This clip is the bit that led into Gaspar's poutrage in the preceding post below. For those who watched Gaspar lash out at Barth without any truthful evidence - again - this clip shows how desperate the mission must be to get that contrived ordinance in place.
It really isn't about Teresa Barth. It isn't about poor Ms. Gaspar having her own problems with what she claims does and doesn't offend her. This is raw political power maneuvering, framing and the dozen speakers and many dozens more watching at home and in the council chamber and those who watched clips after know this.
Maybe the deliberate framing to make Gaspar the victim works for the powers that be. This doesn't mean the press should continue to lap up what they've been spoon fed. I'm talking to you Jon Horn, Barbara Henry and Wehtahnah Tucker. Enough with the false equivalency when one lone voice to represent half of Encinitas is shut out and public speakers are treated with barely veiled contempt. Thankfully, there are so many willing to be vigillant. As several speakers said, they didn't want to be at the city council meeting for more than 4 hours last Wednesday night or any night.
So much for the shiny, smiley version of Kristin Gaspar. This was no Gaspar the Friendly Ghost in the crony machine. Last night we all witnessed Gaspar the Toxic Host as she spewed venom at Councilwoman Barth that seemed to be coming from a lot of dark and nasty places.
Person after person spoke articulately about item #9 on the consent calendar, all were in opposition to making Stocks and Gaspar concocted mayor selection process the official policy. The big surprise is that Bond and Muir found some gumption and at least postponed any vote. Or, at least that didn't mind openly defying the mayor to avoid bad public image.
Gaspar went into full poutrage. Don't take my word. Check this out, Gaspar insists that she is somehow a victim of big, bad Barth:
100% support for Teresa Barth? The lies continued. What alternate universe does Gaspar inhabit, or what universe inhabits her? Try as she might to build a false case that Teresa Barth is deserving of vile treatment she endures, the proof is obvious. Pick a week, any week and watch closely. It's especially obvious in person. Last night's open cruelty showed no friendly ghost here this deputy mayor, no illusions.
Press Updates: Patch editor Marlena Medford missed the mark in describing yet another mayor temper tantrum as Stocks banged his gavel and stalked out AFTER snarling at the audience about their lack of decorum. Absolutely no sense of the irony . . . , but the comments catch that very quickly.
Several Encinitas residents have offered for all of us the brusque, dismissive proclamation from Jerome Stocks in answer to criticism of the questionable legality of tonight's item #9 ordinance on the consent calendar. Hubris, thy name is Jerome.
Sample #1
On Mar 28, 2012, at 11:48 AM, "Milton Saier" wrote:
Dear Mr Stocks,
Who should run Encinitas – the voters, or the cronies on the Council? Today (Wednesday, March 28), the Council is likely to vote for a change that would anoint Kristin Gaspar as mayor for the next two years, regardless of who the voters elect in November. Fearful of the growing anti-incumbent movement in our city, you and Gaspar contrived a proposal that would make Ms. Gaspar the mayor for the next two years, based on the 2010 election. Under the current system, the mayor is elected by a majority vote of the Council. Without the proposed new change, when the voters elect new Council members in November, that new majority could elect someone else, such as Teresa Barth, who has never had the opportunity to serve in spite of her popularity and her 6 year tenure on the council. Under the proposed new ordinance, Ms. Gaspar would be anointed Mayor and could choose her own Deputy Mayor. The proposed ordinance change is unfair, undemocratic and poorly written. If the council passes it, as expected, the purpose of democracy will be defeated. I therefore urge you to rescind your proposal.
Milton Saier
xxx Quail Gardens Ln., Encinitas, CA 92024,
From: Jerome Stocks
Date: March 28, 2012 2:59:28 PM PDT
To: Milton Saier
Subject: Re: Council meeting today
With all due respect, the new policy puts the voters' top choice as Mayor, and the City Council has no voice in the matter. I'm sorry Ms. Barth is bitter about letting the voter's decide because she wasn't the top vote getter, but that's life.
You're email is myopically focused on the imminent situation and doesn't take into consideration that as we move forward this new policy will afford greater stability and predictability for the leadership of our city.
Further, this decision was reached at a publicly noticed meeting in February and this is merely the codification of the decision previously made.
