Wednesday, October 22, 2014

10/22/14 City Council meeting open thread

The current city council has continued prior councils' practice of not providing written summary minutes of council discussion, but only "action minutes" which state the outcomes. Encinitas Undercover will provide a forum for observers to record what occurs at each council meeting.

Please use the comments to record your observations.



65 comments:

  1. Horse before the cart?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Great presentations from Duff Pickering and Bob Bonde!

    ReplyDelete
  3. "In perpetuity is a long time."

    Kristen Gaspar.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not if your last name is Ecke, Meyer, Harwood or Calkins

      Delete
  4. Congratulations Lynn and Russ Marr!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What is crabby Barth's deal? Why did she abstain?
      She will be around for only another month, but she wants to go out this way?

      Delete
    2. Lynn is the worst thing for the Encinitas tax payer. Barth was smart and I support her over the Mars. What a sad bunch of loser council folks just like the Marrs.

      Delete
    3. Marr/Braun could have had their problems solved years ago if they would have requested a building permit and brought their unit up to code. That is required of all of us. Why do they feel they were the exception to the rule? They didn't play by the rules and it took hundreds of thousands of dollars, staff time, not to mention the tax payer's time listening to her years of ranting.

      They still have to pay for a permit and monthly costs to help reimburse the city for some of their loss.

      Lynn Marr was not as smart as she thought she was as it turns out. The city attorney will still be in the same chair.

      Delete
    4. Lynn Marr just had a six figure lien removed by public outcry due to her popularity and standing in encinitas, pretty darn smart I would say. Barth showed her true colors once again.

      Delete
    5. Not to worry. Before all is said and done she'll be getting another lien placed on the property.

      Delete
    6. Move on people, it's good to have the Marr issue over with. It's a total distraction. Whoever got did the mediation on this one gets a gold star...

      Delete
    7. 7:23 AM

      "Move on ..."? When do the people here ever move on. Only because they are one of your own do you say it.

      Delete
    8. Marrs did request a permit years ago, although a permit for the structure was already on record. City attorney and previous Council, including Barth, would not allow the Marrs to permit through the affordable unit policy; they wanted to drag the case out in court, for the attorney fees.

      Delete
    9. 7:23, I'm glad Tony went to bat for Lynn.

      Delete
  5. I second 6:57's post. Good job by the 2 council members and the Marr's. Their daughter, Nichole, was awesome. What a great day. Relief finally.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Screwed the tax payers. what a bunch of ticks.

      Delete
    2. Previous council, the planning dept., under Patrick Murphy, and the City Attorney robbed the taxpayers, not the Marrs. It was smart of Sabine and Council to put this behind them. That lien was for the City Attorney's fees and 10% interest per year, although Sabine was long ago paid those fees.

      Those attorney fees were not owed by the Marrs; they were never going to be collected; the City never tried to collect.

      Delete
  6. Now Tony is talking about fencing off the school, whether it is salvageable, and a timeline. It sounds like his new developer friends have given him something to read again!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Shaffer taking about using the outdoor space right away. I guess the public will have to work around workers in haz mat suits removing asbestos!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Or citizens milling about in tinfoil hats.

      Delete
    2. 7:32, There's less asbestos at PV than any other old school in town. Keep it up Chicken Lil'.

      Delete
  8. I remember someone telling me the city was broke and badly mismanaged

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed. If it were not broke and badly mismanaged, they would fund the road maintenance backlog, fund the unfunded pension liabilities, fund the road safety improvement backlog, and stop trying to pass sales tax and use fee increases.

      $5 million is a drop in the bucket of the reckless unfunded liabilities. That doesn't even cover the capital accounts they raided last year.

      Delete
    2. EU,

      Is there a better managed city in CA by your measures? One with no deferred maintenance and no underfunded pension liability?

      Or should you rename your signature post "every single city in California is broke and mismanaged"?

      Delete
    3. 9:04 PM

      As if EU knew how to manage a city.

      Delete
  9. Does anyone understand what Gaspar is talking about,our should I say babble.WHAT A LOSER!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Yes. Gaspar is asking about their mushy math! Good job!

    ReplyDelete
  11. GASPAR BLAH BLAH BLAH you no the term nimby she's a nobly NO NO NO NO

    ReplyDelete
  12. Gaspar is finally asking financial questions.
    Property tax was 2.9 million more than expected. Those million dollar density bonus properties add up.
    The other 2.7 million was in cost savings. More raiding of funds.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Vina claiming the housing element update outreach efforts are going very well. LOL

    ReplyDelete
  14. Vina said he will reach out to Mr Duffy when it is Duff Pickering. What out Vino!

