Myths Encinitas

True Facts™ (clarifications at end)
After 11 years of public service, Councilwoman Maggie Houlihan died on September 16, 2011 and her colleagues in the majority at City Hall made a conscious decision to ignore her passing.  The flag at City Hall was not lowered.  The permit to hold a memorial was refused.  Her wishes to name a successor to her council seat were not only ignored, the special meeting was a TV/streaming blackout and the majority selection of crony fire chief Muir was an insult to injury for the representation of the Encinitas minority voices.

And, then the tipping point ultimately came in the Arts Alive! Banner program honoring Maggie Houlihan in recognition of her support for the arts as it was mishandled, misdirected and Jerome Stocks accused the sponsors in print of political purposes.

This is where the myth begins.  Jerome Stocks was immediately criticized by Maggie Houlihan's supporters, the Art Community and by the local papers.  He could have come away from all of this blow back without any political loss of face with the tiniest bit of diplomacy and good grace.  Instead, under the guise of serving the public (via property rights) he chose to drag this community through 9 months of controversy and divisiveness.

Our Mayor Stocks began his long campaign to create a justification for his petty, cruel behavior.  He has come to stand for utter lack of integrity in his role as mayor.  Stupidly, he continues to this day denying he said the things he is recorded saying.  He has, of course, relied on the cronies seated on the dais, Deputy Mayor Gaspar, Councilmen Jim Bond and Mark Muir to go along with and even expand upon each mythical aspect - be it the timeline, the participants, the City Manager role, the ironclad (it is not ironclad) process and procedure and straw man arguments. 

In late March of this year Houlihan's husband, Ian Thompson, notified the city council through Coastal Law Group that they would file a law suit against the city for infringement of 1st amendment free speech rights in this Art Banner ruling against showing the late councilwoman's image.  The ACLU also contacted the city regarding the violation of 1st amendment rights in this case.

Even here Stocks lied about the council being available to meet within Mr. Thompson's April 6 time frame when he said council members were out of town.  And when the council met and agreed to allow the banners to show Houlihan's image, despite the elaborate tap dancing by city manager, assistant city manager and the Deputy Mayor, the collateral damage was Stocks again refusing to give  any concession or any degree of cooperation as an act of goodwill.  He dug himself deeper into his mythical kingdom of "I'm right and everyone must pay for not obeying my words".

No signs whatsoever will be allowed in Encinitas until language of signage requirement is clear.  The video clip from this April 13 meeting shows the whole orchestrated narrative, including Stocks coaching the designated new guy motion maker, Muir in the next big waste of time, staff priorities and public goodwill - analysis of the false cause of banner outrage, unclear language. Even this ridiculousness was extended into August with another meeting to create a subcommittee - based on hired attorney (from Glenn Sabine's law firm) reading of the sign requirements. Jeebus.

From Dec. 18, 2011 to this Wednesday's upcoming meeting it will have been more than 9 months of Jerome Stocks personal animus for Maggie Houlihan has stirred controversy, created false narratives re-writing history and kept us from topics of real importance to citizens.  It has been painful and insulting to Maggie Houlihan's loved ones, supporters and close friends. This is wrong even to people who were not fans of Houlihan.  

It is simply not serving the public. It has cost the city in outside legal fees, staff hours and focus and valuable agenda time at the many council meetings with the mythical pretense of serving the public or as Stocks claims property rights or Gaspar claims of process and rules not being followed (no really, she said this) or Muir claims of really confusing language or Bond rambling, well Bond rambling. Throughout Councilwoman Barth is clear and consistent, the public implores and even the press  . . . doesn't matter at all to the club.

So, the Arts Alive Banners raised a lot of money at the  auction this spring, days after Artists 101 Colony director, Danny Salzhandler jumped the city hoops of filling out a form and then he set about removing the vinyl stickers the city Stocks had forced the group to place over Houlihan's image (at the cost to this group of $800).  DEMA and the Artist 101 have remained respectful and never overtly hostile to Stocks et al. 

All of this underscores what is shockingly bad behavior on Stocks' part and his co-conspirators in the majority.  Although he is the leader behind this myth making behavior, the council majority has in no way acted with any integrity.  Which brings us to this week and the agenda item for this Wednesday, approving the signage standards.  The complicit staff have dutifully buried a simple fact of one ambitious man's personal passions directing city government operations against a rival after her death. The latest mountain of bureaucratic bullshit. 

The agenda packet guided by quantity of words over quality of information follows: 

BACKGROUND: At the August 22, 2012 City Council meeting, Council Members Bond and Muir were appointed to a subcommittee to review and make recommendations regarding potential changes to the City’s Banners Program over the public right-of-way.

The ad-hoc committee met on two occasions on September 5th and September 12, 2012. At those meetings the ad-hoc committee identified the scope of issues, obtain legal input, reviewed potential draft language and obtained input from representatives from Main Street and Arts Alive organizations. Suspension of acceptance of Temporary Sign/Banner Applications for banners and signs over public right-of-ways by non-city entities has been in place since April 11, 2012. No new applications for banners over public right-of-way have been accepted during the suspension period. 

ANALYSIS:
The desire in addressing issues on banners over public right-of-way program is to obtain an option that allows continued use of the streetlight standards and other public right-of-way areas for non- profits community groups to promote civic events, cultural, historic or other messaging of community interest, yet manage risk to the City.

In order to continue a banner program allowing civic-minded, non-profit parties to provide banners over public right-of-ways, the following issues were considered:

• Exclusively promote non-profit, civic events or promotional or celebratory depictions related to the City; 
• No depictions of political figures; 
• Council reserves the right to cancel the program. 

Attachment “A” contains the current temporary sign narrative regarding banners over public rights- of-way in the Encinitas Municipal Code and the proposed language changes.

The proposed language changes were also shared with other community/business groups not in attendance at the September 12th meeting via email communications.

FISCAL AND STAFF IMPACTS: No fiscal impacts.

RECOMMENDATION: The subcommittee recommends that Council consider revisions to the Encinitas Banners Program over public right-of-way and direct staff to prepare necessary revisions to the Encinitas Municipal Code.

Current Language: D. Banners over public right-of-way shall be permitted subject to the standards established by the City and approved by the City Manager or designee. Said banners are for civic and non-profit City-wide recognized special events. The banner shall not exceed 45 square feet in area and shall be located only on City approved structures. The banner may be displayed no more than 14 days prior to the start of the event and must be removed within 3 days of end of event. Installation shall be to City specifications. Fees to recover City costs in reviewing the applications shall be established by the City Council.