I hope this information is helpful to you,
Jerome Stocks
Mayor (the last council selected mayor)
City of Encinitas
On Mar 28, 2012, at 3:50 PM, "Milton Saier" wrote:
Dear Mr. Stocks,
First you should know that I have never met Ms Barth; nor have I ever communicated with her. I do not know her feelings at all, even second hand. You certainly are quick to jump to conclusions.
Second, I see this move for what it is: undemocratic, unfair and a misrepresentation of the voter's wishes. However I do understand YOUR intent, and this makes me question your qualifications for the position you now hold.
Sincerely,
Milton Saier
On Mar 28, 2012, at 4:09 PM, Jerome Stocks wrote:
Dear Mr. Saier,
We will need to agree to disagree because I can't wrap my arms around your contention that the voters choosing the Mayor is undemocratic, unfair, or a misrepresentation of the voters wishes.
As for me jumping to a conclusion, I didn't. Ms. Barth has not been shy about her perspective on this issue.
JS
From: Milton Saier
Date: March 28, 2012 5:13:00 PM PDT
To: Jerome Stocks
Subject: Re: Council meeting today
You can't be as stupid as you sound.
Sample #2
On Mar 28, 2012, at 3:49 PM, "xxx" wrote:
City Council Members,
I hope you will not vote to approve item #9 that is on tonight's agenda's consent calendar. I believe that changing the way our Mayor is appointed or elected needs to be fully discussed and vetted. I do believe a change needs to happen, but not like this.
When I voted for city council members during the last election, I was not aware that I would in turn be voting for who would fill the position of Mayor. If we are going to have an elected Mayor, then the voting citizens of Encinitas need to know this when they are voting.
I understand that the Mayor put this on the consent calendar because he wants to pass an ordinance and that two public hearings are required. However, I watched the council meeting when this was discussed. To me it looked like it was almost scripted. It was discussed quickly and the motion appeared to come out of left field, next thing you know the Deputy Mayor seconds it, it gets called for a vote and the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and Council Member Muir vote aye and Council Members Barth and Bond vote no. There was no discussion and the public was caught off guard, and I don't believe the council had any staff analysis on this option.
There were several other options presented but they did not EVEN have a chance to be discussed by the council or staff recommendations.
The ordinance is VERY unclear as written. When would it go into effect? If we are going to have an elected Mayor, then let's have a truly elected Mayor. Adopting this ordinance does not follow a logical and ethical course.
I urge you to not approve this item. It is just plain wrong and not ready for council vote.
Thank you for your time,
Lisa Leslie
Encinitas, CA
On Mar 28, 2012, at 4:15 PM, Jerome Stocks wrote:
With all due respect, the new policy puts the voters' top choice as Mayor, and the City Council has no voice in the matter.
You're email doesn't take into consideration that as we move forward this new policy will afford greater stability and predictability for the leadership of our city.
Further, this decision was reached at a publicly noticed meeting in February and this is merely the codification of the decision previously made.
I hope this information is helpful to you,
Jerome Stocks
Mayor (the last council selected mayor)
City of Encinitas Sent from my iPad
From: Lisa
Date: March 28, 2012 4:28:04 PM PDT
To: Jerome Stocks
Subject: Re: Council Meeting Consent Calendar item #9
I do understand that part of the ordinance you want approved. And it has merit. But it needs to be put in place before elections take place.
We do need to take out the way the Mayor is selected. It should be either a vote or a rotating basis that is not a vote by the council.
What I am asking is that people know when they vote that their vote is going to affect who is Mayor.
With that said, when is this ordinance supposed to go into effect? If it should pass?
A month ago Casper the Friendly Ghost haunted my thoughts and mental images. Well, it's morphed into Gaspar the Empty Boast for pretty obvious reasons to anyone paying attention. Pick a meeting, any meeting and you'll hear some self-adoring declarative statement from Gaspar.
But, these statements, boasts are largely illusionary if the majority council script needs to read differently for those in charge, those funding the majority campaigns. Like Mayor Stocks and the other council majority members Bond and Muir who haunt city hall; consistency, actual facts, alternatives to exclusively self-referential anecdotal judgements are rare.
