We Write Letters

By Olivier Canler - printed at North County Times

For most participants, the process of updating the housing and land-use elements of the Encinitas General Plan has been frustrating and difficult. These elements must be resolved before the City Council can consider the overall General Plan Update. To engage the public in re-drafting the housing element, the city administered a dot-mapping exercise that pitted the five Encinitas communities against each other. We have yet to see the results of that exercise.

Consequently, the General Plan Update is stalled after two years of work, and there's still no red-line version from the current general plan. These circumstances should produce local political drama in the run-up to the November election.
Some residents who were concerned with the potential outcome of the dot-mapping exercise have formed a committee called the Encinitas Project. The committee's goal is simple: a ballot initiative that would let registered voters in Encinitas decide on major density increases in the city.

At issue are up-zoning decisions meant to increase the density set by the present General Plan. A four of five member majority of the Encinitas City Council is required to approve certain up-zoning in the five communities ---- New Encinitas, Old Encinitas, Cardiff, Leucadia, Olivenhain ---- that make up the city.

Since the General Plan Update won't go before the current council before November's election, the next city council will eventually vote on it, should the present procedure remain in place. However, if the Encinitas Right-to-Vote Initiative reaches the ballot and voters approve it, residents will decide if major density increases should be allowed in the city.
With the Encinitas Right-to-Vote Initiative in place, voters would have the opportunity to decide if proposed changes respect community character, and maintain or improve their quality of life. Poorly planned projects that would increase traffic and the carbon footprint, degrade infrastructure, force density or height changes, or just fit badly with our community character would have little chance of approval.

The initiative is not no-growth, but it would mean growth most people can abide. The Encinitas Right-to-Vote Initiative would take the trickery out of land speculation. Developers would have to work within current zoning. Pushing city council members to up-zone would stop. Similarly, city planners would have to submit proposed up-zoning to a vote of the people. The initiative would subject the General Plan Update to a voters' referendum. The Encinitas Right-to-Vote Initiative would govern major housing and land-use amendments.

Most Encinitas residents want to maintain our small beach-town atmosphere. We're concerned about environmental issues, traffic, adequate resources, proper infrastructure and overall quality of life. We love our town and want to keep loving it. As Encinitas approaches built-out status, growth can only go two ways: denser and taller. A look at community history reveals that local control of growth motivated Encinitas to incorporate in 1986. Passing the Encinitas Right-to-Vote Initiative is in keeping with that precedent.

Volunteers are starting to walk neighborhoods to gather the number of signatures needed to get the initiative on a future ballot. Volunteers will also be in front of stores with forms for registered voters to sign. You can also find out more about the initiative by visiting www.EncinitasRightToVote.com.

We Write Letters

Make the connection

"In several recent articles in our local San Diego County papers, the L.A. Times and the New York Times, it is claimed that natural disaster areas, because of drought and excessive heat, now affect crops in 1,297 counties in 29 states, or 61 percent of the continental U.S.

Further, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack reports that 77 percent of the corn and soybean crops are in areas designated as drought-impacted. Natural disasters? Amazingly, in none of these articles has Climate Change even been mentioned. Isn’t it time to recognize the connection and start doing something about it? It’s time to accept science and discard politically motivated propaganda. There’s too much at risk."

Milton Saier, UCSD Professor of Biology, Letter to Coast News for July 27, 2012

Just imagine, we take it one step further Professor Saier and actually start insisting that weather reports begin making these connections?  Or imagine even more reality where we are at long last treated as adults who can handle the difficult subjects of life and grapple with complex issues that may take more than a couple of moments to describe or process.

Our US media has spent on 3% of air time on climate change or global warming despite the hottest year in all recorded history.  The rest of the world has no funded shut-down on rational discussions of this subject by those who profit from misinformation and skepticism, so there are excellent sources of information.  We just need to look for them.

"So the story deserves much more than 3 minutes. Here is “Inside Story Americas” from al Jazeera English with a 25-minute segment. There’s no point in summarizing it. The point is the in-depth discussion, featuring Michael Mann, Bob Deans, and Heidi Cullen."  Joe Romm, Think Progress

We Write Letters

Is change in the air?

