Wednesday, July 21, 2021

Affordable unit sells to La Jolla LLC

From the Inbox:

Attached is the paperwork for Marco's VERY low income home in the Desert Rose/Loden Development. Who knew that a LaJolla LLC could buy it for $111, 000? Marco Gonzalez was the Desert Rose "entitlement" attorney. Note that the City Manager signed off on this when it is usually the Planning Director who approves.

City docs.


Nice deal. The rent covers the carrying cost and when the deed restriction expires you've got a property worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. Was this a competitive bidding situation?

126 comments:

  1. This is outrageous! Desert Rose neighbors advocated for the actual low income family living on the horse ranch to get this house. Between all of the family members, they could have come up with the 5% downpayment to purchase this property. Instead of doing something that could have resulted in actual public benefit for the neighborhood, Marco Gonzalez suggested that the local residents were racists that did not want to live near brown people. Many predicted that this was the way it was going to go down.

    http://encinitasundercover.blogspot.com/search?q=Marco+Bullshit

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Beware the race hustlers!

      Delete
    2. Gonzales is interested in only one thing - lining his own pockets.

      Delete
  2. https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/news/marco-gonzalez-calls-bullshit-on-dense-development-objectors/

    ReplyDelete
  3. This MUST be reported to the Equity Committee. Stat!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Am I imagining things, or is Marco's name really associated with every slimy deal that goes down? While he takes the moral high ground?

    ReplyDelete
  5. So, the builder sold the unit to an LLC that owns/manages both market rate and affordable units all over the region. And this is surprising why?

    The sale doesn't change the facts that the future renter(s) must meet qualified income levels and that the rents charged must be consistent with the City's published affordable rent scale.

    Yes, in 55 years, this company will own an asset worth more, but that's exactly how the program was designed to work at the time the project was approved. There is no obligation to sell the unit; only to ensure it meets affordability requirements.

    The City now requires inclusionary units to be dedicated affordable in perpetuity, but that's a relatively recent change.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, that didn't take long LOL.

      Delete
  6. Blakespear said in a recent "equity" meeting that yeah, someone low-income gets displaced, but "someone new gets to live there."

    That "someone new" can afford a ton more in rent than the displaced person, but hey don't let that interfere with her frantic mission to virtue signal her way to the senate.

    And we know who advises her, right? These people would not admit to their hypocrisy if their lives depended on it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Presuming there are a couple of people here who care about facts, at the time the Desert Rose project was approved, there was no legal requirement to assess or replace on site affordable units when proposing a density bonus project. That changed January 1, 2015. No project being considered today can eliminate existing affordable units without including replacement in their calculation of new units proposed.

      Delete
    2. You know what reasonable people hear, Marco? "Blah blah blah it's the law." Your facts stink to high heaven and that stink you cannot wash off.

      Delete
    3. I actually feel sorry for Marco's law partners. His well-earned reputation as a liar serves to repell any legitimate legal work that could come to that firm. More less, his only clients now are development connected. Most people in this town would not have anything to with him or Coast Law, and we are spreading the word.

      Delete
    4. I don't. Lie with dogs, get fleas.

      Delete
    5. Feel sorry for my law partners? Sure, I get it. I mean, after 17 years of successful operations here in Encinitas my law partners certainly feel the ill effects of nameless trolls on a barely-read NIMBY blog...

      And FTR, anyone who wants to "out" themselves and come by my office, I'd be more than happy to sit down and discuss the scope of what my partners and I actually work on. You may be surprised.

      Delete
  7. A little condo is worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. That house is worth well over a million now. Who knows how many millions it will be worth in 55 years and who will own it then?

    ReplyDelete
  8. That unit was supposed be Sold to a VLI family/Individual, not to some filthy rich developer, for $112,000.
    The home next door to this VLI home just Sold for $2,325,000 Million
    An asset worth more- HA
    Affordable in perpetuity-HA Nolan is saying that it’s 30 years not 55 years. Do they know something
    that we don’t?
    Like the Echter property that is Agri-In-Perpetuty, but was approved for the R-30 up zone.
    The same changes can be made so that they only have to be held for 30 years or less!

