess of city hall counts. She is a failure extraordinaire.
ReplyDeleteBarth isn't running because she couldn't face the likelihood of an embarrassing defeat, with so much of her past support having abandoned her. Now she is going to poison Blakespeare's run, and Blakespeare has no idea what is going to hit her in the election. She thinks raising money from wealthy friends is some sign of support. A big surprise is on the way to her.
ReplyDeleteBlakespear's campaign to date has offered nothing beyond generic statements, evasive responses, and snarky comments about her opponents' financials. Barth may be poisoning Blakespear, but Blakespear is in willing lockstep with Barth; no arm-twisting there.
DeleteBarth…. a wasted opportunity.
ReplyDeleteNext City Council needs to act on its Number 1 prior and hire a real City Manager. Step 1- Nothing else matters as much.
"While others just criticize and complain, Catherine gets things done."
ReplyDeleteAnd so, the blog posters pick up the flag and just criticize and complain.
I would like to see a list of things that Catherine has "done." I am not trying to be disrespectful. This is a serious question. Could Teresa provide examples and details? Thanks.
DeleteNo, the blog posters - many of whom are doers - are the messengers. Barth blames the messengers and labels them obstructionists and complainers. God forbid the messengers get between Barth and her lovefest with Vina.
DeleteAnon cry baby's ,I'm don't think anybody is afraid of you.What a sad pathetic you all are.
ReplyDelete6:41-
ReplyDeleteresidents got the density bonus restrictions approved by active leadership and pressure on Barth
residents got the Desert Rose EIR passed- Barth voted against resident safety
Residents temporarliy stopped the Barth Shaffer Kranz tax hike
Residents got Prop A passed against the wishes of residents
Teresa Barth wrongly claimed some sexual harrassment suit to further her own ego and agenda in hopes the community would feel sorry for her- she is a selfish self-centered egosist who has achived nothing
Sentence #4? But I think I know what you meant.
Delete6:41
DeleteI kinda agree with,"While others just criticize and complain, Catherine gets things done."
Actually Mrs. Barth has been dealing with the inequity of density bonus issue for many years.
Actually, the EIR has not been passed. Additionally I do not believe that Barth has ever voted against resident safety.
Residents did not temporarily stop the barth shafferer krantz tax hike.
The council was merely responsably asking staff about a option that the city has.
I do agree with your statements, "Residence got prop a past against the wishes of residence."
And Barth had strong grounds for a lawsuit but she was not an employee of the city. The abuses of Stocks and Friends are well known and documented.
I see a better city and city government because of Barth's leadership.
8:19 a few facts-
DeleteDebt under Barth- up more than $30 million dollars with no plan to pay it back except raising taxes
Debt service under Barth- increased more than $1 million a year while park maintanence, trails, rail quiet zones remain unfunded
Road maintenance- deteriorated under 8 years of Barth's failed leadership
Wasteful spending- Barth approved ridiculous payments like $1 million for MIG to push her high density development for millenials and supported the payments to Norby to lead ERAC and promote 5 story buildings- she then signed her name to untruths in the ballot statements
the positive changes in Encinitas have happened because of the residents and in spite of Teresa Barth. That Barth does not want to giv credit to residents and instead wants to 'hog the glory' is telling. She is selfish and me first.
Residents got Dan Dalager voted out of office
Residents got Jerome Stocks voted out of office
Residents got the Nichols road report released
Residents stopped the Barth-Shaffer-Kranz Tax Hike
Residents got the EIR done to protect safey at Desert Rose
Residents got the city to pass density bonus restrictions
Barth has voted exactly the same way as Jerome Stocks on 95% of the issues.
Barth has been more rude to residents speaking at city hall then Stocks ever was
Barth did waste taxpayer money on a frivolous sexual harrassment type lawsuit so her then supporters would feel sorry for her.
oh yea- Barth opposed the residents right to vote on density increases, and so does Blakespear. So much for trust and transparency when you can hide behind misinformation and lies.
Huh? How about the Starbucks on Leucadia that Barth voted for?? Resident safety was brought up as an issue and she ignored it.
