We Shouldn't Forget This Date

So It Begins . . .  On this auspicious date, our new Mayor Teresa Barth's very first agenda item invited open discussion of the much coveted, sometimes powerful, often lucrative regional board seats. This is shorthand for all city and regional committees and boards for calendar year 2013.

Confusing, mysterious, shrouded in power brokering and alliances that seemed weighted stronger than Encinitas public service responsibilities these regional board seats were ripe for discussion.

The public speakers offered practical, experiential advice and they were listened to as attested by the video clips of council members.

Mayor Barth explained her reasoning and facilitated a completely open discussion throughout. Notice how she doesn't dominate the discussion, censor or inhibit, but encourages full discussions. She follows through on details too. We note all of these as it is a refreshing change from past examples.  She will be making her selections at the next council meeting, Dec. 19th, the last meeting of 2012.



Deputy Mayor Lisa Shaffer offers a wealth of information and suggestions related to her perspective and that of the community and region in a couple of minutes.



Councilwoman Kristin Gaspar spoke quite a bit longer on her one choice for herself. She then offered her choices for the primary seats amongst the rest of the council.



Tony Kranz had one serious preference to be on NCTD board. His verbal gaffe (difficult to hear on the tape) "Mark's flop",rather than Mark's change, was laughed off for what it was - a goof.



Mark Muir presumes he will be first choice as both the water and fire or public safety guy.



You be the judge, the following high points from the three public speakers are included here. Do you think Mayor Barth and Deputy Shaffer and other council members were listening? In fairness, Mark made comments following the speakers that seemed to justify the status quo (not included in any clip here). He was essentially saying there were too many positions to effectively communicate to the public.

Switching Gears - End of an Era

The end of the year is a time to reflect on one's life and legacy.  It is a particularly compelling time, in view of climate change realities becoming more apparent every day, that what we say and do is shaping our immediate future, not just the distant future for grandchildren.

For this reason the end of Stocks & Bond majority reign over Encinitas city government make future plans and our legacy feel more urgent than past election years. This deserves thinking that rises above facile political maneuvering or infotainment or cheap shots borne out of a social culture of marketing. It's governing time, not campaigning time.

Having an arch nemesis like Jerome Stocks turned out to be a rallying point and organizing platform for many in the last election. Even though the new council members Lisa Shaffer and Tony Kranz did not campaign as anti-Stocks candidates, thousands of Encinitas voters were interested in removing Jerome Stocks above all other concerns. Our Mayor blog was created to acknowledge legitimate disgust with Jerome Stocks' behavior as a so-called public servant. The years of city council meetings contained enough clips of this behavior as evidence for the electorate. The idea was that more people needed to be able to witness first hand – via these clips and linked stories, commentaries and some background information – what critics of Stocks had been saying for years.

Whatever factors were involved it is a fait accompli now and time to switch gears. Is it possible we can still capture the motivation the anti-Stocks group had with a formidable problem we all can identify with versus a person or group of people? Can we cultivate an educated electorate unafraid to voice public opinions for fear of seeming stupid or simply wrong? Is it possible to encourage awareness and still identify as a savvy, social being?

It is easy to see from some of the current community voices reacting to the We Love Encinitas organization (and ethically dubious campaign fliers) in the online news posts and one blog's comments sections, Kristin Gaspar is a likely target to transfer anti-Stocks energy. We get it. Our Mayor blog has 3 or 4 dozen examples of Gaspar's behavior along with Stocks or solo that deserve condemnation. No doubt the new year will bring more.

But, this personality focus is really toxic stuff. It too easily morphs into character assassination, body policing, misogyny and other community-killing divisive words. This invites lazy thinking and other vitality sucking habits. Besides all that it brings out our worst rather than our best natures. Critical thinking asks more.

What if we instead switched gears to the three things that repeatedly come up in Encinitas politics as problems or omissions;
1. finance (economy, budget, pensions, etc.),
2. open government (sunshine ordinance, transparency, civility, accessibility, etc.)
3. environment (land use, community character, resources, climate change)
4 traffic (could fit in environment, but some very big issues ahead need deliberation)

Let's demand of this new council – so they in turn will demand it of city manager and city attorney and city staff – a clear direction of where we are going in any of these areas. Not only must we insist on this, we should demand comprehensive research, comparisons to other cities and emerging trends from our well paid staff. Let's demand that deliberations by the council be more than unsupported platitudes, rambling monologues, throwing out a bunch of buzz words, personal memories, rehearsed staff exchanges and other time-wasting talk.