    ReplyDelete
  9. BIAspear-Gonzalez is effectively converting Encinitas to LA style of development - stack and pack. They will not stop until everywhere is congested like rats crawling all over eachother. :(

    ReplyDelete
  10. All you Karens who voted for Blakespear, voted for Gonzalez to move full speed ahead with ruining Encinitas and CA.

    I hate Karens who are clueless, and that is like 95% fo them.

    Leucadia Town Council is full of them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As much as I hate that term "Karen," I have to agree that anyone who voted for Blakespear/cronies have themselves to thank for our ruination.

      Gonzalez is just a tool in their toolkit.

      Delete
  11. The same blakespear and her girlfriends that changed the zoning in Olivenhain from horse property to ghetto apartments making very happy the rat boy randy "no good" goodson. A punk if there ever was one. Watch your back.

    ReplyDelete
  12. As Marco says, it may have been legal at the time, but it certainly certainly isn't ethical EVER. His intimate relationship with Blakespear and the BIA means he will continue to exploit the affordable housing laws for his own benefit and not for those who desperately need the housing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're a very special kind of idiot, seriously. Intimate relationship with the BIA? They effing hate the fact that I've sued the County over bad sprawl policies (CAP, VMT regs, multiple projects over decades). Why peddle lies? Come out from behind your anonymous curtain and have a real discussion. You think we don't know most of you are the same kooks who run your mouths on EV and decry the fact that you and your candidates so badly lost the last election? There's a reason Encinitas doesn't agree with you...

      Delete
    2. The reason is $$$$$$.

      Delete
    3. Marco, there's a famous line you may recognize.
      It comes to many a mind whenever you try to explain yourself. Edited for your gender: "The man doth protest too much, methinks."

      Delete
    4. I prefer Charles Mackay: “You have no enemies, you say? Alas, my friend, the boast is poor. He who has mingled in the fray of duty that the brave endure, must have made foes. If you have none, small is the work that you have done. You’ve hit no traitor on the hip. You’ve dashed no cup from perjured lip. You’ve never turned the wrong to right. You’ve been a coward in the fight.” And I'd add, hiding behind anonymity on this page is further reflection of your cowardice, all of you.

      Delete
    5. I can see why you would prefer that, given your situation.

      Delete
    6. Well OK Mr. BIAspear-Gonzalez. Thanks Marco that was special.

      I love the part were you turn wrong to right. Like they way you support policies and developers to turn a former really cool surf town into OC. Surf town to Big Town. You are a hero!

      You might want to watch your hip, traidor.

      Delete
  13. Before I ever met Goodson or Marco, I heard stories from normally reserved people about how evil they both were. Amazingly, I heard the same complaints from a range of different people, and their single names have been used as punchlines for jokes for years. Now that I have seen them both in action, I get it!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Per Section 3.F of the recorded Affordable Housing Agreement, the owners may request to sell to a "Non-Qualifying Household" with priori written approval from the Department Director.

    So the city decides in the end whether a family or an LLC can purchase the property. Thanks city. Yuck.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sale to a non-qualified household doesn't extinguish the covenant. The City would assess whether the buyer has the capacity to manage the affordable rental consistent with the housing agreement.

      Delete
    2. In politics this is called a win-win. You get to pretend you are helping low income folks while kissing multi-millionaire ass.

      Delete
    3. A bridge to sell anyone who doesn't second-guess whatever the attorney claims. This is where a history of having a loose relationship with the truth comes back to bite.

      Delete
    4. Love how you assume that the original post needed educatin' there MG. Affordable housing as practicappears to be in Encinitas is another form o We shall see how that plays out..f corporate ownership rentals.

