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.

Big Media Shouldn't Get Bigger

Douglas Manchester buying The San Diego Union Tribune a year ago and then the North County Times and then bragging about wanting to buy LA Times was bad news for Encinitas.  "This is a GOP donor who took a respected paper and turned it into a corporate shill." Media Matters posted this title for an article on Thursday, Dec. 6, 2012.

We were fortunate to have a local publisher, Jim Kydd, who knows what is going on in our local government, within the local education system and in our business community.  He involved himself in this last election and was smeared for it by Mayor Stocks and his supporters. But, Kydd was honored at a local party this season.

No matter what one's political background, there is agreement that the FCC needs to do it's job to disallow monopoly ownership like we have now with Rupert Murdock or or local version, Douglas Manchester.

Flashback: Citizens comment on FCC proposal in 2007 from BillMoyers.com on Vimeo.

Yes, the video above is from 2007. It is a sad testimony to the complete and utter melding of corporate business and government that now, during President Obama's administration, the FCC is not even allowing any public hearings as it meets secretly regarding Murdock's expansion plans. Bernie Sanders, (I)Vermont, met with Bill Moyers to discuss this and the following appear Thursday, Dec. 6, 2012.  At this blog and at EYNU, we believe this garbage journalism issue is fundamental in our community's understanding of what is broken, what must be fixed for the sake of democracy.

"In 1983, 50 corporations controlled a majority of American media. Now that number is six. And Big Media may get even bigger, thanks to the FCC’s consideration of ending a rule preventing companies from owning a newspaper and radio and TV stations in the same city. On this week’s Moyers & Company, Senator Bernie Sanders, one of several Senators who have written FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski asking him to suspend the plan, joins Bill to discuss why Big Media is a threat to democracy and what citizens can do to fight back. Watch and share two preview clips below." [editor: emphasis mine as we are in the middle of an unfolding story]

In the first clip, Sanders explains how letting Big Media have its way would limit discussion of “the real issues that impact ordinary people.” Sanders also expresses his dismay that such a move would come from an Obama appointee. “Why the Obama Administration is doing something that the Bush Administration failed to do is beyond my understanding,” Sanders tells Bill. “And we’re gonna do everything we can to prevent it from happening.”

In this second clip, Senator Sanders shares his belief that, unlike previous attempts, the FCC is trying to suspend the rule more secretly and without much public input. Sanders also talks about the effect of this action on minority- and women-owned media in particular.

Watch the full interview this weekend on Moyers & Company. Click here to find show times and channels in your area. 

Check out our “Fight Media Monopoly” spotlight page for the latest interviews, insight, and information on Big Media’s power play.

© 2012 Bill Moyers Media copied in its entirety from Common Dreams.

Additionally, our local Patch Online includes this article, "Local Media 'Dropped the Ball' in Covering Judge Candidate, KPBS News Chief Says." 

KPBS Senior News Editor Mark Sauer says “far right-wing” hopeful Gary Kreep was overlooked. [ . . . ]

Sauer admitted “failure” in KPBS not telling its radio and TV audiences (and website readers) about Kreep’s background, which included representing the birther movement as it challenged President Obama’s U.S. citizenship. 

The San Diego County Bar Association gave Kreep, a Ramona lawyer, its lowest rating—“lacking qualifications,” Sauer noted. 

Kreep defeated deputy district attorney Garland Peed 50 percent to 49.6 percent for judge office 34—winning by 1,739 votes out of 407,209 cast.

Addressing the thrust of this post, this failure of Big Media to serve it's democratic duty to inform the electorate, Sauer could expand on the U-T failures as he was a reporter for 27 years.

Sauer noted that the U-T newsroom boasted 285 people at its peak about seven years ago. Today, he said, he’d be surprised if 80 worked in the newsroom.

 [ . . . ]

As a result of the “terrible loss” of many respected reporters such as environmental writer Mike Lee—now a “flak for the Water Authority”—the U-T can’t do the kind of reporting necessary to keep readers informed on democratic institutions, he said. 

He said the U-T under current publisher Doug Manchester probably wouldn’t expose the kind of bribery case that led to Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham being convicted—which won the paper a Pulitzer Prize. 