"I was pleasantly surprised when I watched this week’s Encinitas City Council meeting. Instead of the spectacle I saw at the July 11 Council meeting when Mayor Stocks was rude, arrogant, and applied the procedural rules of speaking time limits inequitably (as he has also done in past meetings), I saw a council listening respectfully to the community speakers; a council seriously discussing various aspects of the issues without grandstanding; and I saw Deputy Mayor Gaspar running the council meeting smoothly, efficiently, and effectively without targeting disparaging remarks at Council Member Barth, as she has sometimes done in the past. In fact, I saw the kind of council many of us wish we had all the time–individuals with varying attributes and opinions working together to address concerns and solve problems. What a concept!

Why the difference this week, you may ask? Well, for one thing, Mayor Stocks was absent. The power that Mayor Stocks seems to hold over the Council majority and City staff was missing. The contempt that Mayor Stocks directs at those who disagree with him or irritate him was missing. The animosity that can arise between the council majority and the community was seemingly nonexistent because the majority did not exhibit hostility toward the public, as we have sometimes seen them do and as Mayor Stocks often does.

What can we expect when Mayor Stocks returns? Will the poisonous atmosphere return too? OR will the council majority find the inner strength of character to stand up to a mayor who acts out in ways that are not only self-destructive, but that are destructive to the successful operation of our city."
C.J. Minster, Letter to Coast News for July 27, 2012

We Write Letters, Blog, Participate & Protest Too

Our Mayor, this council majority and City Staff are increasing being confronted by a citizenry wanting more leadership, accuracy and accountability. There are many different viewpoints and criticisms that all converge on one theme, distrust.

Prior to 5/7/12 Workshop
Olivier Canler wrote the following letter for his Patch blog:

Over the last two weeks, all five Encinitas communities had a chance to attend a community open house and listen to the city planners tell us what is driving the need for additional multi-family housing, and what growth will look like in the future.

The meetings were pretty well attended with roughly 50 to 60 people at each one, except New Encinitas where roughly 160 people showed up at Park Dale Lane Elementary.

Each meeting started with an introduction from Gus Vina, the new city manager, followed by a presentation by Michael Strong, associate city planner, who told the audience where the “required” number of 1,300 multi-family units is coming from and why we need to comply with the state housing mandate. Following, was a presentation by Patrick Murphy, director of the planning department, that detailed what could be expected at the two upcoming workshops (May 7th and Mat 14th at the Encinitas Community Center from 6 to 8pm). This is when the residents will give their input as to where these 1,300 high-density apartment units should go.

The most entertaining part of the presentation was witnessing the city planners and Peder Norby attempt to answer some of the tough questions asked by the public. Unfortunately, questions were submitted on 3x5 cards and answered by staff with no opportunity for the public to engage in a discussion on some of the most contentious items of the presentations.  The format of this Q&A was regrettable and did not allow for a dialogue, but it may have been the best format for the organizers to avoid having the discussions degenerate into an all-out verbal fight.

Judging from the questions, the public was not enthusiastic about the plan for growth. Some questions were very community specific, but most of them revolved around city-wide issues that could be summarized in a few bullet points:

1.  The population forecast presented by the State Department of Finance is way too aggressive and does not account for the latest population trends in California. It also does not take into account the 2010 US population census, which SANDAG itself proclaimed to be the “gold standard”. Since 2008, the net migration has been negative with more people leaving than arriving, and the birth rate has been declining since the onset of the recession. Both of these factors should continue for the foreseeable future according to a SANDAG demographer. Marginal growth is coming from the aging baby boomers.

2. The State, through the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), is concerned about showing the ability to offer housing for all ranges of incomes. That sounds like an honorable idea, but unfortunately not a likely outcome in Encinitas. According to the HCD logic high density (30+ units per acre) is the only way to yield affordable housing. Since there is no mandate to control rent and affordability, these high density units will be available at market rate which, given current conditions, would garner a rent of $1,500 for a one bedroom apartment and $2,000 for a two bedroom apartment. Not exactly what you would call affordable.  In the end, we are planning for luxury condos and apartments. Let’s not pretend we are planning for affordable housing, we are really planning for high-density dwelling units.

3. Very little information was presented as to how these new potential housing developments will impact our city infrastructure. How will public safety, schools, water needs, traffic, and pollution be affected by this plan? This is short-sighted planning at best.