      Delete
    5. @Marco. Your obligation is to your client. It just appears that your clients are dicks, so your affiliation with them is where you’re getting this backlash. Sure the language is ambiguous in the deed but common sense would tell you that all qualified buyers should be considered before non-qualified buyers. But common sense is the problem, it’s not that common. The city and the developer hide behind bullshit language of the deed that allows them to sell to non qualified buyers with the city’s approval, taking away the very spirit of a VLI unit. Developers don’t care about looking like dicks, otherwise they wouldn’t do things like this. Not to mention the complete waste of time for VLI buyers and false hopes of home ownership.

      Delete
  15. Thank you for real facts, 12:47.

    This happened under this council's watch. Could their agreement confirm the oft-repeated observation that the "entitlement attorney" appears to have both of the mayor's ears?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Santiara LLC owns quite a few homes whose property taxes would suggest they are the affordable unit of a neighborhood. It would be interesting to see who holds the title of the affordable units of recent (past 15 years?) developments.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Er, since 2013, which is when Santiara was incorporated..

      Delete
  17. And another thing for Lorri and the EV crew on here, since you continue to enjoy talking shit about me over there where I can't respond. EV is still a public page. I can see everything you write, I just can't respond, which I'm sure is just how you like it. While I'm sure you all enjoy your conspiracy theories, please note: I have no relationship whatsoever with the LLC that purchased the Desert Rose affordable unit. In fact, I've had very little to do with the current owners/builders since they purchased the project and started construction. But feel free to continue peddling your lies, conspiracies, and general musings to the echo chamber. I'm always happy to engage, even with cowards.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What was your relationship in setting up the language for disposition of the affordable unit? You're careful to say you have nothing to do with the LLC, what about the rest of it? You were involved with the developer, right?

      This is why you are so mistrusted: you consistently lie by omission. So how about trying to reclaim what you say is your good name by being honest about the part you did play?

      Did you help write or advise on the loophole language in the agreement that would allow the city to decide if the low-income unit could go to a non-affordable qualified renter or buyer?

      Delete
    2. The problem is not that I omit anything, it's that people like you try to read into things that don't exist.

      I had zero to do with the disposition of the affordable unit. Didn't know it was happening. Don't know the buyer. Didn't advise the builder one iota about it.

      What I do know is that the language in the agreement with the city is not unique to this deal. I've seen it in other agreements both here in Encinitas, and in other jurisdictions around the region and state. See, this isn't "loophole language" -- that's your conspiratorial leanings coming out -- but rather, standard practice.

      The City needs confirmation that affordable properties are rented or sold in accordance with their deed restrictions, so there are regular (typically annual) reporting requirements. This "loophole" doesn't change the fact that a future non-conforming buyer still has to report to the city how the occupancy (versus ownership) continues to comply with the deed restriction for its stated length.

      Delete
    3. Would it be legal for the city in future to remove the language that allows the intent of the law to be subverted?

      "Standard practice" does not mean it's right or that it's not a loophole, especially when we have folks like your client David Meyer stating publicly "I know more than anyone about density bonus law because I helped write it."

      Finally, as far as reporting city staff admits it has not kept affordable unit records current. SOP at city hall.

      If not to do with the density bonus unit itself, what was your involvement with Desert Rose, if you don't mind?

      Delete
    4. First, no, the City does not have discretion to amend the language in the deed restriction. The obligation flows from state law. Second, David Meyer isn't my client. This is a perfect example of people making shit up that just isn't true. Third, regarding Desert Rose, I represented prior owners in securing entitlements for the development (including both the City process and in litigation). I assisted both the seller and current buyer during due diligence. Post sale, I worked with the buyer on some technical issues in the first few months of ownership, and answered questions from time to time. That's it.

      Delete
  18. 9:09-

    Good one. More like Gonzalez has his tool in her toolkit. They do make quite the couple. Pfff.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I just puked alittle.