DeleteHow about Barth's embarrassing doggedness in making her losing and lying arguments that the Coastal Commission would bifurcate the city under Prop A?
Please...the list goes on and on. Barth is underhanded, duplicitous, and nasty toward residents who criticize City policies.
Blakespear is so new to Encinitas politics, it's laughable that anyone makes the claim "She gets things done." Entirely absent until this year as part of her campaign, exactly where has Blakespear been getting "things done?"
8:35 Agree with most of your post. Barth did not waste taxpayer money on a lawsuit. She asked the question if she was legally a city employee, a question that should and could have been easily answered. Jerome and Sabine (in my opinion) used it as an opportunity to besmirch her by paying big bucks to an outside attorney for a legal opinion. PapaM ran that story no less than four times.
DeleteCabezon
8:42- the Starbucks on Leucadia blvd at the I-5 is NOT a safety issue....
Delete2:21 - Actually...it is. Minor fender benders, traffic backed up to the east side of the freeway and on the off ramp have placed it on a watch list with the Traffic Commission. Next step is escalation to "nuisance," which could signal trouble for the developer. Never mind that the City signed off on the project, eyes wide open....
DeleteCome on. Ever been to Starbucks early morning to see the line of cars blocking traffic? This is exactly the poor planning that Encinitas is known for just to grab some tax revenue. Short sighted.
DeleteAccident reported just this past week. Apparently a Starbucks shopper thought a sideswipe was necessary.
DeleteYawn, not a story, Barth is leaving. More important than what Barth hasn't done or Blakespeare won't do is what Julie will do.
ReplyDelete-MGJ
Blakespear - another snake in the grass with an agenda for her special interests. Barth wants to remain in the back room atmosphere of the monied manipulators to try and bask in a rapidly fading self sense of glory. Good riddance to her failed tenure.
ReplyDeleteBarth will go down as the WORST council member the city has EVER had!!!
ReplyDeleteWorse than $tock$? Is that possible???
Delete$tock$ still has the worse title by far !
DeleteDallager and Gaspar would still be ahead of her...
DeleteShe is definitely worst then Stocks! At least he told it to you straight and did not lie on his positions.
Delete$tock$ still holds the title of being the worst council member/mayor ever in the history of this city, followed by Guerin who knew nothing about politics (she can be classified as the "dumbest"), followed by Dallagher, followed by Barth, and I'm sure Gaspar will be right behind them all.
DeleteNope. Hands down it is Barth.
DeleteImmaterial. She's leaving office, just like Stocks, Dallager, Bond. You guys sure have a lot of time on your hands to keeping rehashing this every day.
DeleteHow about emailing Julie and asking how you can help her campaign....
It helps to point out fakespear is being endorsed by a failure.
DeleteAn endorsement from Barth is the kiss of death.
ReplyDeleteWhat has Blakespeare done for the city? What is Barth referring to?
ReplyDeleteShe's not referring to anything specific, just hoping folks will think Blakespear's got a laundry list of accomplishment to show. You know, you repeat something often enough...Blakespear's short on specifics, long on vague references.
DeleteBarth also says she likes children.
ReplyDeleteTherefore . . .
I hate children.
If that were true why is Barth leaving them a mountain of debt and increased taxes? Responsible parents position their kids to suceed, Barth has positioned the city to fail.
DeleteSanta Maria, what a low blow. I dare you to say that her face. Absolute lack of class and dignity. Get a life...
DeleteWatch carefully her behavior and make your own conclusions.
DeleteKnock it off.
ReplyDeleteAgree. The kid bit is too much.
DeleteBack to the Barth n' Blakespear show of smoke, mirrors, and innuendo.
Perhaps the point of the "kid bit" went over your head. In this echo chamber, a Barth endorsement is a negative for Blakespear. The simplistic view is that Barth is so reviled and wrong that anything Barth is for (children and Blakespear), we should reflexively be against.
DeleteNews flash. This echo chamber isn't a representative sample of the whole community. There are plenty of voters who still support Barth, and who are influenced by her endorsement.
