Back in 2013 residents had no voice in the city's growth and were becoming increasingly alarmed by the looming threats of increased density and height throughout Encinitas.
There's lots of fun history of Prop A and council shenanigans in the EU archives.
Thank you to Bruce and the others who created this protection from the greed monsters who have had a free reign to do whatever they want, along with an ever so obliging planning dept. that gives them all and even more than they ask for.
ReplyDeleteCouncil goes along every time, or almost, with a few rare exceptions, once in a long while.
What will never be forgotten is how every planner in their dept. acted at the public meetings telling lies about what Prop A would amount to one it was passed.
Several of us followed some groups of interested residents around to hear what bs all the planners were telling the residents about what Prop A would mean.
Roy was no exception and he is still here. I personally listened to him misinform the residents and afterward told these residents the truth and that they had just been lied to.
The truth was nowhere to be found from the planners at these meetings that were intended to inform the public before the vote.
It was shameful and unforgivable behavior, and still is.
Agree, all well stated.
ReplyDeleteLet’s definitely not forget that Kranz rode into office supporting Prop A then once in, turned around and said from the dais “I want to kill this thing.“
Guess that party he attended at Papa Doug Manchester‘s house shortly after he was in office turned his thinking around?
5:30- prop A was awesome. Thank you for all that made it happen.
ReplyDeleteYeah, Kranz is a complete sell out. He goes on a few trips and then ponies up to the developers every chance he gets right there along with Marco.
He gets me sick and the faster we get rid of Kranz, the better for Encinitas.
Too bad a judge under Blakespear allowed those 15 properties to be upzoned. Those projects alone will kill the quality of life in our community.
ReplyDeleteTony is happy to ride that wave. Too bad the spoiler and his handlers blocked our last chance to change the council majority. All 15 will sadly be approved and built.
Bruce and Prop A can’t save us from that.
That was a one time pass. Blakespear lied and said she’d defend A in that suit then rolled over immediately. As of August 2021 Prop A is back in full effect with the judge declaring it constitutionally protected.
DeleteAnd those 15 sites? Sometimes that’s what it takes for people to wake up and believe that the sky really is falling. All the Blakespear and Kranz supporters are learning the hard way.
Courts don’t do one time passes.
DeleteIt’s precedent now.
You’re being sold a lot of happy talk.
5:36 sadly agree. And 5:46. By the time anyone wakes up it will be too late. Encinitas is t coming back from any of this. Tony is the nail in the city’s coffin.
DeleteTOP 5 EXAMPLES OF BRUCE EHLERS SAVING ENCINITAS BY NOT VOTING 5-0 WITH THE WOKE COUNCIL
ReplyDelete1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Oops. That's the whole list.
So true!
DeleteSerious question:
ReplyDeleteWhat good is Prop A if R30 upzoning can happen without an affirmative vote of the electorate?
If it happened once, it’s precedent. It will happen again.
Isn’t this cheerleading for symbolism at this point?
Try reading above. Two judges have now refused to set aside Prop A going forward.
DeleteJudges don’t rule on future hypotheticals. It would be foolish, as there’s no live case with specific facts before them.
Delete“Constitutionally protected” is a great phrase until you realize it was never declared unconstitutional—even when it was bypassed. No reason that can’t or won’t happen again.
Not claiming any future vote just repeating the judge’s decision but you can twist all you like!
DeleteThe problem is with your phrase “going forward” at 5:56.
DeleteJudges have in no way foreclosed doing exactly what they did to get the last HEU through.
6:00 To your point. If the decision to approve the 15 projects was unconstitutional, then why wasn’t that decision reversed?
DeleteWhat’s to stop Kranz from going to a judge when we’re out of compliance with HCD and the Prop A triggered vote fails to get ECR upzoned? His hero Catherine did it and he’s followed her lead since day 1.
Delete7:03, money, honey.
DeleteThe red pill 💊 is terribly sour but real.
ReplyDeleteThe reality of developers lining the pockets of local politicians in the millions of dollars has never been more apparent.
GOAT Blakespear for the fully gated remodel 🏆
Pfff
Delete^^ fully gated remodel win
ReplyDeleteNathan = GOAT fondler
In regard to the overall health of Encinitas:
ReplyDeleteBruce=Good
Blakespear=Bad
Susan=Good
Kranz=Bad
Crispy Burger=Good
Garvin=Bad (*see wannabe sour puss)
You hate Blakespear because she was effective.