Proposed:
“D. Banners over public rights-of-way.

(1) Banners over public rights-of-way shall be authorized by a City permit pursuant to this section and subject to the standards established by the City and approved by the City Manager or designee. Said authorization shall be known as the ‘City’s Banner Program.’

(2) Said banners shall exclusively promote or depict:

a. non-profit civic authorized events such as art festivals, athletic events, car shows and similar events; and
b. promotional or celebratory depictions of or related to the City such as points of interest, attractions and milestones. 

(3) Banners shall not promote nor depict the likeness of any political figures. The phrase ‘political figures’ shall mean former elected public officials, present elected public officials and current candidates for any elected public office. The phrase ‘candidate’ shall mean any person who has publically expressed or demonstrated an intention to run for any public office and/or filed the appropriate papers with a government agency to do so. The purpose of this subsection is to avoid public controversy regarding the perception of any such figures, either positive or negative.

(4) The Banner shall not exceed 45 square feet in area and shall be located only on City approved structures. The Banner may be displayed no more than 14 days prior to the start of the event and shall be removed within 3 days of the end of the event. Banners not related to a specific actual event shall not be displayed more than 90 days.

(5) Fees to recover City Costs in reviewing the applications shall be established by the City Council.

(6) The City Council reserves the right to terminate the City’s Banner Program at any time; provided, however, that any banner erected prior to said termination may remain in place for the duration of its authorization to do so.”
_________________________________END_________________________________

9/26/12 True Facts™ Clarification 1: Permit was not issued for the memorial gathering because when application was made, it was explained a permit wasn't required unless there more than 500 attending. This line is eliminated.
9/26/12 True Facts™ Clarification 2: Flag was not lowered due to Nov. 19, 2008 council vote to follow Federal regulations for flag lowering. City Link scroll to the end, page 9. This was an agenda item because ex-Marine City Manager Phil Cotton was against Jerome Stocks having directed staff to lower the flag for one of his favorite ex-mayors of Encinitas.

This is how adults deal with learning what is true and what is myth.  They acknowledge a mistake.

What remains central is that the city did not honor Maggie Houlihan in any way.

Myths Encinitas

Update at end
Jerome Stocks has recently claimed he wants to be a leader in transportation as part of the evolution of transit in Encinitas and throughout the nation. Transportation is clearly a fiefdom for Stocks and his regional seats with SANDAG and NCTD take him away from his council duties on a regular basis.

Despite what his campaign messaging is, Stocks has demonstrated in the Encinitas City Council that his "leadership" is not interested in what the citizens of Encinitas have to say about how transportation should evolve for our community. And he is wont to share anything of the work with these regional boards beyond the most perfunctory announcements. As stated before, Leadership is mythical when nobody is allowed to know where things are headed. If the public is treated as followers alone, this is dictatorship.

When the widening of Interstate 5's EIR was being unveiled by Caltrans for public comment period in August of 2010, city council chambers were filled with speakers asking for this subject to be put on the agenda for discussion as our neighboring coastal communities were had already done. The majority, with Stocks articulating the facile opposition led the refusal.

Follow-up to this? A couple of months later, during the thick of the last election which uncovered Dallager's unethical behavior (with conflict of interest in a bank loan and in a council vote in favor of a guy who gave him a free kitchen), Judy Berlfein returned to the council to summarize the failures of the majority members despite more than a thousand public participants in the workshop process these council members refused to allow for public dialog.

Dalager is gone, but the pattern hasn't changed in the least. Public service, for Jerome Stocks, is a myth and evolving transit Stocks has promoted so far sounds a whole lot like the car-centric faux-public transit we've seen for half a century.

Update Monday 6 pm: Big oversight in forgetting to call out one of the primary reasons for posting this today. Caltrans plans to hold a public meeting on the supplemental report at 6 p.m. Sept. 19, this Wednesday, at the Encinitas Community Center. The report can be found here.

It is too bad that Jerome Stocks couldn't have directed California Department of Transportation to schedule a public meeting of this importance on a night other than a city council meeting.  How influential is Stocks as a leader in transportation to direct transit evolution, or whatever?

Myths America

Update at end

PART ONE Historic Myth 

The excerpts in Part 1 below are from an article written for the Journal of 9/11 Studies for the eleventh anniversary of September 11, 2001, the day that terminated accountable government and American liberty.

"In order to understand the improbability of the government’s explanation of 9/11, it is not necessary to know anything about what force or forces brought down the three World Trade Center buildings, what hit the Pentagon or caused the explosion, the flying skills or lack thereof of the alleged hijackers, whether the airliner crashed in Pennsylvania or was shot down, whether cell phone calls made at the altitudes could be received, or any other debated aspect of the controversy."

You only have to know two things. 

One is that according to the official story, a handful of Arabs, mainly Saudi Arabians, operating independently of any government and competent intelligence service, men without James Bond and V for Vendetta capabilities, outwitted not only the CIA, FBI, and National Security Agency, but all 16 US intelligence agencies, along with all security agencies of America’s NATO allies and Israel’s Mossad.  Not only did the entire intelligence forces of the Western world fail, but on the morning of the attack the entire apparatus of the National Security State simultaneously failed. Airport security failed four times in one hour. NORAD failed. Air Traffic Control failed. The US Air Force failed. 

The National Security Council failed.  Dick Cheney failed. Absolutely nothing worked.  The world’s only superpower was helpless at the humiliating mercy of a few undistinguished Arabs. 

It is hard to image a more far-fetched story–except for the second thing you need to know:  The humiliating failure of US National Security did not result in immediate demands from the President of the United States, from Congress, from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and from the media for an investigation of how such improbable total failure could have occurred.  Instead, the White House dragged its feet for a year resisting any investigation until the persistent demands from 9/11 families for accountability forced President George W. Bush to appoint a political commission, devoid of any experts, to hold a pretend investigation.

[ . . . ]
Naive and gullible Americans claim that if some part of the US government had been involved in 9/11, “someone would have talked by now.”  A comforting thought, perhaps, but nothing more.  Consider, for example, the cover-up by the US government of the 1967 Israeli attack on the USS Liberty that killed or wounded most of the crew but failed to sink the ship. As the survivors have testified, they were ordered in a threatening way not to speak about the event. It was twelve years later before one of the USS Liberty’s officers, James Ennes, told the story of the attack in his book, Assault on the Liberty. I continue to wonder how the professionals at the National Institute of Standards and Technology feel about being maneuvered by the federal government into the unscientific position NIST took concerning the destruction of the WTC towers.