    BIAspear-Gonzalez = LA

    Nothing good about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let us not forget randy goodson. The city rezoned horse property to apartment ghetto property in Olivenhain. Rats all of them. Filthy friggin' leftist rats.
      I'll do everything in my power to make sure fakespear isn't elected anything.

      Delete
  20. He threatens constantly to sue. People used to take bets in live meetings how long before the words came out of his mouth. He's bombastic speaking to council and citizens alike. And he wonders why no one puts a name to their comments or takes him up on his offer to meet. Some serious introspection is called for but that ain't happening.

    ReplyDelete
  21. 10:58-

    Oh Oh... I get the riddle.... Who is?


    Mr. BIAspear-Gonzalez!

    MARCO!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  22. This is an interesting thread

    ReplyDelete
  23. Affordable housing as practiced in Encinitas is simply a form of corporate landlords with deferred bonuses.

    ReplyDelete
  24. True that Gonzalez the champion for the environment just purchased a Ford Expedition? What's that get, 15 mpg?

    Virtue-signaling hot air balloon.

    ReplyDelete
  25. For a long time the city was careless in tracking the deed-restricted affordable units that had been built. The employee who kept track of it left the city and was not replaced. Who knows whether there have been violations. There were rumors from the surrounding neighbors of Desert Rose that the winning attorney would receive a free lot in the development. It was also known that the property owner only wanted to get the plans approved in order to sell the property to someone who had the means to build the homes. Were the rumors true? Did Marco get what he may have been promised? The convoluted story of the selling of the affordable units only obscures the truth of the money trail.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The original developers, Jose (Joe) Colina and Tony Cassolato didn't have money to pay their engineers and other contractors and were sued for breach of contract many times. This is public information available on the San Diego Superior Court website. Neighbors found out about this when Joe and Tony were joking with the horse ranch owners that they had five active law suits against them at the same time. Ha, Ha! I'm sure their contractors really enjoyed having to take them to court to get paid. Everyone at the time was trying to figure out how they could pay Marco. Any comments, Marco?

      Delete
    2. As far as I know (knew), any lawsuits my former clients were involved in had to do with other projects, not Desert Rose. I didn't represent them in those matters. Regarding the load of crap at 10:59, again, this is more of the unsubstantiated "rumors" that the nameless keyboard warriors here like to throw out. No basis in fact, just a reflection of the accusatorial kookiness this blog breeds.

      Delete
    3. So Marco you're saying through all your "don't knows" is that you walked away from Desert Rose with zero in your pocket for all your involvement? Seems like more than a few people remember you working hard for a developer pushing it through city hall. Setting aside who was where/had ownership and when, it's a simple question to answer without sidestepping.

      Delete
    4. I had an hourly retainer with a client. I provided entitlement and litigation services. I wasn't an owner, and I didn't receive a stake in the development. I helped them with the sale of the project to the builder and then helped that buyer understand the history of the project and the requirements of their approvals. I "walked away" with a fee for my legal services. What exactly do you think is "sidestepping?"

      Delete
  26. Marco you still want to stick with your claim Meyer isn't your client? You do realize you were seen by many on Zoom representing Meyer's Clark St. disaster. Do you have a doppelganger of which you or we are not aware?

    Funny that the developer won't release the CPP recording. No doubt he's well within "the law" not to do so, but let's be clear: you were there and you were working.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Seriously? I represent the group buying the Clark property from the people that David Meyer represents. I don't represent the sellers or David Meyer. Are you people really this dense?