Sauer said he hasn’t watched U-T TV for more than 10 minutes at a time, and “they’re not doing an objective newscast.” 

KPBS—with an audience of 350,000 a day—has a half-dozen reporters who do investigations, Sauer said, and also teams with Investigative News Source run by former U-T editor Lorie Hearn. 

But “we don’t do nearly enough,” he said, calling broadcast news coverage “a mile wide and an inch deep.”

Today, it takes a real commitment for people to wade through and reject a lot of superficial and fact free pap to find news and information to trust.   Blogging is one way those of us who care about making more independent and first hand news available feel we can contribute.

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.

Serious Giving

Some opt out altogether from the historically recent custom of buying Christmas gifts. Some because their family and familiars have plenty of stuff, so the holiday has changed with the seasonal generous urge fulfilled with one of the hundreds of alternatives. This isn't a new concept.

Our Publisher Brings Balance Against Tiny Minority

Thank you so much Jim Kydd for what you do for this community as one of the few independent newspaper publishers left in the whole country.  This year was a game changer for us all in feeling serious forward movement, a waking community and united sentiment in all 5 communities that is is time to Dump Stocks. Coast News was at the center of our local storm.  It takes a storm to unseat embedded, professional political players.

The fact that you chose to exercise your right to dissent as a public citizen via your election website and taking out ads, is legal.  It is democratic.  We more than trust your ability to get all of the rules and paperwork reporting done, made public or whatever is necessary (rather than just a response to odious threats).

It is regrettable that the bad guys used your right to dissent to smear the candidates that you and thousands of us all support.  Then again, we knew the cronies have done many such things in the past and the incumbents have always denied everything at all times.  No surprises. Discussing Doug Manchester sucking up all newspapers is just a local version of the graphic at the top. Nothing to see here folks.

We all have suggestions for better ways you could have done things, Jim Kydd.  We have dozens of people anxious to critique each other at the drop of the hat. Right now we want you to have all your proper paperwork filed.  We all have to say that putting stickers on things without permission isn't right.  Done.

No doubt you and the people behind the Dump Stocks efforts never intended to hurt Lisa Shaffer or Tony Kranz whose campaigns have stayed far away from this effort.  But, diversity is the heart of civic engagement and in no way means choices are always binary.  Not all choices are yes / no, black / white, off / on, us / them . . . you get it.

The good news is the community has hit the tipping point.   And, Jim, it is worth the 10 coins each month to buy a subscription to the Coast News.

Willful Ignorance and Aggressive Manipulation

This week's city council meeting's agenda includes the EIR for the I-5 widening.

The following clip contains 4 speakers from last April when Mayor Stocks tried to muscle through a resolution opposing California Senate Bill #468 sponsored by Senator Christine Kehoe. Two of the speakers are leading scientists and professors at UCSD, as the EYNU post highlights as Encinitas rich treasure of smart, thoughtful citizens so consistently ignored and abused by the council majority.

 

This previous clip is just one clip in the hour's worth of informed and impassioned speakers who waited five hours to speak at this meeting.

The public has long been trying to have community involved city council meetings about the I-5 widening. Jerome Stocks, privvy to all kinds of inside information from his position with NCTD and SANDAG refused these meetings and failed to share what his own involvement or any salient facts learned in these roles. What he does share he misrepresents for his political ends. He has always treated NCTD and SANDAG as his own fiefdom. Voting his conscience remains his private interpretation of representation.

How Many are Helping Guide From Within the Herd?

“Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment.” Albert Einstein

The trouble with habitual, entrenched power is it can be smug, blind. Those in power are most often unaware of the perceptions of those all around them and how it is changing. This election season there are people in all five communities who are thinking about their own lives and choices quite differently.

As the quote says, it is difficult to make statements that differ from those around you. Individuals may not be able to rise and speak up at city council like the Duff Pickering or Brian Burke in the clips that follow, but many are finding they can influence those closest to them. They are sensing things formerly hidden in plain sight and telling their friends.

People are directing those they trust towards challenging the status quo, challenging City Hall - the planning staff, the financial reports, the facile city attorney and most importantly the incumbents up for re-election - Jerome Stocks and Mark Muir. There are 33 more days until we learn just how successful this movement from within can really be.