DeleteYou should respect and study the ways of the goat.
7:03 Effective at destroying a once iconic beach city. Very effective.
DeleteBIA is a sad joke. Raised by her ultra Puritan, white mother to be a whiter than white racist who could never survive on her own. They’re held up and they’re whiter than white compound up on the way to streets in Cardiff, and let the Brown people in to serve them.
DeleteSo embarrassing we have that family in our town. Then she goes to Utah to pick a servant way up to serve her and her mommy. The he she claims to be a bike rider but that’s another first thing about real riding. Sad but true.
7:11- I second that…. She’s such a loser she’s not even the number one loser.
DeleteThe number one loser goes to the Town Dunce.
BIA is only the second highest Loser and City Council/Mayor history. She can’t even win the loser race.
You're obviously someone that gets their information from Facebook and has no clue what the GOAT or her family are about. History will look back at people that shape their world view based on what they suck from the social media teat as one of the leading causes of the downfall of our civilization.
Delete703pm virtual guarantee he/she/it/him rents a shit apartment or is fully sponsored by the grift.
DeleteFuture no so bright midwit bro
All hail future Governor goat!
DeleteAgreed. Kelly Slater will be excellent.
DeleteI never thought I’d see the day that stocks relinquish the title as worst councilmember ever….
ReplyDeleteBIA and The Town Dunce easily jumped Stocks horridness by 10 yards easy….
Stocks supported Morris. ‘Nuff said.
DeleteStocks lead the charge to upgrade city pensions. Go look it up....
DeleteIs this Kranz or Nadler?
ReplyDeleteCan't tell 🤡
https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1673131160761925633?s=20
Does Tony look sexier in a wetsuit or in his 10 speed outfit?
ReplyDelete-Garvin asking for a friend
Oh come on, I just ate dinner! 🤢
Delete💯.10-speed. Classic. 🤣
DeleteLOL! In a short john with booties
DeleteProp A says the city has to go to the voters twice, and if both votes fail, then they can implement upzoning anyway.
ReplyDeleteAt least that’s the interpretation precedent set by the courts.
If true, then the interesting implication is that Prop A provides leverage only during the first vote. The leverage comes from avoiding the time and cost of the second vote. But after the first vote, two things are basically assured: first, the city is obligated to invest the cost and time in a second vote (sunk cost). And second, the city knows win or lose on the second vote—they are probably going to be able to implement the plan whether they win the vote or not. These two facts mean the city has no real incentive to compromise in the second vote.
If you want the best HEU deal, focus on setting a few achievable (and legal) demands, and negotiate them into the first vote. Someone like Bruce needs to be willing to endorse the plan if he can use the leverage to secure enough compromise in the first vote.
If you can’t reach a compromise in the first vote, then bend over, because the city gets everything they want after that without having to compromise.
That's your interpretation of the court decisions with lots of "ifs."
ReplyDeleteHow much money the city wants to waste on these updates is up to them.
Yes, but ‘if’ this is true and an option, it would be just the strategy our lazy mayor would take. Look at their plans for ECR. The voters will say no all day long. The council, especially Tony, know this.
DeleteHe’ll go the Blakespear way of using the courts cause it’s the lazy way and an easy way to sell out to developers.
Anyone wanna take the bet that he gets re-elected and this goes down that way?
I’ll take the bet on The Dunce getting re-elected…. Bruce is going to be the end of Tony’s political career.
DeleteCheers to Mayor Ehlers!!
Yup and Thunder was going to take down Blakespear. The developers and Dem party won’t let that happen. Just wondering who the new spoiler will be?
DeleteAsk Garvin!
DeleteAsk 🐖👧
DeleteLet’s hope he gets some kind of anal infection and has to to go back east for treatment….
DeleteI almost get sick when he introduces himself as a Encinitas resident…. What a freaking joke. Why doesn’t he introduced himself as an ex-Lehman Brothers dickhead?
https://www.google.com/search?q=the+inside+job&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari#imgrc=44CduoFdxI066M
That douche is rotten to the core….