They will make mistakes, council and staff alike. We will find some council members and city employees lacking at any given time. Hell, we'll continue to have community members who annoy us. We will disagree. This editor will try to catch the kinds of things that illustrate dissent and controversy. This isn't a good news, community events calendar, party line place. Our city government's corruption and incompetence demands vigilance. We don't have to make things up. Video clips, quotes, news coverage and the whole works will apply. The former super majority clearly served the few of their overlords. There is a new game in town. The mandate is genuinely from the majority of our community so there are more eyes watching.

And, if a blogger can be allowed to dream. Just imagine a city council becoming relevant to the disengaged, the young, the non-white people, the renters, the low income residents of Encinitas. It is a myth that when all people enjoy a higher quality of life and feel security and engagemed it means something is diminished from another's quality of life. If this new city council wants continuous improvement, they should think big.

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.

A Council Advocating for Its Citizens - Imagine

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

August 15, 2012

2:15 PM

CONTACT: Friends of The Earth

Kendra Ulrich: (216) 571-7340, kulrich@foe.org

Diane Moss: (310) 463-1355

Santa Monica Council Urges Probe of San Onofre Reactors

Council unanimously votes for state investigation of San Onofre costs, reliability and alternative energy resources and urges federal license amendment hearing

SANTA MONICA, Calif. - August 15 - Last night, the Santa Monica City Council voted unanimously to urge the state to fully investigate the costs and reliability of the crippled San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station and to compare it to other available energy sources. The council also voted unanimously to urge federal regulators to hold a transparent and public license amendment procedure for the plant’s twin reactors.

The reactors at San Onofre have been shut down since January, when one of the thousands of thin, tightly packed tubes in the newly replaced steam generators failed and leaked radioactive steam into the environment. Further testing revealed unprecedented, accelerated wear in thousands of these tubes, less than two years after the steam generators were replaced. 

In a decision filed on December 15, 2005, the California Public Utilities Commission approved a plan under which Southern California Edison could bill ratepayers up to $680 million for the costs of four replacement steam generators ($569 million for replacement steam generator installation and $111 million for removal and disposal of the original steam generators). The CPUC required a reasonableness review for expenses beyond this amount and set a maximum ratepayer collection cap of $782 million. A technical report commissioned by Friends of the Earth estimated the cost of repairing or replacing the faulty generators at San Onofre at $400 million to $800 million. This estimate does not include the costs of replacement power, inspections and preliminary repairs, which according to recent reports by Edison have already reached $165 million. 

Under state law, Edison can ask the California Public Utilities Commission to allow it to recover its costs through rate increases to its customers. An investigation by the CPUC, such as the one called for by the Santa Monica City Council, could end in a ruling that Edison, not its customers, is liable for the costs. Such a ruling could push Edison to  permanently shut down the reactors rather than incur additional expenses.

The Council vote also directs the City of Santa Monica to urge the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to conduct a public, transparent license amendment hearing on San Onofre. A license amendment is a formal, open and legally adjudicated procedure that would allow for independent expert review of the significant modifications to the replacement steam generators. Under NRC rules, a license amendment is required for major design changes to replacement equipment like those Edison made to these replacement components. In a petition before the NRC, Friends of the Earth and other public interest groups charge that the replacement generators were not “like for like” as Edison presented them to regulators, but instead were substantially altered.

Santa Monica's action is similar to the resolution unanimously adopted last week by the Laguna Beach City Council.

###

Friends of the Earth is the U.S. voice of the world's largest grassroots environmental network, with member groups in 77 countries. Since 1969, Friends of the Earth has fought to create a more healthy, just world.

Myths Encinitas

Although covered elsewhere, the myths of ERGA - Encinitas Ranch Golf Authority - need to be aired in an election year where so many other financial fantasies are being unveiled.

Over the last several years the story of why the ERGA agreement needs to be diddled with changes every time these developers and players approach the podium.