Beware the illusions, the woman must be challenged. How can she use the term moving forward over and over again, while virtually putting the breaks on a 2-year process and starting over? How can she demand speedy turnaround in one breadth and caution slow going in another? Words often become nonsense if we search beyond the giggling feel good sound of them all. We deserve much better than empty words, even if read well from a script. See previous post,Bullies' Articulately Rendered Figurehead* discussing Gaspar's script reading.
Mayor Stocks (or his crony ghostwriter) accidentally outed himself in theNCT article about a second train stop in Leucadia.
The Coastal Watchdog said on: March 25, 2012, 8:04 pm
A train stop will help Leucadia business thrive. Del Mar eliminated the
train stop and has withered, while Solana Beach and Downtown Encinitas
embraced the Coaster stops and they have thrived. This proposal is good
for improving the capacity of our commuter rail service, reducing the
need to commute in a car, and good for local business. Those are the
reasons I'm proposing it.
Uh, oh. He hit send without proofreading, so he must quick cover-up.
The Coastal Watchdog said on: March 25, 2012, 8:33 pm
It's great the Mayor has decided to promote the concept as well!
Oh, no. Maybe that isn't good enough.
The Coastal Watchdog said on: March 25, 2012, 9:42 pm
Oops, I now realize I said "proposing it" when I should've said
"supporting it"...
There are years of hatefulness under the name of Coastal Watchdog. A sorrier excuse for a nasty, narcissistic mayor would be tough to find.
It's rare that the crony club doesn't back the big cheese. Last night's council meeting was a treat. Patch has the story this morning so take a moment and read the whole thing.
In a 4-1 vote with Encinitas Mayor Jerome Stocks opposed, Wednesday night Council adopted a policy that bans council members from messaging via their cell phones or wireless devices, like tablets, while they are on the dais.
Oh, do go say a few words of delight in the comments section for this victory for Barth who has addressed issues of technology along with open government and respect for colleagues and public consistently. And good for the others to have made the brave move to let the cheese stand alone. More please . . .
Update: Coast News also has an article online about this no-texting at the dais resolution. Show this great little local paper some high traffic, enthusiastic commenting love.
Put your stereotypical notion of bullies aside for a minute and consider the deputy mayor. She may not fit the textbook example of a bully like her council dance partner, Mayor Stocks, but she is a bully nonetheless.
A month ago, the council listened to the second attempt of thepublic speakers' requests to keep the 2009 city manager correspondence files from being destroyed. They were all reasoned arguments why it was better to keep these records after only two years. At this Feb. 15, 2012, Councilor Teresa Barth questioned the city clerk and asked that the motion to destroy records would make an exception with these city manager files to be kept an additional year for the new city manager to review and reassure the public that nothing of value would be lost.
The recommendation was reasonable, agreeable to the city manager and most of all, honored the public request.
But this council majority was not going to have it and anyone paying attention can pretty much deduce there are some secrets buried there. Otherwise there would never be the public browbeating of City Manager Gus Vina. Even in the midst of this offensive display, Vina offers some credible compromise language to help allow a graceful exit from the pile-on. No, the council appeared bent on shoving him around. See for yourselves below.
Just two questions delivered with intensity:
"Are you interested in having the correspondence for the city manager kept for a period of time?"
"Have you looked into the file at all thus far?
It sounds creepy as it is reminiscent of this interrogation:
"Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party of the United States?"
Loud and clear, the answer is supposed to be, NO to both. It's calling out the head of the city’s government operations like a school boy by challenging his word, his integrity without warning or reason. The man is being grilled as though he has done something wrong.
Take a look at the scripted monologue from the bully with the shiny clothes and shiny smiles.
"That’s why it seems appropriate that we do review with the city manager, for example, and see what’s important for you to have access for you to have. Because we can always make changes to that retention schedule based on the preference of the city manager. And that makes more sense to me. Because the whole point of these items coming before you and the different departments is so that you can take a look personally at what is needed. So I’m happy to keep them around here, but I just think it’s more appropriate to ask, see if it is valuable to you, because there is an expense associated with that. And if you’re saying it is not of value to you it seems odd to me that we are spending a dime of the taxpayer money to keep it knowing that you are not gonna’ access that file. So I guess your answer is important to me."