      Delete
  27. If Gonzalez lies about something so easily debunked then so much for his honesty.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Marco's claim that he didn't know about the original developers' financial and legal problems is not true. Prior to becoming a developer, Desert Rose partner Jose Colina was a CPA who lost his license and whose case is on the State Board of Accountancy Website. Marco was informed of this information, as was Tony Kranz, who voted in favor of the project by explaining that one of the developers had been his son's football coach. During the second Desert Rose council hearing, Marco addressed the developers' reputation head on and told the council that they were, "nice guys," and complained about how disrespectful Olivenhain neighbors had been to them and to Marco himself. After Save Desert Rose won the first legal case, Marco released his famous interview where he claimed that we didn't want to live close to "brown people." Two years later, the case was overturned in the Court of Appeals. Neighbors had an unexpected two years of silence and no movement on the project when the actual owner of the property got rid of the developers and had to go around and pay various contractors, many of whom had not been paid for years. After new owners took over, Marco continued to represent the project for Woodbridge Pacific Group and went before council and complained (repeating David Meyer's favorite claim) that the project was stopped by residents who caused the project to be in planning for 10 years. He did not mention the role that the developers themselves had played in these delays.

      Delete
    2. Sounds a lot like the Grabois complaints there, but as usual, your facts are off. Not sure what makes you think I knew anything about Joe's work before Desert Rose, but the fact is I was originally brought into the matter for a very limited purpose -- to review the biological issues associated with a required streambed alteration agreement. As I learned about the project and community opposition, I agreed to assist with a second CPP meeting to answer questions and provide info about density bonus laws.

      That's where everyone went full asshole on me and the developers
      (as I reflected in our CPP report) and, frankly, spurred me to continue working with them. I've done a lot of CPPs, and that meeting was as bad as I've seen. The disrespect many of you feel is warranted is a big part of the problem here (and I'm not saying there aren't developers who do the same, but I sure try not to represent them). And regarding my comments about racist anti-affordable housing sentiments, the bulk of that came from written comments and testimony associated with a project in Solana Beach. However, the repeated "Desert Rose will look like PB" comments coming from neighbors were still rooted in anti-affordable housing and density sentiments (and yes, there were comments about the crime and property value impacts that would allegedly occur as well). And finally, my complaints to CC on behalf of the buyers (I was actually still representing the sellers) about the delays in the project approvals had as much to do with staff lagging.

      But here's the thing -- in the end, the court's decided the outcome, and many of you who were total jerks after the initial court hearing went your way got a healthy dose of crow to eat. I understand the resentment; it sucks to lose. But you lost.

      Delete
  28. Marco's claim that he didn't know about the original developers' financial and legal problems is not true. Prior to becoming a developer, Desert Rose partner Jose Colina was a CPA who lost his license and whose case is on the State Board of Accountancy Website. Marco was peocisws rhia indoemRION, as was Tony Karnz, who voted in favor of the project by explaining that one of the developers had been his son's football coach. During the second Desert Rose council hearing, Marco addressed the developers' reputation head on and told the council that they were, "nice guys," and complained about how disrespectful Olivenhain neighbors had been to them and to Marco himself. Ater Save Desert Rose won the first legal case, Marco released his famous interview where he claimed that we didn't want to live close to "brown people." Two years later, the case was overturned in the Court of Appeals. Neighbors had an unexpected two years of silence and no movement on the project when the actual owner of the property got rid of the developers and had to go around and pay various contractors, many of whom had not been paid for years. After new owners took over, Marco continued to represent the project for Woodbridge Pacific Group and went before council and complained (repeating David Meyer's favorite claim) that the project was stopped by residents who caused the project to be in planning for 10 years. He did not mention the role that the developers themselves had played in these delays.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Well on those notes can we assume that Gonzalez, exposed, has gone off to peddle his "facts" to a less informed crowd?

    Beware of posts on social media that go by the name "Encinitas Facts."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So how did these people who owed money all over town pay Marco?

      Delete
  30. So how did these people who owed money all over town pay Marco?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Holy Moly! Keyboard warriors? It's not hard to understand why no one wants to post with their real name. Does everyone remember when Marco forced the shutdown of Encinitas Guerrilla after an unflattering piece on Marco? The blog was forced to delete everything, wait a while, and then reopen. The threats must have been very serious.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I remember! The piece that was such a hit with readers struck way to close to the bone for his taste. The truth hurts and reality bites, even when done satirically.