There is 🐖👧 on EV defending her buddy Garvin. More proof of the Garvin, 🐖👧, dunce love triangle.
ReplyDeleteRemember this next election.
Those two intertwined instigators love to play victim.
DeleteMAGAs tend to stick together.
DeleteThe city
ReplyDeletecouncil will vote on (and approve) high density 2 story development in commercial zone in August. And that will include areas near Moonlight Beach that are in the qualification zone for reduced parking spaces (fewer parking spaces than housing units. This will result in absolute chaos and parking wars. Blakespear and Speedy Gonzales are behind the developers' interests and are responsible for the destruction of the community character. The citizens need to override the State mandate, allowing the developers to determine the fate of peoples' neighborhoods. The politicians are in the hip pockets of the BIA.
What project?
Deleteover by the old CRC location behind the firehouse or over by the ice cream stand...
DeleteHello...My name is David Gordon, of D. Gordon Aviation I live in La Jolla. I'm an asshole. You see, my company plane with the tail number of N3386E just flew back and forth over Encinitas and Solana Beach 44 times. That's right 44 times and I couldn't care less. The times were in the 12:00 to 1:30 p.m range today, the 26th of June. I flew 18 miles from Montgomery Field to do this.
ReplyDeleteOver schools, 10's of thousands of people and their homes.
I DON'T CARE
Nor do I…
DeleteIt was only 43!!!
Delete1:19...it's because you don't live here.
DeleteLet's memorialize this.
ReplyDeleteCatherine Blakespear and Marco Gonzalez are responsible for the destruction of Coastal Encinitas?
Those citizens of Encinitas who wrote, circulated petitions, campaigned to get Prop. A placed on the ballot and passed in 2013. Eight years later, residents were dismayed when the city sued them. Prop. A requires a public vote if the 30 ft. height limit is exceeded or the zoning density is increased. In 2019 the city named “Preserve Proposition A and John Does 1-100, inclusive” as plaintiffs (those being sued) and said they would name them later. Of course, the city had their names on the petitions and the ballot arguments, so knew the relevant names. The city stated that it “is ignorant of the true names and capacities…and will amend this complaint to allege their true names and capacities if and when they are ascertained.” The names were never added. The lawsuit also named “anyone with an interest” in Proposition A, which was virtually all voters.
ReplyDeleteThe city put two separate items, Measures T (2016) and U (2018), on the ballot to modify Prop. A, but both were rejected by the voters, each by a larger margin than previously. A careful read of each measure indicated that the city was attempting to get rid of the voter requirement.
After the failure of Measure U, the city was sued by the BIA for its noncompliant Housing Element, which needs to be updated every year. The judge decided to allow the city to update the Housing Element which necessitated upzoning and increased building height, but without a Prop. A vote. The judge’s order only allowed a single update without a vote.
The city and Mayor Blakespear wanted to get rid of Prop. A permanently. Some of you may have seen “My Mayor Sued Me” signs. These referred to the 2019 lawsuit against defendants “Preserve Proposition A.” When supporters of Prop. A and those who believe in the democratic process took strong exception to being sued, the mayor amended the lawsuit in 2020 to instead sue the state Department of Housing and Community Development. This removed “Preserve Prop. A” from the lawsuit, making it necessary for the group to intervene in the lawsuit so that residents would be represented in front of the judge.
The judge agreed with the group’s intervention in his judgement: “Preserve Proposition A intervened, asserting, correctly, that neither the City nor the State would defend the interests of those citizens of Encinitas who voted for Proposition A.” He understood that:
“…Proposition A seeks to protect the natural resources of the City of Encinitas, maintain the character of the City's five communities, ensure that infrastructure and public benefits are adequately planned and funded prior to any increase in zoning, and preserve the zoning and property rights of the voters.…”
The judge took a considerable amount of time in coming to his decision in order not to violate the state’s constitutional protections of citizens’ rights. Quoting the state constitution, the judge wrote:
Declaring it "the duty of the courts to jealously guard this right of the people," the courts have described the initiative and referendum as articulating "one of the most precious rights of our democratic process.”
The mayor has said repeatedly “our hands are tied by state law.” However, the judge did not agree:
“But nothing in these enumerated powers of enforcement allows state to require a jurisdiction to seek to invalidate a voter initiative, nor is there any provision for a jurisdiction to sue either private citizens or to invalidate a voter initiative.”