[ . . . ]
If enough Americans or even other peoples in the world had the intelligence to realize that massive steel structures do not disintegrate into fine dust because a flimsy airliner hits them and limited short-lived fires burn on a few floors, Washington would be faced with the suspicion it deserves. 

If 9/11 was actually the result of the failure of the national security state to deter an attack, the government’s refusal to conduct a real investigation is an even greater failure. It has fallen to concerned and qualified individuals to perform the investigative role abandoned by government. The presentations at the Toronto Hearings, along with the evaluations of the Panel, are now available, as is the documentary film, “Explosive Evidence–Experts Speak Out,” provided by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. 

The government’s agents and apologists try to deflect attention from disturbing facts by redefining factual evidence revealed by experts as the product of “a conspiracy culture.” If people despite their brainwashing and lack of scientific education are able to absorb the information made available to them, perhaps both the US Constitution and peace could be restored. Only informed people can restrain Washington and avert the crazed hegemonic US government from destroying the world in war. 

Improbably, Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy (under Reagan) and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate.  

PART 2 - Current Jingoism

Jeremy Scahill speaks out on Sunday show Up with Chris Hayes.  He steps away from the corporate side shows of the national party conventions by criticizing and holding responsible the corporate media.  This is an MSNBC program, owned by General Electric, a weapons contractor for the Department of Defense.

Jeremy Scahill, a Puffin Foundation Writing Fellow at The Nation Institute, is the author of the bestselling Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army, published by Nation Books. He is an award-winning investigative journalist and correspondent for the national radio and TV program Democracy Now!. You can read his blog on TheNation.com here.

Of course the big theme here is War and the Military.  National Security has been used to justify abolishment of citizen rights and accountability at all levels. These are emotional subjects, but let's respect our citizenry can tackle adult subjects, both simple and highly complex.  Being treated as stupid will make us stupid.

Political malpractice? Mythmaking as public policy needs to be exposed on the national stage and on the local dais - regardless of political gamesmanship (or season). Pointing out if there never has been an acceptance of more than minimal deference to open government from the other national party and our local majority is part of this.

We could argue that the media is a major author of these myths and are nearly entirely responsible for filtering out, censoring or otherwise killing dissent.  Even locally our papers primarily act as a delivery system for news initiated by government sources or their funders rather than community dissenters. You will never ever hear anyone campaigning in 2012 locally or nationally bring up these myths.  It doesn't mean they don't matter.

Update, 9/11/12 @ 2 pm: Didn't think that the local news situation could degrade.  According to a Patch article this morning the North County Times has been Sold to UT San Diego.

Myths Encinitas

Mayor Stocks was interviewed for the campaign by Coast News and more than half of the responses related to his claims of transportation leadership.

The myth making here centers on two key features.  The first is  his giant wish making has nothing to do with being on the Encinitas City Council except as a means to his ends via his self-assigned regional board seats.  And these seats allow a small voice compared to federal and state officials in control of all of the aspirations and accomplishments he claims.

The second major myth is that his many years on the SANDAG and NCTD have been devoted to the Encinitas People's Business, capitalized to emphasize his actual responsibility.  A city council clip from the beginning of this year follows the article excerpt.  It's characteristic of his NCTD role being flaunted as part of a personal fiefdom rather than a public duty. Also, the pay to play aspect of these various plans don't really satisfy true public transit needs for all the people, just those able to foot the higher costs.

The article excerpt follows with OM editor comments bracketed:

As the SANDAG chairperson for a two-year term and the North County Transit District chairperson for two years, Stocks has become immersed in mass transit issues.  

He wants to be a part of the evolution of transit in Encinitas and throughout the county. “In terms of rail transit in the city, just like all along the coastal corridor, it will be double tracked, with more trains and a better commuter service,” he said. [federal & regional & state subsidy & planning dependent] 

“Federal regulations will change so that we could see light rail rather than heavy rail,” Stocks predicted. “Light rail use less energy, lower pollution and reduces sound impacts along the corridor,” Stocks said. “That directly impacts the quality of life.” [federal & regional & state subsidy & planning dependent] 

In addition, Stocks looks forward to the future growth in commuter rail and inner city transportation. “Encinitas’ relatively low density suburban geography doesn’t lend itself to successful mass transit,” he said. However, such services as the newly reintroduced Flex Bus that allows passengers to call ahead for door-to-door shuttle service within Encinitas and Solana Beach is a viable option. [federal & regional & state subsidy & planning dependent & ok if you have the fare price] 

As more and more cars take to the highways, Stocks said the future of Interstate 5 expansion includes HOT (High Occupancy Toll) lanes, two in each direction that will allow single passenger cars to pay for enhanced mass transit services. [federal & regional & state subsidy & planning dependent & ok if you have the fee price]

Here is that second major myth, Stocks doing the people's business in his role as NCTD chair. It looks more like another opportunity for self-congratulation and condescension towards Councilwoman Barth, numbering in the hundreds by Stocks and company over the past 5 years of meetings.  This matters because Barth's voice represents the community voice, the people's voice as much or more than any other council member. It was also the beginning of the more rehearsed version of dance team synchronization between Gaspar and Stocks.

View on YouTube if clip isn't displaying properly.

We have listened to years of meetings with council members reporting at the end of the meeting.  Jerome Stocks does not share much if anything with his constituents about what interests them most on the issues of the rail corridor or the regional planning.  For Stocks, information is power and he is obviously loathe to share.  Leadership is mythical when nobody is allowed to follow or even know where things are headed.

This is the tip of the myth mountain related to transportation concerns in Encinitas, so more will follow. 

Myths Encinitas

Encinitas has all of the makings to be a creative leader in 21st century measures for resiliency in our natural environment.  The citizenry is leading this effort, the minority voices on the council have long advocated for this and the majority are content to do the minimum and reap the recognition.  Greenwashing is ubiquitous in the power that comes from extraction where profits and private property rights (read: wealth) above all else crew that is or council majority.

Across the nation, across party lines the people are pushing the leaders from the ground up to prioritize the health of the people and the natural world. Clean air, clean and abundant water, less waste, eliminating pesticides, safe food, less carbon and so many other things have touched households - often starting with the children.