      Delete
    2. 4:52 Which one was it?

      Delete
    3. 11:06, long gone. Doubt anyone downloaded it, as who knew the blog would be leaned that way? When things got too hot, apparently freedom of speech became optional.

      Delete
    4. "Be leaned on." Truth gets inconvenient, it disappears.

      Delete
    5. Typical sleaze bag, who threatens people with the "law". He can't handle satire because it hits too close to home. This clown is a blight to the community.

      Delete
    6. Hmmmmm.... I forced the shutdown of Encinitas Guerilla? WTF are you even talking about? Seriously, you guys need to take off the tin foil hats over here. Cowards and conspiracy theorists of Encinitas would be a more accurate name for this blog.

      Delete
    7. Right after that too close to home piece came out EG was gone. Tinfoil hat or coincidence too close to ignore?

      Delete
  32. Marco's posting here is pathetic... why would a professional, working to the norm, need to participate in such a discussion?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can't think of another attorney working in Encinitas who brings this much bad press on themselves. They don't have to threaten blogs and are not all over social media trying to defend themselves.

      He's now a developer himself, destroying back country with monstrous wave parks: https://beachstreetdev.com/. The homepage image is worth a 1,000 environmentally-unfriendly words. But he's no doubt of great use as an "entitlements advisor."

      Delete
  33. I actually like the fact that Marco has the balls to comment under his own name. He and a few others are willing to stand up to the ANON which is ruthless. Many times true, but none the less ruthless. Well done Marco.

    However, Marco's actions with BIAspear to ruin Encinitas have been noticed and you both will pay the consequence for ruining our former cool beach town.

    Thanks to you now its more OC/LA big town than surf town. Karma baby karma.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He may have the balls to comment under his own name but he also has them to tell easily-outed lies. Balls or stupidity or extreme hubris?

      Anyway he's out of here. No more balls, just a yellow streak.

      Delete
    2. Speedy G. mocks this site as being insignificant and rarely frequented, but he jumps in to make comment. Seems he is thinner skinned that he realizes!

      Delete
  34. THe Beach Street Development looks like an environmental nightmare--even more so considering the current water restrictions that are due to go into place. Many would oppose this project solely based on Marco's involvement on its own.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So, San Diego County has been warned about rolling blackouts as there are NO functioning power plants here as it is ALL imported. Yet more building, wave machines, resorts are planned. Well...that make complete sense.
      And water. Almost forgot that one.

      Delete
    2. Gonzalez needs to stop pretending he cares about the environment. Really, just stop already.

      Delete
    3. He likes green alright - greenbacks in his own pocket!

      Delete
  35. Given the water crisis, all big development should be postponed. It is ludicrous to continue to spread the resources thinner and thinner. Perhaps this sort of development should be permanently canceled, until and if environmental conditions change.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's water and power being the biggies. 99 percent of the population HAS NO CLUE where the electricity comes from.
      Electric cars and battery mining...scams for for fools.

      Delete
  36. 5:46 - Yeah you sound like an expert. I'm sure pumping and burning billions of gallons of petroleum is sooooo much better for the environment and the human labors.

    Face it you are clueless.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where does the electricity come from???? Hmmmm????

      Delete
  37. 12:15 - Marco you still sticking to Meyer not your client? Asking for Clark St. CPP attendees.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As I noted above, I represent an entity purchasing land from people that David Meyer represents. That doesn't make Meyer my client. Get a clue.

      Delete
    2. "An entity?" Who/what? Your convoluted half-explanations lack transparency. And you wonder why people question your authenticity.

      Delete
    3. The crowd you associate with tells it all. The Sleaze Factor.

      Delete
  38. Is it true that "Encinitas Facts," sometimes-live Facebook page, belongs to you Marco? Have seen comments on the local paper's online version under that pseudonym, too. Is that also you, Marco?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't you guys tire of this shit?

