6:53 PM, familiarize yourself with the process: https://www.encinitasca.gov/Portals/0/City%20Documents/Documents/Development%20Services/Planning/Land%20Development/Citizen%27s%20Participation%20Plan%20-%20Handout.pdf
At last night's meeting when an appeal regarding rebuilding on a lot overlooking Moonlight Beach came up as an action item, Blakespear looked at the audience and asked if a member there was the architect for the project. When the answer was yes, Blakespear recused herself, saying she just realized she had a conflict of interest because she has a personal and professional relationship with the architect.
She instantly turned the gavel over to Kranz, who instantly asked Sabine if the three remaining council members (Hubbard was absent) could decide the issue. Sabine said only if the vote was unanimous — two of three couldn't decide.
Kranz called a recess so the parties could confer with him and Sabine and decide if they wanted to postpone to a later meeting.
The course of action by Blakespear, Kranz and Sabine was too quick and too certain not to have been planned in advance. Blakespear's claim of just realizing the conflict was totally bogus. Very unfortunately, the behavior was typical of this council.
10:06 AM why would our "pro-developer", "approve everything" mayor and council look to delay a recommended denial to an appeal that would allow new development to proceed?
Ummm running scared of increasing numbers of lawsuits from residents, perhaps? Finally trying to at least have the appearance of coloring inside the lines? Wild guess.
11:24 It's not new development. It's renovating and expanding an existing house. What did the applicant and appellant decide to do after talking with Kranz and Sabine? Did the item go forward, or did they decide to delay till Hubbard is back?
4:16 Watch the tape and decide for yourself if her recusal and passing to Kranz and Sabine wasn't set up in advance. The point is she was disingenuous, as usual.
It appears developers no longer have to hold community participation meetings to the neighbors.
ReplyDeleteAll they have to do now is send out newsletters.
Brilliant! For developers sure thing. Not so much for concerned neighbors.
More bs from the city. Add in the environmental assessment in place of an EIR and the sheet never stops.
Vote the three running next year out!
6:53 PM, familiarize yourself with the process:
Deletehttps://www.encinitasca.gov/Portals/0/City%20Documents/Documents/Development%20Services/Planning/Land%20Development/Citizen%27s%20Participation%20Plan%20-%20Handout.pdf
Gas or electric? The difference in the effects on our environment are negligible.
ReplyDeleteBan them all. Other cities in our state have already done that. We can too.
Either suck it up or use a broom and dustpan, and recycle the debris where it can be be reused.
If council is genuine, yes I know that is wholly imaginary, in supporting a climate action plan, this could show some genuine effort.
Oh, never mind. They just voted. Big surprise. Not.
Blakespear and her council puppets need to go!
ReplyDelete6:53 PM
ReplyDeleteWas this information on the council agenda? Which agenda item?
At last night's meeting when an appeal regarding rebuilding on a lot overlooking Moonlight Beach came up as an action item, Blakespear looked at the audience and asked if a member there was the architect for the project. When the answer was yes, Blakespear recused herself, saying she just realized she had a conflict of interest because she has a personal and professional relationship with the architect.
ReplyDeleteShe instantly turned the gavel over to Kranz, who instantly asked Sabine if the three remaining council members (Hubbard was absent) could decide the issue. Sabine said only if the vote was unanimous — two of three couldn't decide.
Kranz called a recess so the parties could confer with him and Sabine and decide if they wanted to postpone to a later meeting.
The course of action by Blakespear, Kranz and Sabine was too quick and too certain not to have been planned in advance. Blakespear's claim of just realizing the conflict was totally bogus. Very unfortunately, the behavior was typical of this council.
Don’t reproduce.
Delete10:06 AM why would our "pro-developer", "approve everything" mayor and council look to delay a recommended denial to an appeal that would allow new development to proceed?
DeleteUmmm running scared of increasing numbers of lawsuits from residents, perhaps? Finally trying to at least have the appearance of coloring inside the lines? Wild guess.
Delete11:24 It's not new development. It's renovating and expanding an existing house. What did the applicant and appellant decide to do after talking with Kranz and Sabine? Did the item go forward, or did they decide to delay till Hubbard is back?
DeleteNo idea, why don't you watch the video and report back?
DeletePostponed until sometime in August.
DeleteA conspiracy theory, with the only evidence being the speed with which the mayor recognized the face of the architect?
DeleteWe are all dumber for having read that comment.
4:16 Watch the tape and decide for yourself if her recusal and passing to Kranz and Sabine wasn't set up in advance. The point is she was disingenuous, as usual.
DeleteYellow vests!!
ReplyDeleteBroken record!!
Delete