    ReplyDelete
  15. As predicted, Gaspar is not educated when in comes to financing. She may do alright in her husband's therapy business because that's as easy as balancing your checkbook. Unfortunately, when there are tons of accounts and advanced financial methods and procedures it is way over her head. Her lack of finance came shining through tonight.

    We need a mayor who gets it. What an air head.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She asked some good questions on the "unofficial" CAFR. Still wouldn't vote for her because of the Andreen upzoning tete a tete.

      Delete
    2. Give her credit for asking the financial questions. Draw the line with her involvement with Mike Andreen and upzoning. Vote for Sheila and Julie.

      Delete
    3. It's just before the election and this is one of the few times Gaspar has ever brought up any financial matters except for PV. She needed another feather in her cap tonight because she is using her children on Facebook to garner more money for her campaign. I guess the bars didn't give as much as she wanted.

      My vote is for Sheila and Julie along with a lot of others who feel the same way.

      Muir has put on some more pounds. What is up with that man? The only words he knows is "as it relates to". Other than that, his voice is so soft you can't hear him. He needs more oxygen in those lungs and less body fat. Breathe Muir, breathe. Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

      Delete
    4. Gaspar has been on council now for 4 years and she still has no clue how a city budget works. We need to send her packing.

      Be gone Gaspar. Poof (she loves magic tricks).

      Delete
    5. Gaspar hasn't a clue how city's finances operate. It is easy to make generalized claims of experience and competence, because you know you will never be called on it or can avoid embarrassing questions by laying low. Vina is totally calling the shots for her, along with her developer and bar backers.

      Delete
  16. Council are the Devil for supporting Vina. Vina is a total loser and cost the Encinitas Millions of dollars over day that incompetent guy is in office.

    Once we get a real council we will punt Vina, like a case of crabs.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Yes, 9pm that is what needs to happen but someone please name any of the current council members or the mayor who will do that. Go ahead, name even one. You cannot. No one can.

    We do have a chance to have two members who will pursue this ending of our own little slimey in our midst with Sheila and Julie up there on the dais. Sure, you can claim they would be a minority but with their motivation up there finally representing the residents, there would be others who would recognize which way the wind is blowing and join them or be shown the door in two years.

    What the heck is Muir doing while he is up there? His small minded comment after the done deal about not approving of the tax exempt status being used is as ignorant as it comes. Was he not listening to what we all heard and why the bonds are being constructed as they are? Two years cannot come soon enough and he is not alone among that crew but after observing him for the last couple of years I am bewildered at his constant bewilderment. He often asks questions that were already asked and answered and yet he remains uninformed. Duh.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed, Muir is dumber than he looks or he is drinking too much of the bad stuff. His mind is not there.

      Delete
    2. Compared to those other idiots, he's a genius!

      Delete
    3. I did notice that they are using outside attorneys to fight the BIA. At least they are smart enough to do that.

      Delete
    4. 12:10 All of that genius Muir has must be rubbing off from his friends $tock$, Gaspar and Andreen. Now that's one smart group.

      Delete
    5. "Tried and tested" I think that was the hash on Muir's campaign signs last election. I now suspect he was referring to the double-double at In N' Out!

      Delete
  18. Just turned into the council meeting expecting another 6-8 hour meeting...... But noooooo, it's the Lucy show with guest star Jack Benny. Now that's entertaining television. Finally something worth watches vs those morons on the council.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Did anyone read Shaffer's latest missive on last night? Why does she have to be such a witch?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I did. I agree with her.

      Delete
    2. new article up on the Beacon, seems there were other things that happened at the meeting Shaffer didn't inform her readers about-

      Delete
  20. It's appalling to see how little Gaspar nows about finance and she's been in office how long.I think her title of CFO at her husbands business is in name only like they have check machine with her name in coded .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was not surprised at all. Gaspar has no idea about a budget, finances, or how a city runs. She's been on council for four years now and she is as blind as when she first started.

      Her voting record has done nothing for this city. The only word she understands is "NO".

      Listen up Gaspar - "NO to you for mayor". Sounds good to me.

      Delete
    2. The CFO is a phony title. Gaspar is clueless on managing the finances of a city and has demonstrated it during the last 4 years.

      Delete
  21. All the back-slapping over the la Veta case is premature.

    The Marrs are addicted to drama. This is a long process and we are at step zero.

    Grab some popcorn and pull up a chair.