Here's Duff Pickering on Sept. 26th challenging the reporting of the Workshop Mapping analysis.

The next two clips are from Sept. 19 and Sept. 26 wherein Brian Burke challenges the Encinitas Pension funding.

 

 

It may seem cliché, but it is worth a reminder that there will always be someone else here in Encinitas who works his nastiest when he's in disguise. Reading his words it's pretty clear he doesn't give a flocking concern for the welfare of all. He wants blood. Vigilance.

This Is the Model for Candidate Debate

The Encinitas City Council Candidate Forums - where all candidates will present their statements and be questioned by the community are scheduled as follows:

Sept. 18 (Tues.) Cardiff-by-the-Sea
Oct. 3 (Wed.) Olivenhain
Oct. 9 (Tues.) Leucadia - New and Old Encinitas

Debate is still the terminology used, but real debate as taught in western culture's academic tradition is extinct.  Anyone who watched the ridiculousness of the months of Republican primary debates can attest to this.

The clip below shows what voters could be exposed to with articulate candidates educated and aware of the issues and willing to stand for principles worth defending against the mediocre, the mendacious.

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.

Famous Cardiffian Remembered

Last week the late Chalmers Johnson would have been the 81 years old.  Thought this was a good time for more people than just the political wonks to be exposed to a remarkable scholar who lived in Cardiff-by-the-Sea. This is the confluence of local, national and international politics in our little beach town.  Though not cited in the Wikipedia biography below, one of the most encouraging things Chalmers did [editor opinion] is acknowledge that he had been dead wrong for years in his support of the US military policies.  Footnotes have been omitted here, see source for these and the bibliography. His Blowback trilogy described below are excellent non-fiction summer reads or part of an Encinitas home library.

Chalmers Ashby Johnson (August 6, 1931 – November 20, 2010) was an American author and professor emeritus of the University of California, San Diego. He served in the Korean War, was a consultant for the CIA from 1967 to 1973, and chaired the Center for Chinese Studies at the University of California, Berkeley from 1967 to 1972. He was also president and co-founder of the Japan Policy Research Institute (now based at the University of San Francisco), an organization promoting public education about Japan and Asia. He wrote numerous books including, most recently, three examinations of the consequences of American Empire: Blowback, The Sorrows of Empire, and Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic. A former cold warrior, his fears for the US have changed: 

"A nation can be one or the other, a democracy or an imperialist, but it can’t be both. If it sticks to imperialism, it will, like the old Roman Republic, on which so much of our system was modeled, like the old Roman Republic, it will lose its democracy to a domestic dictatorship."

Johnson was born in 1931 in Phoenix, Arizona. He earned a B.A. degree in Economics in 1953 and an M.A. and a Ph.D. in political science in 1957 and 1961 respectively. Both of his advanced degrees were from the University of California, Berkeley. Johnson met his wife Sheila, a junior at Berkeley, in 1956, and they were married in Reno, Nevada in May 1957. 

During the Korean War, Johnson served as a naval officer in Japan. He was the communications officer on a ship (the LST 883) "tasked with ferrying Chinese prisoners of war from South Korea back to North Korean ports." He taught political science at the University of California from 1962 until he retired from teaching in 1992. He was best known early in his career for his scholarship on the subjects of China and Japan. 

Johnson set the agenda for ten or fifteen years in social science scholarship on China with his book on peasant nationalism. His book MITI and the Japanese Miracle, on the Japanese Ministry of International Trade and Industry was the preëminent study of the country's development and created the subfield of what could be called the political economy of development. He coined the term "developmental state". As a public intellectual, he first led the "Japan revisionists" who critiqued American neoliberal economics with Japan as a model; their arguments faded from view as the Japanese economy stagnated in the mid-90s and beyond. During this period, Johnson acted as a consultant for the Office of National Estimates, part of the CIA, contributing to analysis of China and Maoism. 

Johnson was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1976. He served as Director of the Center for Chinese Studies (1967–72[2]) and Chair of the Political Science Department at Berkeley, and held a number of important academic posts in area studies. He was a strong believer in the importance of language and historical training for doing serious research. Late in his career he became well known as a critic of "rational choice" approaches, particularly in the study of Japanese politics and political economy. 