It is a myth that doing the bare minimum as a leader means you can call yourself an advocate for the environment.  Case in point is Kristin Gaspar who championed the council majority vote to decimate the environmental work plan that had been created by the Environmental Commission over two years, voted along with the majority for crony on the Environmental Commission over highly qualified applicants, argued for the downtown Farmer's Market to pay higher fees, overturned staff's plans to have General Plan update plans available at the Leucadia Farmer's Market and had a good laugh over safe food issues with her kids drinking juice.  For all her proselytizing from the dais, she has yet to mention climate change realities behind the General Plan Update.  By politicizing density as the only issue, she fosters confusion and fear. This is a smattering of how anti-leadership works with constituents who are misinformed, afraid or simply unaware.

We offer this more recent summary from last Wednesday's meeting:

Agenda item 4 has this in the staff report as background:   "On July 20, 2011, the City Council approved the City’s first Environmental Action Plan designating sixteen key environmental enhancement areas on which to focus. One specific work area was: “Seek recognition through the Institute for Local Government’s Beacon Awards for Encinitas’ current and ongoing efforts to promote sustainability, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, conserve resources and save energy.”"

Staff was doing what Council had asked, and following through on the Environmental Action Plan.  Unfortunately, Donna Westbrook pulled the item from the consent agenda and made a speech about property rights and how participation in this program means forcing people to all live close together and give up their cars and ride bikes everywhere (said very disparagingly) and eliminate parking and follow an international conspiracy, etc. etc. etc.

Instead of dismissing her comments, there were questions from Council about why we are doing this.  Kristin said that she doesn't hear from people that they want sustainability principles applied and she asked why we are "forcing this" upon our community - people like Encinitas the way it is so why do we need to change.

In a later discussion, Kristin squashed a resolution that would ask the Encinitas rep to the California League of Cities (Jim Bond) to go along with the League's recommended position "The fourth proposed resolution requests consideration of suspension or revision of the California Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32 of 2006). The City Council has adopted an Environmental Policy and a Climate Action Plan that are both responsive to and consistent with AB 32 goals of greenhouse gas reduction. Staff recommends a “Disapprove” vote on this resolution." and instead gives Bond instruction to "vote his conscience". We can only assume what his conscience will tell him!

Again there were comments from the Council that they don't hear from citizens about environmental issues or a desire to address sustainability. So if we want our elected officials to represent us and our views, we need to speak up and hold them accountable. How shameful to have us backing down from an already weak Environmental Action plan.

Myths Encinitas

The most magical mythical thing for Our Mayor Stocks is that he is a legend in his own mind.  The last council meeting was a robust display of his smug arrogance as holder of all knowledge necessary to a public hearing on the Crest Drive appeal shown in this clip, from yesterday's post, (Eddie Haskell character being a variation on the arrogance described in today's post).

For today's Myths Encinitas this tendency will be hereby called, Stocksplaining based on this definition where "person in authority position" is the position of privilege:

Splaining—[Privilege]splaining is when a person of privilege condescendingly tells an unprivileged person something [he or she] already knows, particularly something about [one's] own life and/or identity, e.g. a man mansplaining what it's like to be a woman to a woman. [Privilege]splaining is that delightful mixture of privilege and ignorance that leads to condescending, inaccurate explanations, delivered with the rock-solid conviction of rightness and that slimy certainty that of course [the privileged person] is right, because [he or she is the privileged person] in this conversation."

It would be difficult to cull through all of the videos clips of Jerome Stocks, even when he wasn't sitting in the mayor chair, and find one where he isn't Stocksplaining something to someone.  But this last clip is particularly interesting because his Stocksplaining to James Bond enraged Bond who has spent 20 years on the council and was mayor 4 or 5 times.  After all, old white men are the master splainers and being treated as an empty vessel needing to be filled by some self-appointed Jerry Jump-up expert is just outrageous for the old politico.

The room last Wednesday was filled with people who have a great deal of experience, they knew about their neighborhood, the project and some were experts in their field.  One in particular needs to be heard by more of our community who have battled with the engineering and planning departments, Boone Hellman. Mr. Hellman is just one of many with expertise and in this case real technical expertise. All of the speakers are worth hearing if you haven't yet.

Another aspect of this is how demeaning it is.  Women are all too familiar with the problem of men explaining things, and as historian and author Rebecca Solnit writes:

" . . . billions of women must be out there on this 6-billion-person planet being told that they are not reliable witnesses to their own lives, that the truth is not their property, now or ever. This goes way beyond Men Explaining Things, but it's part of the same archipelago of arrogance. 

Men explain things to me, still. And no man has ever apologized for explaining, wrongly, things that I know and they don't. Not yet, but according to the actuarial tables, I may have another fortysomething years to live, more or less, so it could happen. Though I'm not holding my breath."

In our little Petrie dish that is the Encinitas City Council, a microcosm - like hundreds of thousand of other towns our size across the country, is where we are all trying to advocate for ourselves and our communities in matters of governance.  This is a chance to connect the dots and empathise with others who have been marginalized, ignored, silenced, patronized, lied to or abused.

Stocksplaining doesn't rest well with anyone except Jerome Stocks himself, yet it's a feature not a bug. It is obviously a gigantic myth he holds about himself.  It's time for him to be voted out of the city council, along with his friend Muir.

Myths Encinitas

Tree City USA, Urban Forest Policy and other designations claimed by the Encinitas City is largely mythical. It just doesn't seem like Engineering got the memo from Public Works (and clearly unfamiliar with the Environmental Commission).  Public Works was in charge of writing the manual on Encinitas Urban Forest, including heritage trees.  Engineering is pretty much robotically wired to road code dimensions and are rarely swayed by real life or logic.

This particular week we have the perfect storm of empty rhetoric regarding city council policies actually effectively connecting and engaging various departments' supposed commitment to Encinitas community character, Encinitas trees and Encinitas Urban Forest.

Why? The agenda for Wednesday's meeting agenda includes the merging of two department director positions into one. Consolidation of the positions of Director of Engineering and Director of Public Works into Director of Engineering and Public Works. We question the success of that merger in the current culture at city hall that does not celebrate connectivity, collaboration or cooperation.