Throughout this prolonged and expensive legal process, it is worth noting that none of the city’s adopted housing plans provide adequate affordable housing, despite this being the stated goal. In fact, the city is currently being sued in Federal Court due to alleged violations of Fair Housing law.
The city’s aim has always appeared to give the developers what they want, rather than to follow the intent of state law to create affordable housing. The mayor and city council lost sight of this intent and goal.
To view the court documents in their entirety, visit: www.encinitasresidentsalliance.com.
Mostly correct.
DeleteExcept the city didn’t sue residents. You can go to the superior court case search and put in your name. If there are no cases where you are named as defendant, then you weren’t sued.
The prop a group that complained about being sued then had to shamelessly reverse and argue the opposite to become a party to the case. They were exposed.
Also, the court did set aside Prop A as a one time decision to allow upzoning without a vote. But there’s nothing precluding another judge in the future from issuing another one time order. In fact, it’s a precedent now, so it’s even more likely to happen again.
The city sued 100 John Does, to be named later, who where involved in Prop.A. This could have meant anyone who voted in the election on either side. The city realized its mistake and amended the lawsuit to sue HCD. In court the judge ruled against HCD and the city and in favor of the Prop. A folks who joined the lawsuit as an intervenor. Neither HCD or the city appealed the court decision out of fear of losing on the issue of the constitutionality of the initiative process up to the state Supreme Court. Prop. A was validated statewide. The city has said there will be a Prop. A vote on the El Camino Real Specific Plan and on any city-owned properties like the public works yard where the city might rezone to R-30.
Delete4:33 thank you for a factual recounting.
ReplyDeleteTypical hypocrisy from EV led by Lorri the ultimate hypocrite. They're now complaining about the content and tone of oral communications. 🤣 Where was the outrage when residents they don't like were getting lit up every meeting? Oh that's right, it was crickets. Add this to the long list of things they are guilty of but bitch about when they get a taste in return. It would be disgusting if it wasn't so damn predictable. 🙄
ReplyDeleteFight your own wackaddodle battles. How TF you crying about Lorri not going to bat for your dumbass. Wait, that post was satire wasn’t it.
DeleteDon't worry, Encinitas Votes is supposed to be going private any day now. Right? Right?
ReplyDeleteInstructions on decorum posted by Blakespear and Kranz above the agendas in council chambers:
ReplyDelete"The audience and speakers are asked to be respectful and courteous. Please address your comments to the Council as a whole and avoid personal attacks against members of the public, elected officials and city staff."
This is not a Dr. Lorri thing, this is a Kranz/Walsh thing. How far will Kranz push Walsh to rant some more? Who knows.
Making the popcorn perched on the edge of my seat for more "clarifications" from Kranz's chief of staff.
Kranz is the one eating popcorn. He doesn’t have to do a damn thing. He’s got developers to coddle while the activists fight amongst themselves.
DeleteAnd Walsh to do his dirty work!
DeleteAnd 🐷👧to help!
DeleteHistory aside, the city council and developers have the state on their side. Any community who has spent their own money fighting neighborhood destroying projects knows this.
ReplyDeleteWe can rant all we want, but until we vote in leadership that puts their residents and cities first, then we can expect more of the same.
It’s pretty obvious the majority of residents are OK with the status quo or just don’t care.
Or are simply waking from their stupor too late. Next time a more educated and aware populace? Time will tell.
DeleteWe hear Next Time every election season. Hope is the can getting kicked down the road. Reality is the five story monstrosity going up in your neighborhood.
ReplyDeleteThat’s why time will tell. It has to get bad enough.
Delete5:35 sure sounds like “I never post anonymously” Marco Gonzalez or someone for whom he wrote the script.
ReplyDeleteThe mayor absolutely sued residents then amended the suit after realizing the crappy optics. Go argue wth the judge who said in his opinion that you do not get to sue your own residents. The fact that neither HCD nor the city appealed that decision says it all.
Okay.
DeleteSo give us the name of a resident whose name we can plug in to the case search to find the record of the city suing.
Just one name, and you win the argument.
Any other response and you are pure BS.
Go look at the first filing in 2019 signed by the mayor against Preserve Prop A. Then believe your eyes and stop already.