Scripted to make sounds coming from her face seem like concern, respect, fiscally responsible and caring. Pretty twisted while insulting the council's unanimously selected city manager (and paid $240,000/year) while shredding people's democratic rights by deftly removing the public will completely from the decision. Nowhere in this monologue is the public’s right to documents. She is saying that it is only for the council majority to review with the manager. Public keep out.
Anyone who feels differently, keep out.
Vernal Equinox today, day and night in balance just twice a year. In honor of this first day of Spring and last week sometime being Arbor Day and Encinitas newly designated Tree City, USA, today will center on trees. But, where the mayor and the council majority are involved, there is also the dodging of accountability, disregard for public sentiment and a cavalier dismissal of rules unless they are for somebody else. Did you say, "Sweeping generalizations?" On notice here to search for anecdotes that are the exception. Promise.
Last week of Sunshine and Open Government, the story of Orpheus Trees was presented and today the following clip adds to this historic council majority claim to ill-fame.
Mentioned in this clip and linked in last week's post, Sheila Cameron's complete commentary from the Coast News three years ago is shared here. This Wednesday's March 21, 2012 council meeting will be discussing agenda item #9, the very issue Sheila has described below, email communication. This example is why it is vital for the council policy to specifically spell out retention requirements and other procedures related to 21st century technology.
Trees and Sunshine
March 19, 2009
This week, March 14 to March 21, is proclaimed Sunshine Week in California. Not referring to the abundant sunshine that we enjoy here, but rather the term is used to shine a light on political processes and to foster transparency in all corners of government.
Last week, March 7 to March 14 was Arbor Week in California. Cities have to apply and pass muster with the National Arbor Day Foundation to be recognized as a Tree City. There are 124 Tree Cities in this state — Encinitas is not one of them.
There is a nexus between these two weeks, coming one after the other, that reflects the deficit in the lack of processes practiced in Encinitas city government.
In the middle of Arbor Week, irate Encinitas residents were protesting in a City Council meeting because staff members, ignoring process and public concerns, cut down 11 young healthy trees in the Orpheus Neighborhood Park so that a few condo owners could improve their ocean view. I don’t know how the Arbor Foundation will view this city’s action, but I doubt that it will sit well with an organization whose purpose is maintaining a healthy urban forest.
The Encinitas Environmental Commission has developed an Urban Forest Policy and aspires to be designated a Tree City. The policy was presented at the March 18 City Council meeting. Now it goes to the staff to write up the procedures for operation. Will this policy prevent an Orpheus Park incident from happening again? Some public process needs to be assured and built-in to the procedures. The policy and the procedures need to return to the Environmental Commission and City Council for review and a second public hearing.
The Brown Act is our Sunshine Law in California, which assures us of accountability and transparency in government. The Freedom of Information Act, Federal Advisory Committee Act and the Sunshine Act are the federal laws granting us access to public records and open meetings.
When Brown Act violations occur, it does not bode well for city governments. While the trees in Orpheus Park were being cut down, the three majority council members engaged in a serial e-mail exchange among themselves on this issue. With more than two members discussing an issue, it constitutes a collective concurrence outside the purview of the public, a Brown Act violation.
Closed sessions are meetings where all City Council members meet to discuss: a) possible or real lawsuits/legal action; b) salaries/pay and benefits for staff; c) purchase of property for parks, city projects, etc., without the public in attendance.
Closed sessions are required to be noticed with an agenda.
In Encinitas, the way in which Closed Sessions are being noticed to the public constitutes a Brown Act violation. Currently all Closed Sessions are being noticed as a “Special Meeting,” which means the city is only required to give 24 hours notice versus the 72 hours notice normally required for regular agendas. Result: It doesn’t give the public adequate notification should they want to speak to any issue listed. It shows yet another attempt to circumvent the public process.
Marco Gonzales, co-founder of the Coast Law Group and an Encinitas resident, spoke before the council at the March 11 meeting: “The integrity of your entire government structure is called into question — not just the underhandedness, it is about avoiding process and not having process. We have a systemic problem here in the city with regards to governance. It has led to a lack of confidence of your constituency. It is not hard to govern well, just set the rules and follow them.”
Sheila S. Cameron is an Encinitas resident and former mayor of Encinitas.