Meanwhile, another agenda item:
Public Hearing of the appeal of Engineering conditions for public improvements adjacent to 1794 Crest Drive. Reading through the appeal makes the many layers of trees, street standards, infrastructure, community character and financial hardship a complex web of assumptions, justification and a fair dose of misinterpretation.  Behind it all is money (see Growth: Ponzi Scheme series) and an authoritarian adherence to codes as power.  It's how it sounds to this reader. The appellant's challenges the reality of the city plan for a trail throughout the Crest Drive built out area will ever happen, yet alone that harms no trees. Another mythical notion of shared goals amongst departments with a council majority uninterested in making these connections.

It is very difficult to ascribe "good faith" to our city departments dealings with single family residents, given a long history of inconsistent treatment of resident requests. Indeed, there is a very real reluctance of homeowners, architects and contractors to come forward with individual stories because of fear of retaliation in their properties and businesses.

It's vital we all keep hearing, learning and sharing our preferred city government ideals.  Planting trees should be more than a political photo op. There are  fantastic examples all around us, and some close by, of a better way to deal with sincere connections to our public spaces, our trees and our private property and business owners.  These magnificent pines on Crest Drive and all the other vegetation is of upmost importance in this time of drought, climate change, erosion, need for sustainability and economic depression.

Andy Lipkis, well known TreePeople founder, known to many in Encinitas speaks here about  our need for functioning community forests as acupuncture used strategically to heal; for our watersheds, to create oxygen and filters for our air and coolants and . . . well start at 6:00 to dive right into it. Enabling community is at the heart and soul of this for success.  We could have this kind of thinking on our city council.

Love the part about we Americans just hate to be told what to do, but when informed we want to help.

Crest Drive is yet another opportunity for our city council to seek policy for connections and restoration rather than piecemeal acquisition of scattered contract work for favored vendors. After Wednesday there will only be about a half dozen council meetings until the election. Time to envision change and campaign for it too. 

Myths Encinitas

"Our culture is centered on a myth of economic growth: if we stop growing, that means we’re failing. Under conventional wisdom, growth is not only considered "good," it is seen as the most effective means to lift millions of people out of poverty and to ensure prosperity and opportunity for all. And in many places and for many people, it has been extraordinarily successful in achieving this goal.

But as we approach a global population of 7 billion and a world GDP of $70 trillion, we must increasingly consider the implications of this continuous quest for growth, not just for Earth's finite resources and fragile ecosystems but for societal well-being. Increasingly, economic growth has become an end in itself rather than a means to societal betterment.

Yet how do we move beyond growth when our economic system and culture take for granted the idea that perpetual growth is not only necessary, but something to celebrate?

The Illogic of Perpetual Growth

Nothing makes the absurdity of perpetual growth clearer than the short video “The Impossible Hamster.” If we’re not careful, we risk the possibilities of environmental and climatic disruption and future economic contraction, as the resources and ecosystem services that we take for granted are increasingly strained under the pressure of 7 billion people. The best way for us to reduce the threats of these system changes is to start an intentional effort to move beyond growth, and to reduce the throughput of our highly consumptive economies."

This is an excerpted portion of a larger article from "Rethinking Growth" with more fresh perspectives on redefining growth. Today's Encinitas You Need Us post includes a TED talk from the same article, recommended in Councilwoman Teresa Barth's newsletter last week.

Myths Encinitas

The Hall property mythologies are some of the longest running in Encinitas history - almost half of the 26 years.  Just in the last week the Jerome Stocks and Jim Bond were mouthing the same revisionist history at the big special city council meeting on July 11.

Yesterday's Our Mayor post provides 8 clips dating from 2008. Nobody is against the park or wants to delay the park.

Prior to Our Mayor blog, the Leucadia blog did some really great posts on various Hall property actions, reactions, lies and community commentary.  A search of the blog with "Hall Propoerty" brings up a non-chronological list with 32 entries, going back to 2006.

If one would read all of these posts with links, comments and view just these clips presented yesterday, you can get an appreciation for the weary sound of Jerry's Sodamka's voice in the following clip. He spoke at last Wednesday's meeting to go on video record that yet again the city was not accurately reporting history and was stretching credible limits with the financial package. We'll honor his desire to go on record by making it just a bit more public than being buried in the city video archives. Jerry is one of Encinitas finest myth busters. And his financial concerns are still valid despite the approval vote Wednesday for the finance concepts.

Myths Encinitas

The myth of unlimited growth as fiscal strength  is directly related to the crash course, The Growth Ponzi Scheme featured these last four days at Encinitas You Need Us.  Tomorrow will be the final part 5. This guest series gives a narrative that people without financial expertise can use to be able to talk about city finances.

Part 1: The Mechanisms of Growth - Trading near-term cash for long-term obligations.
Part 2: Case studies that show how our places do not create, but destroy, our wealth.
Part 3: The Ponzi scheme revealed - How new development is used to pay for old development.
Part 4: How we've sustained the unsustainable by going "all in" on the suburban pattern of development.
Part 5: Responses that are rational and responses that are irrational.

The Growth Ponzi Scheme 

by Thomas Marhon

We often forget that the American pattern of suburban development is an experiment, one that has never been tried anywhere before. We assume it is the natural order because it is what we see all around us. But our own history — let alone a tour of other parts of the world — reveals a different reality. Across cultures, over thousands of years, people have traditionally built places scaled to the individual. It is only the last two generations that we have scaled places to the automobile.

How is our experiment working?

At Strong Towns, the nonprofit, nonpartisan organization I co-founded in 2009, we are most interested in understanding the intersection between local finance and land use. How does the design of our places impact their financial success or failure?

What we have found is that the underlying financing mechanisms of the suburban era — our post-World War II pattern of development — operates like a classic Ponzi scheme, with ever-increasing rates of growth necessary to sustain long-term liabilities.

Since the end of World War II, our cities and towns have experienced growth using three primary mechanisms:

• Transfer payments between governments: where the federal or state government makes a direct investment in growth at the local level, such as funding a water or sewer system expansion.
• Transportation spending: where transportation infrastructure is used to improve access to a site that can then be developed.
• Public and private-sector debt: where cities, developers, companies, and individuals take on debt as part of the development process, whether during construction or through the assumption of a mortgage.

In each of these mechanisms, the local unit of government benefits from the enhanced revenues associated with new growth. But it also typically assumes the long-term liability for maintaining the new infrastructure. This exchange — a near-term cash advantage for a long-term financial obligation — is one element of a Ponzi scheme.

Encinitas Illustration 

Jerome Stocks State of City, 4/18/12 clip

Returning to guest post . . .