      Delete
    2. Have you figured out how to put your baseball hat on straight yet?

      Delete
    3. That was a serious and simple question, Marco: are you or are you not "Encinitas Facts?"

      Delete
  39. There's an old saying that "A person's character is tested when they are given power." Gonzales-Blakespear have failed the character test.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Failed the decency test.

      Lies, lies of omission, rewritten history. Both throw crap at the wall to see what will stick and when caught, move on to the next one. Been the M.O. for both since Day 1.

      Delete
  40. Marco, how do you call yourself an environmentalist when you destroy the back country with land- and water-intensive uses like this: https://beachstreetdev.com/. The homepage picture is horrifying.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Can somebody ask Nathan Fletcher who is supposed to be serving the public a serious question.

    There are only two logical possibilities if you have a brain that actually works outside of far left talking points




    1) The vaccines work, and the unvaccinated are no threat to the vaccinated (if anything, the reverse, based on high load vaccine cases).

    In that case leave the unvaccinated alone. They'll figure it out.

    2) The vaccines don't work.


    Which is it Nathan?

    Either answer places you in a precarious position in regards to truth based on your bullshit talking leftist talking points you've been vomiting

    ReplyDelete
  42. The unvaccinated are a reservoir for the virus, giving it opportunity to further mutate. That threatens everyone. The Trump inspired stupidity has confused his feeble minded followers to erroneously think it is a political issue, when in fact, it is biology. Wake up, if that is even possible....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. O.K then why are half of the infected in the U.K are people that received the shot? I can't wait for this.
      Also, what about people that have had covid, you want them to get the shot? Even though they have the anti-bodies.
      And please make an attempt to "let go of the hate of Trump" Stop being the buffoon you child like mutant.

      Delete
    2. Chances are 2:04 thought it was a good idea to vote for the Alzheimers riddled walking corpse and the fake black woman.
      Tell all of us how that's working out...come on...tell us.
      I know it is working out just fine for the illegals.

      Delete
    3. Take it to a thread you already destroyed, village idiots.

      Delete
    4. 2:04, the virus threatens people that have been vaccinated?
      If that is the case then why did millions get vaccinated?
      Hmmmm? Come on, don't be shy, educate us all.
      Try and stand straight, enough with your left leaning insanity as it is un-American.

      Delete
    5. holy fuckballs the qtard replies here are lacking any hint of intelligence. Literally writing sentences that any 12 year old could look at and say "no, that's fucking retarded" about, even without the context, which makes them even more retarded.

      Delete
  43. Congratulations Marco, you are the winner of the Looney Lorrie Meltdown of the Week award! Even though one of her right wing friends pushed her over the edge she attacked you in response, so you win! She probably simply forgot the reason between the time she posted and started commenting but you still win! Pushing her so far that she slipped again and exposed her agenda by issuing hollow threats of exposing secrets and revealing that she's timing the release of information to most damage incumbent candidates earns you bonus points! Bravo Marco!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Everyone has limits. Lorri Green is a well-respected and beloved member of the Encinitas community who is generous and caring. The anger you see expressed here are the words of people who don't want their cover blown. Lorri is being targeted and attacked in the same way that Maggie Houlihan was only because Lorri has provided a forum for people to share factual information that some do not want the rest of us to know about.

      Delete
    2. Agree, 9:19. Gonzalez was de-fanged on Encinitas Votes and he just can't get over it.

      This thread grew legs and attacks on him fast, a reaction to his association with the most questionable deals in town. Lie with dogs, get fleas, get noticed.

      Delete
  44. Scientific peer reviewed studies prove that several in this thread are informed by one or both of these sources:

    CNN and/or MSNBC

    1939 is calling, do any of you fucksticks have any knowledge of history of is Joy Reid your professor.