4. The city planners were very skilled at not accepting any blame for the failure of the first round of planning in which El Camino Real and Encinitas Blvd were targeted for most of the growth. They projected the blame on the public that attended the city workshops in 2011, mentioning that there was very adequate representation from Encinitas residents. They failed to mention that New Encinitas residents were unaware of the plan, and therefore the recipients of the growth.

What will these workshops accomplish? They will most likely result in communities turning against one another and neighbors putting this unwanted growth in someone else’s backyard.

All this for what purpose? Just to make sure we comply with Regional Housing Need Assessment (RHNA) guidelines so that we won’t have to fear potential litigation from builder/developers associations and low-income advocates? The city has not had a compliant housing element for two decades, with no monetary or legal penalties imposed, so why the urgency to push compliance through now?

We need to preserve our quality of life and community characters and not support a dubious allocation process.

We like our communities just the way they are: Olivenhain with its rural charm, New Encinitas with its highly functional suburban feel with good amenities, Old Encinitas with its beautiful coast and its many landmarks, Cardiff with it beautiful views and its small community charm, and Leucadia with it funkiness and patch work zoning.

Ultimately, this will be resolved in November with your choice of candidate.

Proceed cautiously during the general election. A lot is at stake for the character of our communities.


At the 5/7/12 Workshop 
Oliver and Brian Burke were cheerfully handing out the flyer below and chatting with people participating in the event.  Protesting and participating aren't mutually exclusive or necessarily antagonistic or accusatory as some agitators project, even though the goals and methods of various critiques vary. (Click on Document to Enlarge)

We Write Letters

A compromise could have been worked out.

I just read the completely lopsided story of the general plan workshops as told by Mike Andreen ("City starts new effort to update future housing plan," April 18).

What actually happened was that community groups in Encinitas (Olivenhain, Old Encinitas, Cardiff, Leucadia and yes, New Encinitas) tried very hard to engage our community to be part of the workshops. I am sorry if the business community felt left out. Funny, I saw quite a few local developers at the meetings, who now say they didn't know what was going on.

I was an alternate on the General Plan Advisory Committee for a while, and felt that there was an effort by the community to resolve the problem of over-density in certain neighborhoods in Encinitas. Frankly, I think the density should be spread throughout the city, and that was what was happening. As people in New Encinitas found out there is no middle ground with developers, instead of some nice mixed use being planned there, it turned into overkill.

A compromise could have been worked out. I am not completely sure what Mike Andreen is taking credit for, except taking away the power from the community and giving it to the developers. Instead of compromise, we will get what developers want. Pay attention, Encinitas.

Rachelle Collier

Leucadia

Encinitas is Bound to be Our Own Little Greek Tragedy

Today's Patch features Charles McDermott's letter to the editor detailing financial chaos to come.

Dear Editor,
The city of Encinitas is in the midst of a financial crisis, but you wouldn’t know it by walking around town. During the 2004 Olympic Games you also could not tell that Greece was past the point of no return and poised to go down in flames, have a banker appointed to rule the country, and German's deciding who gets paid and who doesn't. And more surprising, no one could have guessed that the remaining elected Greek politicians would be begging to go along with such plans. 

Any reasonable person who looks under the city's hood will see a Greek tragedy in the making. Encinitas, like Greece, has very significant unfunded financial liabilities, incompetent management, and politicians that are 100 percent beholden to public employee unions and select developers. 

Informed citizens are already upset with our failing roads, boondoggles like the Hall Property, up-zoning, and the appointment of Fire Chief Muir to the Encinitas City Council. However, all these issues are just the tentacles of the same squid, which is our unfunded pension liability.

Please click over and read the whole letter to the editor . He's also provided links to back-up figures. And while you are there, please consider leaving a comment. Let's keep this discussion out in the open. As Mc Dermott states,

This idea of locking in a massive increase in payout while having the public cover all the potential losses may seem unfair. However, it is the lies and cover up that followed pension collapse that should get the apathetic voter base motivated to demand change now.

And the accountability is placed squarely in the laps of the sitting council majority.

If we choose to continue to elect the puppets of special interests like Stocks, Gaspar, Bond, and Muir we will be forced to face the music at a much later date when all the options will be grim as opposed to unpleasant – and like the Greeks, these decisions will be made for us by faceless and heartless investors who run the muni-bond market.