The other is the realization that the revenue collected does not come near to covering the costs of maintaining the infrastructure. In America, we have a ticking time bomb of unfunded liability for infrastructure maintenance. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) estimates the cost at $5 trillion — but that's just for major infrastructure, not the minor streets, curbs, walks, and pipes that serve our homes.

The reason we have this gap is because the public yield from the suburban development pattern — the amount of tax revenue obtained per increment of liability assumed — is ridiculously low. Over a life cycle, a city frequently receives just a dime or two of revenue for each dollar of liability. The engineering profession will argue, as ASCE does, that we're simply not making the investments necessary to maintain this infrastructure. This is nonsense. We've simply built in a way that is not financially productive.

We've done this because, as with any Ponzi scheme, new growth provides the illusion of prosperity. In the near term, revenue grows, while the corresponding maintenance obligations — which are not counted on the public balance sheet — are a generation away.

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, we completed one life cycle of the suburban experiment, and at the same time, growth in America slowed. There were many reasons involved, but one significant factor was that our suburban cities were now starting to experience cash outflows for infrastructure maintenance. We'd reached the "long term," and the end of easy money.

It took us a while to work through what to do, but we ultimately decided to go "all in" using leverage. In the second life cycle of the suburban experiment, we financed new growth by borrowing staggering sums of money, both in the public and private sectors. By the time we crossed into the third life cycle and flamed out in the foreclosure crisis, our financing mechanisms had, out of necessity, become exotic, even predatory.

One of humanity's greatest strengths — our ability to innovate solutions to complex problems — can be a detriment when we misdiagnose the problem. Our problem was not, and is not, a lack of growth. Our problem is 60 years of unproductive growth — growth that has buried us in financial liabilities. The American pattern of development does not create real wealth. It creates the illusion of wealth. Today we are in the process of seeing that illusion destroyed, and with it the prosperity we have come to take for granted.

That is now our greatest immediate challenge. We've actually embedded this experiment of suburbanization into our collective psyche as the "American dream," a non-negotiable way of life that must be maintained at all costs. What will we throw away trying to sustain the unsustainable? How much of our dwindling wealth will be poured into propping up this experiment gone awry?

We need to end our investments in the suburban pattern of development, along with the multitude of direct and indirect subsidies that make it all possible. Further, we need to intentionally return to our traditional pattern of development, one based on creating neighborhoods of value, scaled to actual people. When we do this, we will inevitably rediscover our traditional values of prudence and thrift as well as the value of community and place.
Strong Towns   www.strongtowns.org

This Wednesday - Encinitas Financial Model as spelled out above.

The timing of this relates to the upcoming council meeting this coming Wednesday, July 11, being held at Encinitas Community Center (Senior Center) at Oakcrest & Balour. The agenda available here includes the agenda packet prepared by city staff.

The financing schemes to pay for major capital improvement projects, Hall property park and Moonlight beach is a real shuffle. There is a lot of Peter paying Paul switches and big debt commitment in these staff recommendations:

1. Reallocate General Fund Capital Improvement Project Funding - 7.0 million to projects.
2. Authorize proceeding with financing up to $8.0 million for projects.
3. Adopt Resolution amending the Capital Improvement Program Budget.
4. Award of contracts for Hall: $2,258,767.85 for the project.
5. Award of contract for Moonlight State Beach Improvement Project: $595,209.

Did we forget to mention how important it is to go to this meeting? Also, stay for item #2 - the great mayoral robbery - an ongoing fetish for Mayor Stocks.

Myths Encinitas - People's business continued . . .

This week's second major myth is that this council majority primary interest is to conduct the people's business.  This is a continuation of Monday's Myths Encinitas.  The Deputy Mayor, in her role as Gaspar the Willing Host (variant of Casper the Friendly Ghost, a favorite here at Our Mayor and Gaspar the Empty Boast) again shows she is more than willing to be the presenter or hostess on behalf of the cronies. This includes the majority team and the people they are serving - a very short list who will benefit directly from an unchallenged status quo in all things. 

A subcommittee set of constraints is just the latest in the council administration policies being reshaped and rewritten over the last few years to keep the public tightly controlled and gagged if possible. But for context, it is important to show a whole series of acts to waste the people's time, the public's money for staged antics to silence dissent, marginalize minority decisions and control outcome at council meetings. All of these things are to codify, make legal, injustice and bullying behavior of the majority. Hours and hours of council time, public backlash, council "deliberations" (read: rationalization) is used to create controversy and confusion.  People's Business my ass - that is a joke.

This subcommittee business started with the strategy to take the offensive with a big emotional topic to mine votes in the upcoming election year  - the General Plan Update.  September Stocks ranted and raved fact free for about a minute and a half. His rudeness and ugly baby image gave the trigger point for, step 2 the outraged citizenry / businessmen. The next step was to position Kristin Gaspar to present the scripted plan to introduce a new council advisory body.  What followed this elaborate attack on the General Plan process was volunteering Teresa Barth to sit on a subcommittee with Gaspar to flesh out this newly scripted plan as the video clip below shows. 

Subcommittee Ambush for Super majority Goal. 

Just 2 weeks later the majority volunteers Teresa Barth to the subcommittee appointed to decide how to fill Maggie Houlihan's seat despite Maggie's videotaped wish that Lisa Shaffer be considered her successor and many public speakers questioning why the next highest vote getter at the last election, Tony Kranz.  Barth was clearly in favor of either of these options, yet she was ambushed again into legitimatizing the majority nonsense. We are to infer (or to read in minutes) that Barth was a full and equal member of the subcommittee. What do you think? 



 Back to the General Plan Blow Up offensive plan where Councilwoman Barth was roped into being a volunteer on the ERAC subcommittee meeting.  In this tirade by Councilwoman Gaspar which was illegally allowed to be presented by Mayor Bond as an non-agendized speech, unchallenged by the city attorney, unanticipated by Barth and on top of all that . . . Bond disallowed any rebuttal from Barth.  This is an ambush, an attack clear and simple.



By this time it was clear that Barth was being set up to appear as a traitor to the Maggie Houlihan constituents, unworthy as a potential mayor (with that procedure coming up soon) and virtually silenced to present her own case or mount an effective counter balance to an all-consuming super majority.  Teresa Barth remained and continues to hold stead as a community treasure in the eyes of the public  - despite these attacks. 