This post isn't about last Wednesday night's city council meeting agenda or speakers or their views, or even any mistakes regarding facts.
It isn't about the speeds on Quail Drive being raised in defiance of all that seems obvious to common sense. It isn't about a public hearing also based on denial of known natural world phenomenon involving sand, wind, sun, water and gravity.
It is about our Jerome Stocks being a bully in chairing the meeting.
How about what we expect from children? We teach it's not just about rules or laws or legality. It is about being a human being. Stocks fails again and again and again in demonstrating his naked failure at genuine civility or exercising basic humanity.
Update Below
It's Sunshine Week across the nation. Our Mayor Stocks remains in the dark when it comes to the concept of sunshine as the best disinfectant for corruption and collusion.
In the clip below he reads his carefully worded revision of history. The great hostility that was the city's cutting of eleven trees from Orpheus Park and subsequent ham-handed cover up is again misrepresented.
There was an opportunity for Jerome Stocks to admit error and show some remorse for actions that would shame most of us who would seek the public's esteem. Not a chance for this politico. And yes, he blames the trees too.
Update: For those unfamiliar with the back story of the Orpheus Park tree cutting, there will be further council meeting clips to come. In the meantime, a news account with the apt title, "Trees and Sunshine" is linked here.
Update below
Remember the giant public relations nightmare for the council majority exactly three years ago? It involved the cutting of a dozen trees in Orpheus park for no apparent reason, without any explanation for urgency or purpose and the sh*&tstorm that followed? The city council majority and the city manager, then Phil Cotton, emailed each other, constituents and Dan Dalager even hiked down to the elementary school to verbally beat up on the teachers.
It was a monstrous failure for the so-called leaders Dalager, Stocks and Bond. It was gross incompetence for the city manager and staff to completely ignore the newly issued draft plan of the Urban Forestry Management Plan and a legal dereliction of duty by the city attorney. Several weeks of public speakers at council meetings did not elicit ethical responses from the majority.
During a council meeting on the Sunshine Ordinance policy months later, Dalager offers a kind of apology for that gross misconduct and then utters a revealing admission.
Former Mayor Dalager's yammering fact-free monologue of his recalled error in "too much transparency" yarn held a punch line revealing his habit of deleting everything from his email. Sabine, city attorney, immediately qualified / cleaned up the self-incriminating statements by keeping Dan's magical receptacle in play and telling him he really doesn't do what he just admitted doing. The city attorney presented himself here more like consigliere, quite unlike a public servant.
Update: For those unfamiliar with the back story of the Orpheus
Park tree cutting, there will be further council meeting clips to come.
In the meantime, a news account with the apt title, "Trees and
Sunshine" is linked here.
Uh, oh it will not be such a hot week for our mayor and his cronies this week. Check out the Patch article explaining national Sunshine Week for more information.
Kilroy was here - WWII graffiti in this cartoon goof as Kiljoy is amusing given our council majority's massive over reaction to the Surfing Madonna, which they characterized as graffiti.
The thing about a select few people is their all around relentlessness. And in the case of a grifter, he will, in the face of all evidence, maintain his story. Even if he changes or even reverses his story he will retain the key features of blaming others, dividing people and proclaiming we all need to fear or condemn some one or some thing, some time, some where. But, for a price, he is there to help.
facts be damned
goodwill be damned
reputations be damned
public good be damned
personal integrity? – ptooey!
To be generous, even grifters, shills and hacks need to make a living. Maybe believing his own story becomes a lifelong struggle of self-identity for this kind of guy. He no doubt has loved ones, pets, a back yard grill and favorite television shows; so, he may not stand out for you in a crowd. A crony, a local scam artist has a name that isn’t important to the point here. He’s part of an array of some rich, some ingratiating, some with official standing, some in the shadows, some are befuddled while obedient, etc. Not all are as vocal or obvious as others. Regardless, they are a club.
The point is merely that there will always be cronies preying on the community. There are profits to be had in this richly endowed town. Every election in Encinitas the same forces fire up the rhetoric and fan the flames of fear and accusations. Huge out of town money is spent on slate mailer lies and showy billboards. Grifters target greed and gullibility, emotions familiar to all of us. The uninformed are truly vulnerable, those sincerely trusting better natures will again be betrayed and the stupid remain ever-willing accomplices even as they pay the price like everyone else – rinse, repeat.