And, something missing from every council meeting, local press story or blog flinging scattered bits and pieces at us all is this, what about the management of this golf course. What about J.C. Golf and their failure of management?  Isn't this a first step in assessing performance in assigning accountability?

It was and is a myth that this is a well run facility that was without financial failings.  More importantly, this myth was known and kept afloat - as all records now indicate.

One only has to look at the condition of the property and holdings and compare it to what is being charged to golf or other services.

Here is a look back at some the archived clips at encinitasyouneedus.  Original meetings can be accesses for every speaker and arguments.

May 19, 2019 - Stocks pushes hard to "re-open" a 10 year old contract, lots of fact free assurances from the crony crowd that everything is looking great. Request from Council-woman Barth and Sheila Cameron for financial back-up. (Spoiler alert for the next clips following this, doesn't happen.)

 

In June an almost comical runaround from Jay Lembach in response to Councilwoman Barth's questions about obligations to ERGA's debts.

I told you so moment. Encinitas asked to take a preemptive hit for golf course.

Some history . . . Emphasis on how the developer, Carltas benefits above all. Phony baloney stuff criticized.  Risk taken in 1996, privatized gain is now looking for a socialized cost.  It is essentially a bail out.  Why didn't they just admit the truth? Request for audit . . .

Spoiler: Mayor's Speech for Tonight's Meeting 3/28/12

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?

Sent from my iPhone
Might have typos

Sunshine Violation Whoops!

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. 

Sunshine Week, March 11-17

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.

Deputy Mayor's BFF*

* Best Friends Forever

I'm shocked, shocked I say that one of the Deputy Mayor's friends was selected for the ERAC group last night.  (Pronounced erase at this site.) The council majority selected Roger Bolus for the New Encinitas Representative.  Thing is, it isn't a bit clear that he even lives in New Encinitas.  Quail Gardens area is considered Old Encinitas.

And that is only the beginning.  Does the name ring a bell for anyone?

Here is a clue - a Gaspar team member allegedly yelled out at a Leucadia candidate forum in 2010.  Those close by said he called Teresa Barth a whore, stupidly misogynist hatefulness considering she was defending Kristin Gaspar against discriminatory remarks about her being a mother.  She looked right at the man and asked, What did you say?  And, no, he didn't reply; he left the forum with his buddies. Here's a clip snippet.


From an observer at the forum:

When these guys came into the room they drug extra chairs up from the back and took over two seats reserved at the front by event organizers. So, sitting behind them it was clear they were belligerent and bullying before anyone even started to speak. Did anyone else notice (or get video coverage) of one or two taking off the Gaspar shirt while walking out? Was that an attempt at stealth or a rejection of their candidate? This same crew was at the Olivenhain forum.

During that time, Leucadia Blog identified Roger Bolus, Rotary Club President, as the central figure above, while local papers hadn't even asked the questions.

But, just because Roger and his cohorts allegedly acted like bullies and attempted to harass and strong-arm Kristin Gaspar's opposing candidate they were not arrested or even accused of doing anything illegal.  So, by the kind of narrow reasoning so favored by the deputy mayor, mayor, councilmen Bond and Muir and the city attorney; justice can be reduced to Just Us.

As citizens we all have the responsibility to be vigilant.  Jean-Bernard Minster demonstrated that last night when he demanded the criteria for ERAC selection and exposure to the public's scrutiny.  This week's public demands for open government is only the first ripple in a great wave of dissent coming.

ERAC - Majority Armed

Sloppiness or secrecy, that is the question.

Editor Note: ERAC - at this blog - is pronounced erase, with a soft "C", as in Encinitas rather than a hard "C" as in club.

ERAC = Do Over? or Disappear?

ERAC (Element Review Advisory Committee) note of concern received this weekend:

"[ . . . ] looking at the agenda for the January 25 Council Meeting Item 6 addresses the staff recommendation that Council make appointments to the Element Review Advisory Committee with an effective date of January 26, 2012. I accessed the staff report associated with this agenda item and noted the following:

• The report consists of an email to Council from Patrick Murphy, Diane Langager, and Mike Strong. In the Background section it states, "Council reviewed the applications at their January 18, 2012 meeting." Those of us at the January 18 meeting know that this is not the case.  Agenda item (Item 4), which stated "Council to meet with applicants for Element Review Advisory Committee (ERAC)" was tabled. In regard to the wording of Item 4, Gus Vina stated that "the item in error says that we were going to hear the applicants, and that's not what we are going to do tonight."  