Over a period of a few critical weeks at the end of 2011 the people's business was ignored in favor of blowing up General Plan Update and creating a super majority on the city council. They also were able to kick Teresa Barth to the curb when selecting a new mayor based on fabricated nonsense from Gaspar's she-said, she-said presentation of undocumented subcommittee work.

On March 21 of this year Teresa Barth was able to make it clear she would no longer serve on any subcommittee until rules and responsibilities were spelled out.



And six months since later this super committee have codified a gag rule that completely keeps the people's business in secret.

This majority gang will never be accused of serving the peoples business or being critical thinkers or creative in their governance of Encinitas for the good of the whole population.  They are relentless though in their inventive winner take all strategies via disinformation, distraction and denial - if you'll excuse the alliteration. Again, making the claim of doing the people's business is comically stretching the truth.

Myths Encinitas

The most glaring myth lately (first of several) involves the Gaspar Gag Order passed at the last city council meeting by the majority. In essence these new procedures codify "secret meetings" and require "group-think" to be considered a good team player.  This is a complete myth.  A good team player provides his or her unique flexibility,  skills, strengths and insights to strengthen a team.

Another aspect of this myth of a good team player is the completely fabricated outrage to justify unacceptable behavior in ambushing and attacking Councilwoman Barth last fall.  Siince that abusive period Barth has refused any and all appointments to a subcommittee until rules are clarified.  This was to be that meeting and instead it was a bunch of bullies ganging up on her, ganging up on the public with the blessing of the city attorney and city manager. Go team evil.
 
And this myth begets more myths, like the mythical allegiance a good team member must provide to her attackers.  Throughout the 30 minutes of this agenda item #8 discussion the crony club that is our city council majority ignores public speakers, revises history, makes things up, redefines language, creates false choices, welcomes straw men and a whole fustercluck of cruel, condescending and dismissive silencing of Teresa Barth and the thousands and thousands she represents.  It's legal, but team evil is the only game in town right now. Some clips to judge for yourself follow.

Imagine for one moment you are a lone voice attempting to be heard as an equal team player even though you have a different opinion or perspective and moreover, you have alternatives for the team to consider. Most importantly, Barth points out that it is a mistake to consider the city council as the team when the focus should be on the public with the council being part of that team.

If you can sit through all of the next two clips, you might try to listen to how language is used, how sources are lacking and other critical elements citizens should expect from a deliberative governing body are completely missing.

It is really difficult to witness or listen to authoritarian language of absolute control presented with childish clichés in a tone of condescension from a neophyte like Kristin Gaspar.

• All discussions involving city staff will happen within an ad hoc committee setting. 
• The ad hoc committee will sign off on the staff report before it’s brought back to council.
• The ad hoc committee will only address topics discussed by the full council. 

Mayor Stocks wanted to slap on even tighter control with mandating the mayor alone being able to appoint subcommittees and name the chair.

The pile on doesn't end with the vote of 4:1.  Barth attempts to at least allow the guidelines to come back as an agenda item.  Not a chance.

Following this meeting Teresa Barth stated,

"I have served on a number of subcommittees during my past 6 years on council, including a committee with Jerome Stocks concerning former city manager Phil Cotton's compensation. Mr. Stocks recommended a significant raise and I recommended no raise. I have never received a complaint from any other council member nor have I complained about their comments or suggestions in the sub-committee process. Deputy Mayor Gaspar seems to believe that disagreement and independent research are somehow inappropriate.

Councilman Bond also commented about the need to "get things" done and having the public included slows things down.

Open Meeting laws (the Brown Act) do not apply to temporary sub-committees as long as there is not a quorum of elected officials on the committee. However, in light of the recent actions and comments by other council members, I believe the public should have the right to attend such meetings if they so desire. I proposed simple procedures that would have allowed the public to attend subcommittee meetings. The Council majority didn't agree."

Tomorrow there will be a second installment of this myth.  It is born out of the misuse of the phrase, people's business as a council responsibility.

Myths Encinitas

There is a false sensibility promoted over the last 30 or 40 years in the dismantling and takeover of US media - even to most every local television, radio and newspaper of false equivilencies.  Even the most progressive thinkers get trapped in this formula. Not every issue has two opposite and equal sides or perspectives.

That is nonsense on it's face that there is some sort of parity for each and every argument.  The idea that there is some sort of balanced conversation about everything is a false idea.

Have we ceded the principled conversation to the troll patrols and haters on the right who use the words principle or ethics to stick to whatever they are doing? It is as if you would see a guy driving drunk on the wrong side of the road hitting parking meters and people and not slowing down and you go, "Well you gotta' give him credit he's consistent."  Hal Sparks

Words like principle and ethics have real meanings.  If we've learned nothing, we need to recognize the futility of talking to those on the right who will refuse to acknowledge fact or reality or simply treat the dictionary as an etch a sketch. 

Sure, start a dialog with even the most obtuse teabagger sort…attempt to convince him that the views he clutches are self-defeating…try to disabuse him of his calcified bigotry -- but don't be optimistic about the outcome of your efforts. Trouble is: Depressingly large numbers of people have invested a great amount of time, energy and identity in the maintenance of their reality-defiant attitudes…There is just too much fragile self-esteem, bulwarked by brittle pride, at stake. 'Often, a journey towards self-knowledge and an attendant awakening to the nature of one's condition can be unnerving and painful.'

When conversations are only about fear and hate, we liberals lose the plot.  Making connections about potholes, speed limits, the right to speak at meetings or wanting open records are the kinds of things we can and do work towards community.  But, hate and fear don't necessarily go away allow an opening for more.  Always standing by are the grifters who revel in the sewers of human emotion and every couple years they feed on and feed into the campaign horse race atmosphere.  These are the true jackass whisperers who herd and work into a lather the completely misinformed (who sadly believe they are the only ones in the know). Real scrutiny triggers rage and ugly attacks because the myths don't . . . can't undergo questioning.  It's a toxic mix of myth, fear and intolerance.

Myth busting for progressive community activists means relentless conversations, use of analysis, facts, actual videos, truth telling at council meetings, letters to editor, blog posts and online comments.  But this isn't directed towards the audience described in the above paragraphs.

This summer will mean a great upsurge in people in neighborhoods all over town.  The people who have never been exposed or those who can and do want reality-based information or those have simply drifted or gotten discouraged outnumber the haters.  We need to tell our stories, to encourage and nurture people to question the political status quo because it won't stand up under honest scrutiny.