DeleteBtw the judge acknowledged Preserve was a loosely formed group of thousands of residents. Take it up him if you disagree.
DeleteStill no name to search?
DeleteLook, if you assume every John/Jane Doe lawsuit across the country is referring to you, then you have bigger problems than we can address here.
You’re clearly not understanding.
DeleteAnd you’re arguing over this why? Residents won. Prop A (for now) is intact.
ReplyDeleteIt's all about disinformation and spouting the city's line.
DeleteToo bad it's an echo chamber.
DeleteThe city never named the John Does. The court never got the names. It's only Catherine Blakespear or Tony Kranz and others in the closed session meetings who can answer this question. Garvin can asks his BFF Kranz who made it clear that he wanted to kill Prop. A. Surely Kranz knows.
ReplyDeleteOr his bff, 🐖👧
DeleteKnowing and telling the truth are two different things.
DeleteThe city's strategy in presenting two housing plans that they knew would fail was their strategy all along to get around Prop A.
ReplyDeleteTwo strikes and bang, there goes Prop A before a judge again. Right, like that won't happen again. Pretty crafty of them. Pretty f'in shady too. $$$$$$$$$$$
Prop. A can't go before a judge again without another Prop.A vote that fails. It's not possible to sue about something that has not happened yet. There has to be a cause of action. Next vote is likely the El Camino Real Specific Plan. Judging by the reaction at public workshops, the vote will fail unless plans are radically altered. Residents in New Encinitas are already gearing up to fight the upzone.
ReplyDeleteCity already planning to fail. Then watch Kranz and Hinze blame the residents for rejecting their crappy plans. Rinse and repeat.
DeleteTony may be a dunce but he won’t have a problem finding a way to serve his developer puppet masters.
ReplyDeleteI'm with San Diego Flight Training International. I just now finished flying over Encinitas back and forth 14 times.
ReplyDeleteIn order to accomplish this I needed to fly 18 miles from Montgomery Field in San Diego. My tail number is N2442E.
Don't be alarmed, just because leaded exhaust particles are falling on your kids school...and your kids. I don't care.
You see, I make money poisoning the air at your house. And don't forget safety and ignore the "fact" that 1000 private planes crash every year according to the FAA across the U.S . The same FAA that allows me to fly back and forth over and over your house. But I don't care as I make money teaching more idiots to fly these pieces of junk.
How many times circling the same flight path this time? Are the those endless circling over and over our town a part of the required flight plan before taking off and heading our way? Post them. If you can.
ReplyDeleteYou never have. I would assume the long holiday weekend there should be no treading flights going on until Wed.
Anyone want to take the bet that this chicken little wacko will post more of his ...... every day, even when the flight school is closed for the long holiday weekend?
Just read an article in the Advocate that discusses ‘by right’ upzoning on ECR. Not one mention of Prop A. Do we know with certainty Prop A must be applied?
ReplyDeleteOr will the council go the route of Blakespear and undermine our vote?
Yes, we know. Staff has Prop A on the ECR specific plan timeline.
DeleteAnd once again, the city can’t sue to enforce anything until after a vote happens.
DeleteI sadly have no faith in Sacramento or our city council. The outcomes are almost always in their favor. 😞
DeleteIt will take two dissenting votes to get around Prop A, unless things have changed since the last time.
ReplyDeleteAs a strategy, as lousy and despicable as it was, council hit a home run. We lost. All they have to do is present their usual unacceptable plan to the public, change a few words, submit a second unacceptable plan to the public, and there you go, Here comes da Judge.
Gawd, I would love to be wrong. Please.
Who’s the dunce now?
DeleteThe high density/no parking development proposals will create permanent chaos. Once implemented, there will be no options to correct it. Everywhere it has been done, the results are inevitable - parking wars, conflicts and mass confusion. It absolutely destroys neighborhoods, as the premise it will encourage the use of mass transit is false. The City Council have sold their souls to the BIA, and follow the lead of Gonzales and Blakespear in selling out the community.
ReplyDeleteSadly, all too true. This once special community is suffering from a lack of representation by our elected reps. Too many don't participate in the democracy we have if we made use of it.
ReplyDeleteI will always respect the all too few who choose to spend their valuable private time attempting to hold our elected's accountable for their selling out.