• There is no list of applicants or the positions on ERAC for which they applied accompanying this report. The public was not allowed to hear the applicants and now the public isn't even given a list of who applied to review before the meeting? Sloppiness or secrecy, that is the question."

 Editor Note: List of applicants was included in January 18, 2012 staff report. The point being, this list should have also been included in this week's agenda packet. Was it only a week ago that this funny smell was named?

Update: Lisa Shaffer's excellent summary of this gigantic screw-up at City Hall is now posted at Encinitas Patch.  Go read the whole thing for a condensed version of the whole sordid story.  Here is a sampling:

COUNCIL CHAOS: When the draft update was released, Council members Jerome Stocks and Kristin Gaspar disowned what had been done and prior Council direction. Stocks berated the staff for bringing their “ugly baby” to the Council, asking everyone to say how beautiful the baby is. Ms. Gaspar pushed for a new round of public meetings and another advisory committee, the Element Review Advisory Committee (ERAC). On Dec. 15, the Council agreed to create Ms. Gaspar’s proposed Element Review Advisory Committee (ERAC), and another round of public meetings. However, the Gaspar proposals were not well thought out, and implementation of them is again creating some chaos.

KC and the Sunshine Band

Musical homage to Kevin Cummins and the many other advocates for Sunshine Ordinance in Encinitas. See further information about tomorrow's, January 18th meeting below.

More seriously, open government is well and truly the most fundamentally important issue in all of the city issues. Councilwoman Barth has consistently spoken out for open government. This video clip spells out her views on the public's right to know.

January 18 Council Agenda Packet

• Item # 4 Council to meet with applicants for Element Review Advisory Committee (ERAC)
• Item # 5 Review public notice mailer for the Comprehensive General Plan Update
• Item # 6 Report from Commission for the Arts FY10/11 accomplishments and consider and approve FY11/12 proposed Work Plan
• Item # 7 The Sidewalk Café Policy

The whole KC and the Sunshine Band intro relates to what's lurking in the Consent Calendar where it doesn't belong?

Calendar definition: "Items on each Consent Calendar are matters which are routine, and it is anticipated they will not be discussed separately. With a motion "to adopt the Consent Calendar" the City Council approves all Consent Calendar Staff recommendations, as shown on the agenda. Items may be removed for discussion by submitting a "PINK" speaker slip to the City Clerk".

If you guessed "Destruction of records in accordance with retention guidelines and pursuant to Government Code." you'd be right. By no stretch of the imagination could record destruction be considered routine or unworthy of public discussion. Citizens and Candidates have championed open government and the need for sunshine ordinances for years.

We as citizens have the right to our distrust. This council majority has consistently failed us. Their votes tell us they want us to keep our expectations tiny. This council majority headed by Mayor Stocks have battled sunshine ordinances and recently cost the city taxpayers thousands and thousands of dollars by refusing to be open and forthcoming with a single pavement report. Kevin Cummins' lawsuit has been covered several times already at this blog here, here & here.

So, no doubt Kevin and others will pull this item from the Consent Calendar and be present for the other agenda items. Update: Schedule conflict with event to unveil art banners may empty the room.

Whoops! Another confusing message from city staff. And this is most critical for New Encinitas residents becoming involved in city government through the General Plan Update. First applicants are on the agenda to interview with the city council and then essentially told they are NOT needed for the council to make decisions. Sit down and be still? The applications were received more than a week before this meeting and only now volume and time constraints are considered?

Dear Applicants for the Element Review Advisory Committee (ERAC):

Due to the volume of applicants and time considerations, the applicants will not be interviewed on January 18, 2012. On January 18, the City Council will receive the applications and provide direction. You are welcome to attend the January 18, 2012 meeting. You will be notified of the date the Council makes the appointments.

Thanks.

Patrick Murphy

Director of Planning and Building

City of Encinitas