Myths Encinitas

This Monday's edition is from the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, with thirty-five years of community strengthening research behind them. Fact sheet presented in full. This refutes the myths our mayor and the council majority and all city planning has bought and promoted as fiscal strength. It can't undo the reality of a Wal-Mart opening this week, but it can change some thinking for our fiscal planning with a new council after November.

Five Myths About Big-Box Retail

MYTH: Big-Box Stores Create Jobs

FACT: Studies by independent economists show that big-box stores eliminate more retail jobs than they create.

A recent study examined 3,094 counties across the U.S., tracking the arrival of new Wal-Mart stores between 1977 and 2002. The study, conducted by Univ. of California economist David Neumark, found that opening a Wal-Mart store led to a net loss of 150 retail jobs on average, suggesting that a new Wal-Mart job replaces approximately 1.4 workers at other stores. (The Effects of Wal-Mart on Local Labor Markets, January 2007).

The reason for the overall decline is that a new Wal-Mart store does not increase the amount of money that residents have to spend. Sales gains at these stores are invariably mirrored by a drop in revenue at existing businesses, which then must down-size or close. The job losses are larger than the gains because Wal-Mart accomplishes the same volume of sales with fewer employees.

Although similar studies have not been done of other big-box retailers, it's likely that they also have either a negative or no impact on employment because the underlying dynamics (i.e., no increases in consumer spending) are the same.

MYTH: Big-Box Stores Boost Tax Revenue

FACT: The tax benefits of big-box stores are negated by the cost of providing public services to these developments and declining tax revenue from existing commercial districts.

Big-box development creates substantial public costs. These sprawling stores are not efficient users of public infrastructure. Compared to traditional, compact business districts, they require longer roads, more road maintenance, additional miles of utilities, and more fire and police time.

One case study in Barnstable, Mass., found that the annual cost of providing city services to traditional downtown and neighborhood business districts was $786 per 1,000 square feet. Big-box stores were 30% more costly, requiring $1,023 in services per 1,000 sq. ft. (Tischler & Associates, Fiscal Impact Analysis of Residential and Nonresidential Land Use Prototypes, prepared for the Town of Barnstable, Jul. 1, 2002.)

In addition to incurring new costs, cities that approve big-box development often experience a decline in property and sales A project of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance tax revenue from existing neighborhood and downtown business districts, as well as older shopping centers. As these areas lose sales and experience vacancies, the value of property declines and with it, the property tax revenue. Sales tax revenue also falls. One study of 116 cities in California found that, in all but two cases, the presence of a big-box store did not correspond to increased sales tax revenue. (Bay Area Economic Forum, Supercenters and the Transformation of the Bay Area Grocery Industry: Issues,Trends, and Impacts, 2004, 74-81)

MYTH: Big-Box Stores Grow the Economy

FACT: Trading independent retailers for big-box chains shrinks the volume of activity in the local economy.

For every $100 they receive in revenue, locally owned businesses hire more local workers, purchase more goods and services from other local businesses, and contribute more to local charities than their big-box counterparts. When chains displace local businesses, it results in an overall loss of economic activity, not a gain.

A 2004 study conducted in Chicago analyzed ten locally owned restaurants, retail stores, and service providers and compared them with chains competing in the same categories. The study concluded that every $100 spent at one of the independent businesses created $68 in additional economic activity in the city, while spending the same amount at a chain only generated $43 worth of local impact. (Civic Economics, The Andersonville Study of Retail Economics, 2004.)

One of the main reasons for the difference was that the local retailers bought more goods and services from other local businesses. They did their banking at a local bank. They hired local accountants, web designers, and other professionals. They turned to a local print shop for their printing, and they advertised in local publications. The chains had almost no need for these local services and spent relatively little in the city.

A consequence of this is that even modest shifts in the mix of local and non-local businesses in a community can have significant economic ramifications. A case study in Kent County, Michigan, estimates that the region would gain 1,600 new jobs, $140 million in new economic activity, and $53 million in additional payroll if residents shifted 10% of their spending from chains to local businesses. A shift in the opposite direction — more spending at chains — would cause equivalent economic losses. (Civic Economics, Local Works: Examining the Impact of Local Business on the Western Michigan Economy, 2008.)

MYTH: Big-Box Stores Bring Competition and Consumer Choice

FACT: Big-box stores often displace numerous small and mid-sized stores, leaving fewer shopping options and less competition. 

An average Wal-Mart or Target supercenter is nearly four football fields in size (190,000 square feet) and captures about $80 million a year in spending. To understand how large that is, consider that it would take 35,000 people making 25% of all of their retail purchases, from groceries to appliances, at that one Wal-Mart store. To take another example, the average 120,000-square-foot Lowe's captures $35 million a year in sales. That's equal to the total hardware/building materials spending power of 37,000 people.

Most communities, even fast-growing ones, cannot absorb a store of this scale without sizable revenue losses to existing businesses, including both locally owned stores and competing supermarkets and shopping centers. Part of the reason these companies build such large stores is that they leave little room in the market for other businesses. As competing stores close, residents are left with fewer choices. Many towns and neighborhoods now depend on a single big-box store for many types of goods, virtually eliminating competition. Once they attain a dominant share of the market, these retailers may raise prices. One study compared the cost of 54 grocery items at 11 Wal-Mart supercenters in Nebraska and found that the total varied by more than 13 percent. Some of the stores with the highest prices were in areas that lacked competing grocery stores.
(Hometown Merchants Association, Impact of Supercenters on Nebraska Economy, April 2004.)

A growing number of communities are deciding that a better way to ensure competition is to have numerous small and mid-sized stores, rather than one giant superstore. One way to achieve this is to place a cap on the size of stores (for more on this see our Store Size Cap Policy Kit at bigboxtoolkit.com).

MYTH: Big-Box Stores are the Only Option

FACT: More cities and towns are saying no to additional big-box development and finding better ways to grow by creating and expanding local businesses.

Nearly 300 communities have rejected big-box proposals in the last few years, and many have adopted policies that restrict or prohibit this type of development altogether.

Far from impeding growth, these policies often attract new small businesses investment as entrepreneurs seek out viable locations. Communities can spur more small business development by revitalizing their neighborhood and downtown commercial districts, launching programs to train and finance new entrepreneurs, and developing a strong Buy Local campaign to encourage more public support for locally owned businesses.

(For more information on these strategies, see the Building Alternatives to Big Boxes section at bigboxtoolkit.com.) This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License