    Good fukcking god get a clue geeezus

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Awww, Marco has a fan at 5:11. Sounds like the nutty "Omed Demiri" of Verdu Facebook pages fame. So sad he had to call in reinforcements.

      Delete
  45. Joy Reid is a Harvard graduate and an award-winning journalist. I think she is an authoritative source.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Authoritative HACK would be more accurate. I will admit she has a nice speaking voice but a leftist hack all the same

      Delete
    2. WTFC about your political views on a local blog?


      Not I.

      Delete
    3. 638

      Nobody cares about what you think bu thanks yoo for playang.

      Be sure to remain inside and iNjeCt yoUrsElF wItH blEaCh derivatives while binge watching Chris Matthews reruns

      Delete
  46. 5:16 - haha! Trumpy pea-brain cannot tolerate a topic that does not allow room for his rant so he has to burp his nonsense into whatever string is available - hilarious! . Almost as undisciplined as Marco...

    ReplyDelete
  47. WTFC about your national political views on a local blog?


    Not I.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because the poison of the left filters to Encinitas and blakespear. Notice how they think alike being local or federal? Wanting to defund the police to the lie of man made global warming. Get it?
      It all ties together. Why do you think that newsom is about to be thrown out of office? The poison of leftism.

      Delete
  48. According to Marco, "the fact is I was originally brought into the matter for a very limited purpose -- to review the biological issues associated with a required streambed alteration agreement." Marco does not tell us that the developers were in trouble for two years and had their project shut down for environmental violations within the stream bed while Marco was advising them. The report was written by Roy Sapa'u of all people and backed by Gus Vina! If these slash and burn advocates stopped development because of environmental violations, how bad were they really? These wetland violations are public records with photos. I would not recommend that anyone hire Marco to oversee a streambed agreement--which was written before the first time the developers presented this project with fewer units in 2010, years before Marco was brough on board.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gonzalez's "Encinitas Facts" do not hold up.

      Ask the neighbors of the "Fiore" density bonus project in Leucadia about their experience hiring Gonzalez.

      Delete
  49. Gonzalez, tool in the BIA toolkit:

    "And when the lights are really low, and the groups are really small, it’s, ‘Don’t bring the brown people here, don’t let the poor people in, let’s build a big gate around our little castle, because it’s really nice and pretty and we don’t want them to mess it up."

    The dude lives on a street with "No Trespassing" signs posted at the entrance. Hypocrisy with a capital H.

    From his interview with VOSD: https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/news/marco-gonzalez-calls-bullshit-on-dense-development-objectors/?fbclid=IwAR0tJID6q7Uo8zAg3JBxHK7wRZ0lIHrq02yl7Dc6P2f5RNxwe4VCXI-5Zsg.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Speedy G is a hypocritical jerk!

      Delete
  50. When the going gets factual, "Encinitas Facts" leaves the discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Comment under the VOSD article:

    "I am active in my Encinitas community, and find it insulting that Marco would accuse me of this. He is just a joker on a stage if he thinks the bonus density projects in Encinitas have anything to do with affordable housing. Bonus density is an exploit for developers to make more money-- NO POOR PEOPLE will be moving into these projects. In fact the "brown people" are being pushed out by this gentrification. When you're a lawyer and a semi-public figure, I suppose you have to make inflammatory remarks to get airplay, but please Marco, talk to me and my neighbors first before throwing us under the bus."

    Nailed it!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. OK, but it's density bonus, not bonus density.

      Delete
    2. either way it stinks and guess who is squarely in the middle of it all?

      Delete
  52. Corporate Landlords Suck!

    https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/selling-out-americas-local-landlords-moving-big-investors-2021-07-29/

    ReplyDelete
  53. So where is a copy of the original Affordable Housing Regulatory Agreement that the Developer, WoodBridge Pacific Group, signed March 20, 2018. Doc #2018-0121625 recording in San Diego County. Just curious what that says.

    ReplyDelete