    I hope I am wrong. Time will tell. I will say it was a new Lynn that decided to say nothing when the agenda item was going well; that was refreshing surprise. I was expecting a recitation of bogus and failed old legal claims. Whoever convinced her to let the daughter do all the talking is the real hero.

    ReplyDelete
  22. 8:22 you seem to wish this mess would go on and on so you can continue to rail on the Marr's. It is a done deal. Both parties have come to an agreement. Too bad for you. If both parties have reached a settlement, you lose out.

    The city and the Marr's have somehow achieved this without your input. What a blessing.

    You hope you are wrong? Your chiming in shows what you were really hoping for and it isn't that you were wrong. Move on. This is a done deal. One less issue you can use to express your negative feelings for this couple who were mistreated so abysmally over 16 years for a never declared illegal accessory unit.

    I wish their $900 charge for registering their unit had been comped for all the needless stress they were put through but this is finally over.

    Thank you Tony and Kristen for finally doing the right thing with their case.

    The only gift of public funds by removing the liens went to sabine and his firm to the tune of almost a hundred grand that they have already been paid. Just what service did they perform for our city that they should have been paid for any of this? He gets to line his and his firms pockets with no accountability.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 8:40, believe what you want. I do hope it works out, but there is a history of behavior that cannot be ignored as a risk. Also, the deal itself has some difficult challenges.

      Specifically, quoting the staff report summary of the deal: "2. The unit will be brought into compliance with the current California Building and Uniform Fire Codes."

      I'm not an expert, but there have been many changes to construction codes since this structure was built, and many of them would be cost prohibitive to remedy. In fact, it might be cheaper the scrape the structure and rebuild.

      What happens when the code enforcement officer finds that lead pipe or solder is used in the plumbing? What happens if the joist or stud spacing is deemed out of spec? What happens to the deal if the roof pitch is found to be insufficient? What happens if the electrical conductor, insulation, connectors, and/or junction boxes do not conform to current code? What happens when there is no seismic strapping connecting the structure to the slab?

      I'm just suggesting that it's a little early to spike the football, that's all. There's a long way to go yet.

      Delete
    2. Current building and fire codes allow for legal non conformities. There will be an inspection for health and safety. Why are you so worried about this, anyway?

      Delete
  23. I for one would be willing to donate my labor to help with any needed modifications, if there are any. No specifics have ever been offered as of yet, so where do your defeatist implications of substandard conditions coming from besides your own imagination?

    This has nothing to do with why they have been subjected to needless prosecution for the last 16 years. We all know why they were they were subjected to such malicious attacks.

    Their courage to stand up for this community no matter the consequences has and will remain admirable. When our history is written they will be a positive and those who pursued them will be dishonored.

    That they have been subjected to such unprecedented singular scrutiny for their honorable civic attempts to hold council and staff accountable is shameful. History will not be denied in the end.

    The Marr's vindication is secure and their opponents can do nothing but implicate themselves personally from this point on.

    I am sure this will not end those who seek to discredit them at every opportunity but know this will only come back at you as you have become what you rail against the most.

    Mirror,mirror on the wall, please show these blinded single track minded ones what they truly are and what they have become in the publics eye.









    ReplyDelete
  24. You are welcome to believe that a 40-year-old building will magically conform to 2014 codes, no matter how silly that thought is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are welcome to mind your own business. The City cannot legally practice selective enforcement, and Encinitas Municipal Code and California Government Code both recognize that newer laws are not retroactive unless they specifically state, in the codes' language, that they are retrospective.

      Delete
  25. Ever hear of legal nonconforming? There are a multitude of these around here and if Planning would ever get behind bringing all these in, we could tell the BIA and all the others hoping to cash in on destroying this towns character to take a hike.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You can argue what should be; I'm talking about what is.

      This settlement rests on a specific written agreement. The proposed language both sides have agreed to includes neither the specific phrase, nor the general concept of legal nonconforming.

      Current building and fire code conformance seem to be the required standard in the settlement agreement.

      In legal matters, it's best to stick with the the precise language and facts relevant to the written agreement.

      Delete
    2. A settlement agreement, which is a contract, doesn't have to mention the specific phrase, "legal nonconforming." That is part of city and state codes, already. Laws do not have to be recited to be relevant to a contract.

      Someone's anonymous interpretation is of what "seems to be required" is of no relevance.

      Obsessive, negative projections are just more trash talk; those biased and predictable opinions are of no importance to any of the parties involved in reaching consensus and complying with the settlement.

      Delete