Nothing can be done for the willingly stupid group, but the naïve and the uninformed need never be abandoned. Good people far outnumber the cheats. The numbers of people old and young who are or who have begun to transform themselves into mature, informed participants in their city’s governance can overwhelm the well financed plans of the cronies.
WARNING: The image of a toy belies the central feature of what is
being discussed. At the core is a viciousness as the central feature,
the anchor point that most people are ill prepared to anticipate.
Then the task becomes simple vigilance, always. And the huckster will always try and divide people, but the man can remain a non-threatening joke to anyone who knows how to spot the scam when he pops up again. Citizen duty #22, keeping the cronies in check.
Breaking: National Case Study of Citizen Vigilance
All over the nation women and men were exercising their citizen duty #22 (not really numbered) by going right to the source, the money, when calling out the nation's largest huckster of hate, Rush Limbaugh. 98 top advertisers dump Rush Limbaugh.
But it’s not just Limbaugh that these advertisers want to
disassociate with, but other big names in right-wing radio too. As the
Daily Beast’s John Avalon notes, this is unprecedented in the 20-plus
years that Limbaugh and his imitators have been on the air and could spell real trouble
for an industry that’s already suffering demographically. Women ages
24–55 are the prize advertising demographic, but Limbaugh and other
conservative hosts have steadily alienated these listeners over the
years, so the sexist attacks on Sandra Fluke were “a perfect storm.”
The advertising flight is reminiscent of Glenn Beck’s Fox News program. After major companies refused to advertise on Beck’s show in light of racially insensitive comments, he was left with just fringe businesses like survival seed banks and gold sellers. Not long thereafter, he left Fox, reportedly under pressure.
Our mayor, crony to our local version(s) of Rush Limbaugh, is apparently a fan of this national bully. That's right. Jerome Stocks lists both Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck as interests on his facebook page.
Erase (ERAC) has the official gimmick capacity to transform all that was accomplished over nearly two years of the General Plan Update.
Via this official gimmick capacity:
the super majority financial backers are ushered into a front and center advisory position.
the staff and the consultant are made into the prime culprits of blame game.
the super majority’s voter base in New Encinitas is preyed upon by fear tactics from unreliable sources and persistent accusations from the council dais.
the super majority’s nemesis, Barth, is politically maneuvered to play along or be tar brushed with their imaginary plot.
the super majority’s enemies (actual citizens participating in the process) are called names and erased.
Jerome Stocks threw his offensive tantrum last September paraphrased as, “I want control of the General Plan Update (GPU) through the council and the planning commission. Alternatives to the status quo that come from this community process are unacceptable.” Because the actual words he used amounted to rejecting a contract process and contract schedule long known and heartily approved by him, by the entire council. But he couldn’t say that. It’s illegal.
The anger directed at the staff was a foil. They were sacrificed on the pretense of a community outreach failure. Instead, he erased the GPU contracted structure, process and timetable in a 1.3 minute rant. A rupture in what had become a well oiled machine towards updating the General Plan was forced through this first big lie.
An opening had to be made for the majority’s financial backers and the majority’s voter base.
Stocks was the set-up. Step two, Bond denigrates the community participants who had spent hours of their own time contributing in the designed process while elevating the business community as the more important voices. Like Stocks, Bond did a 180 on the process he’d agreed to and praised consistently for more than a year. Then mayor, Bond effectively erased all goodwill generated by this citizen process and democratic participation in favor of pay to play.
Enter the speakers including the council majority financial backers like developer, Meyers; Stocks’ BFF Andreen plus business, real estate and property owners who self-identify as the most valued people, business and property owners on El Camino Real. Threats of “businesses will all leave if these update changes happen” were central to the majority of the presentations.
Sincere revelations of individuals feeling left out and uninformed, just like business fears of change were issues that did need to be heard by the council and dealt with by the council. A four month review had been built into this process to accommodate that very thing. Staging a protest for political positioning is another story.
But even if there was a massive failure in reaching New Encinitas and getting their viewpoints heard and recorded, solutions were far simpler than what actually had been scripted for Gaspar to present.