We Write Letters

For full letter contents, go to the San Diego Union Tribune's letters:

Arts flap in Encinitas
The Logan Jenkins column “Houlihan banner crusade doesn’t fly” (North County, April 1) identifies the Houlihan Arts Alive imbroglio as an issue of small-town politics. He hits the nail right on the head. It is an embarrassment that the City Council majority is so provincial that they cannot gracefully acknowledge the contributions of an arts patron and a proven advocate of many voices in the community.

My major concern is not the First Amendment issue; but rather the precedent that this sets. There would not be a problem with acknowledging or celebrating a national figure. But this parochial attitude would make it difficult to recognize any other local civic supporter, like Paul Ecke III. [. . .]

I intentionally do not name the city manager as the architect of this deed because he serves at the pleasure of the City Council. – Eli Sanchez, Encinitas

[Logan Jenkins Fan Disagrees on This One]
For the record, as a long-standing member of 101 Artists Colony’s board of directors, I would like to clearly state that our attempt to honor Maggie Houlihan with this year’s Arts Alive banners had absolutely nothing to do with politics. [ . . .]
Any attempt to connect our proposed tribute to Houlihan’s posthumous recommendation for her successor would seem an impossible reach given that an interim successor has already been selected by council appointment rather than by election. By the time a permanent successor is elected, the banners will be long since out of sight and mind.
Although we disagree on this one, I remain a fan of Logan Jenkins and his excellent North County column. – A. Paul Bergen, Encinitas

[Comparing Mayoral Selection Antics and Art Banners] 
So the questionable maneuvering of the Encinitas City Council majority to maintain its power base by engineering the mayor-ship in the coming years has caught the attention of the media (“Politics derails mayoral selection plan,” North County Coastal, March 31). Just the straight reporting of what took place at the meeting is enough to display what goes on in this misrepresentation of public interest in Encinitas.

[ . . .]  But let’s also look at the situation regarding the recent ACLU interest in the council’s decision about the Arts Alive banners. After longtime City Councilwoman Maggie Houlihan lost her battle with cancer last year, the organizers of the local arts community’s banner program decided to honor her many years of service to the community with her likeness on the back of the artist-designed banners. [ . . . ]

When this decision was made months ago, I was of the opinion that it was petty and egregiously unkind, given the recent death of Houlihan. It represented the type of decisions that have been all too frequent among this council of small-minded politicians. Now we find that not only was it petty, it was also not legal to base that type of decision on such a nebulous policy.

Next time around, let’s elect to the Encinitas City Council people who pay attention to law and ethics. – Katie Wheeler, Encinitas

Discord on the dais
I watched the March 28 Encinitas council meeting webcast at 3 a.m. from the London hotel where I was staying on business. I was shocked and astounded by the lack of civility and lack of decorum displayed by both the mayor and deputy mayor. A colleague hailing from the People’s Republic of China of all places, who was also working in the hotel lobby, struggling with jet lag, watched with me for awhile and then asked whether this was typical of city government meetings in the U.S. I had to explain to her, with no little embarrassment, that Encinitas was somewhat of an exception. – Jean-Bernard Minster, Encinitas

Letter to the Editor

Discord in Encinitas

By Rachelle Collier

In response to “Encinitas mayor choice raises ire again” (San Diego Union Tribune North Coast, Dec. 17), about Councilwoman Teresa Barth once again not being appointed to be mayor or deputy mayor for Encinitas at the special council meeting Dec. 13: [click to link to video & blog background]
There were quite a few of us there, who silently protested the much-anticipated oversight of appointing a hardworking council member who truly represents the people of Encinitas. We made no comments because the City Council majority does not listen unless your ideas and comments mirror theirs.

The question is who are we? The council majority spins it that we are agitators. The truth is we are the people of Encinitas, coming from each community with a reason. We do not attend council meetings because we have no life, or nothing better to do. We are there because we have business at the city, neighborhood issues, questions and concerns. Some of us are on town councils, boards, HOAs and Main Street associations, but all of us go to City Council meetings because we have an interest in improving this community.

Unlike some of the Encinitas council majority, we are courteous and concerned with making this city a better place to live. We are not beholden to special interests, some of whom were there at the council meeting and, of course, did not stand up. Why should they? They are being represented quite nicely by the new Encinitas City Council majority. So to those who still wonder who we are, we are the citizens of Encinitas.