Mr. Green Jeans made a great point that was completely ignored. It's not a winning plan to run against Barth (who isn't on the ballot), and tar Blakespear with guilt by association.
Loud, angry, and negative doesn't win elections.
I got the point, all right, but saying she didn't have kids because she hates them...no one knows her story on that. I'm about as opposed to Barth as they come, but that's out of bounds in my book. As for "plenty of voters," I assume you're counting the majority of residents who do not watch the city closely and it is true that they may be swayed by Barth's endorsement. Anyone who knows better, however, cannot stand the woman.
Delete2:45,
DeleteAh. Got it. Agree. Yes. I was talking about the voters who don't follow city politics closely.
Yup, the echo chamber is in full effect. I've said it once, I'll say it again. Most voters will not be aware of Barth, Gaspar, Kranz, Shaffer, Muir, let alone new people who are running.
DeleteEach election is a ramp up to educate the 80-90% of voters (if they vote) who aren't engaged in local politics. A lot of politics locally is personal, you vote for your neighbor, the guy at your church, the lady from the soccer league.
That's how Dallager got in, and Tony as well. Teresa had support in Cardiff, Gaspar had the Rotary club. You get my point.
If you want Julie to get in, you better be prepared to donate money, host a meet and greet, go door to door etc..Blakespeare has help from Shaffer, and agree with her politics or not, Shaffer knows about running for office in the modern world. That includes Social Media and all the bells and whistles.
Right now, she has to be considered the favorite because of the money she's raised and the support she has. Just saw a yard sign on Neptune in Leucadia this morning....
Out of Bounds Comments - Since when have we care about boundaries? Come on, you can't just pick and choose what comments you like and don't like.
DeleteWhy on earth not??
DeleteCommenting about people's family lives is out of bounds. Keep it on their record, that's it. Or didn't your parents teach you that?
DeleteIt was a well known at city hall that Stocks,Dalagar and Bond were huggy kissy feely and you should stay away from them, It was bad.Ya the good old boys don't you miss them.All Gaspar dear friends.If you recall Gaspar was on a mailer with Dalagar----- well birds of a feather flock together !!!!!!!
ReplyDelete2:35 I have talked with a number of voters who do not go to city hall, get Barth's newsletter, but have a negative view of her. Barth did nothing for Rossini Creek in cardiff, Barth did nothing for Desert Rose in Olivenhain. Barth had to be pulled kicking and screaming to do something about Density increases at Fulvia and Balour, Barth failed to take timely action to get a better price on PV, Barth backs VIna who is despised by far more than hsi so called gang of 28, and oh yes, Barth lied on the Prop A ballot statement-
ReplyDeleteBlakespear hitching her wagon to Barth may yet be a risky strategy-
6:02,
ReplyDeleteA "number of voters" you say?
Well, that certainly sounds statistically significant.
I stand corrected. Julie should focus her campaign on Barth's record.
6:02 Nice try to distract- the comment was only about Barth and Blakepear. It is killing Barth that she will no longer have a place of prestige in the community. She would have loved to run. She desperately held little meet and greets with her one time supporters and found that most would not vote for her.
DeleteSure- there were stack and pack high density lawyers that woudl support here- but her support had withered away-
Ask people in Olivenhain at Desert Rose- or the neighbors at Fulvia, or Balour- talk to folks in Cardiff about her lack or response at Rossini Creek-
funniest of all is if Blakespear should win she'll kick Barth to the curb within 6 months-
Gaspar hitching her wagon to STOCKS OR DALAGAR way smart. ----------------- NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?
ReplyDeleteGASpar has been tied to $tock$ from the time she got to sit in the big chair. He continues to pull and manage her puppet strings. She can not do anything without him or her mommy leading her by the nose.
DeleteOH YA AND FAKE MAYOR
ReplyDelete2:41 is on a fishing expedition, but no one is taking the bait.
ReplyDeleteBetter luck next time.
Sounds to me that 2:41 makes a fair offer.
ReplyDelete