Offensive step 3 is “throwing out the baby with the bathwater” a radically extremist reaction to responses already anticipated and planned for in the contracted process and approved timeline. Again, a ruse is scripted to give language to a takeover with words like stakeholders (read: financial backers), This takeover erases the contracted process and timeline in favor of a majority council-centric process.
The most divisive step so far, put Gaspar as stage manager creating a new process, with new schedule, new stakeholders group via subcommittee forced on Barth. Despite breathless protestations over costs, Gaspar maps changes that will cost many months and hundreds of hours of staff time, council time, consultant time, commissioners time far in excess of a process that wasn’t broken. Every sentence Gaspar reads from the playbook is misleading, falsely framed, unsubstantiated and clearly intended to confuse.
In the midst of this majority theatrical, Barth is backed into playing a part. With civility she places the community interest at the heart of her response. She stresses the contracted four month period is a respectful approach for the community to digest the draft and let business review. But, this one voice can’t balance the power play being foisted on the city government. Barth remains a touchstone for the community at large, despite majority’s repeated attempts to paint her as an enemy.
Well, a feature of the majority plan was an attempt to discredit Barth, to rob her of her formidable reputation as a superior civil servant whose stance is inclusive rather than divisive. With absolutely no way for anyone to verify her accusations, Gaspar dumps a fetid pile of grievances on a crowd leaving the room and to a dais of baffled looks, again, with the script.
This was so pathetic it gained no traction. Gaspar is an embarrassment as parrot for the more hateful features of the majority exhibited years prior to her presence. But it isn’t just bad behavior. What this cost, what was lost hasn’t even begun to be tallied.
On Wednesday, March 7, 2012 the planning staff will be asking council to approve more than $43,000 for the thrice re-designed community outreach mailer printing / mailing and additional consultant fees. Five months have been lost that could have been used for review and increased public input. Instead there has been bad will, distraction and a whole series of secretive meeting changes, agenda changes, false applications and absolutely zero public scrutiny of this ambushed and erased General Plan Update process.
Taxpayers are essentially paying hundreds of thousands of dollars and precious time to campaign and fund raise for Stocks and Muir. Classy.
This statement by Cardiff resident George Hejduk is lifted from The NCT articleon Tuesday night's itty-bitty special public hearing of the Ecke Proposal to divide almost 40 acres into three smaller parcels.
"Ecke Ranch owners repeatedly have tried to change the agricultural zoning on their land in the two decades since they agreed to preserve it for agriculture in perpetuity, he said. They lobbied city officials and got a measure on the ballot in 2005 that was "soundly defeated" by voters, Hejduk recalled."
Okay, this from the Ecke Ranch attorney is supposed to reassure the thousands of us who just fell free of the turnip truck we rode in on here.
"They got shot down," she agreed. "That is a
very good reason why they will not be trying it again."
And this from NCT article, the Ecke attorney adds,
"She repeatedly stressed during Tuesday's special hearing that the only
proposal before the city is a minor subdivision request. The
agricultural zoning isn't proposed to change, she noted."
In a previous NCT article, Mayor Stocks' and/ or his BFF Andreen's sock puppets* in the press, like Coastal Watchdog stressed in the comments section of the article how small and inconsequential this land use request was. Yes, the sneering is the giveaway.
Sorry if they believe that logical failure will suffice as a ruse. Hidden in plain sight by making something small and innocuous looking is a classic deception.
“If you think you're too small to be effective, you have never been in bed with a mosquito.”
What is the reality? What is behind the deal? There is no answer in this post or in the press. There are (gratefully) a few protesting citizens even though there aren't investigative journalists uncovering much of anything in Encinitas. Even so . . . small is a start.
It would be a good idea to fire an email off to these planners to remind them we aren't required to trust Paul Ecke III, the planners or the mayor - just because they say this is small. No, we don't need to trust because those in control insist we must. Small works with distrust too, so send an email, or a letter to the editor. What harm is there in asking what's going on here?
*sock puppet
A phony name made up by a user in order to masquerade as someone else on the Internet. Sock puppets can make controversial comments or without revealing their identity.
The term comes from a pretend person made by placing a sock over one's hand.