Johnson is perhaps today best known as a sharp critic of American imperialism. His book Blowback (2000) won a prize in 2001 from the Before Columbus Foundation, and was re-issued in an updated version in 2004. Sorrows of Empire, published in 2004, updated the evidence and argument from Blowback for the post-9/11 environment, and Nemesis concludes the trilogy. Johnson was featured as an expert talking head in the Eugene Jarecki-directed film Why We Fight, which won the 2005 Grand Jury Prize at the Sundance Film Festival. In the past, Johnson has also written for the Los Angeles Times, the London Review of Books, Harper’s Magazine, and The Nation. 

The Blowback series
Johnson believed that the enforcement of American hegemony over the world constitutes a new form of global empire. Whereas traditional empires maintained control over subject peoples via colonies, since World War II the US has developed a vast system of hundreds of military bases around the world where it has strategic interests. A long-time Cold Warrior, he applauded the dissolution of the Soviet Union: "I was a cold warrior. There's no doubt about that. I believed the Soviet Union was a genuine menace. I still think so." But at the same time he experienced a political awakening after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, noting that instead of demobilizing its armed forces, the US accelerated its reliance on military solutions to problems both economic and political. The result of this militarism (as distinct from actual domestic defense) is more terrorism against the US and its allies, the loss of core democratic values at home, and an eventual disaster for the American economy. Of four books he wrote on this topic, the first three are referred to as The Blowback Trilogy: 

Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire
Chalmers Johnson summarized the intent of Blowback in the final chapter of Nemesis. 

"In Blowback, I set out to explain why we are hated around the world. The concept "blowback" does not just mean retaliation for things our government has done to and in foreign countries. It refers to retaliation for the numerous illegal operations we have carried out abroad that were kept totally secret from the American public. This means that when the retaliation comes -- as it did so spectacularly on September 11, 2001 -- the American public is unable to put the events in context. So they tend to support acts intended to lash out against the perpetrators, thereby most commonly preparing the ground for yet another cycle of blowback. In the first book in this trilogy, I tried to provide some of the historical background for understanding the dilemmas we as a nation confront today, although I focused more on Asia -- the area of my academic training -- than on the Middle East." 

The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic
Chalmers Johnson summarizes the intent of The Sorrows of Empire in the final chapter of Nemesis 

"The Sorrows of Empire was written during the American preparations for and launching of the invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq. I began to study our continuous military buildup since World War II and the 737 military bases we currently maintain in other people's countries. This empire of bases is the concrete manifestation of our global hegemony, and many of the blowback-inducing wars we have conducted had as their true purpose the sustaining and expanding of this network. We do not think of these overseas deployments as a form of empire; in fact, most Americans do not give them any thought at all until something truly shocking, such as the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, brings them to our attention. But the people living next door to these bases and dealing with the swaggering soldiers who brawl and sometimes rape their women certainly think of them as imperial enclaves, just as the people of ancient Iberia or nineteenth-century India knew that they were victims of foreign colonization." 

• Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic

Chalmers Johnson summarizes the intent of the book Nemesis. 

“In Nemesis, I have tried to present historical, political, economic, and philosophical evidence of where our current behavior is likely to lead. Specifically, I believe that to maintain our empire abroad requires resources and commitments that will inevitably undercut our domestic democracy and in the end produce a military dictatorship or its civilian equivalent. The founders of our nation understood this well and tried to create a form of government – a republic – that would prevent this from occurring. But the combination of huge standing armies, almost continuous wars, military Keynesianism, and ruinous military expenses have destroyed our republican structure in favor of an imperial presidency. We are on the cusp of losing our democracy for the sake of keeping our empire. Once a nation is started down that path, the dynamics that apply to all empires come into play – isolation, overstretch, the uniting of forces opposed to imperialism, and bankruptcy. Nemesis stalks our life as a free nation.”

• Dismantling the Empire: America's Last Best Hope

Johnson outlines how the United States can reverse American hegemony.

Update: Last week Tom's Dispatch posted one of the 100 best posts: Chalmer's 2004 article, Abolish the CIA!

You New? Fresh Perspectives . . .

At a loss this morning for how to best characterize last night's special council meeting and the performance success of City Manager, Gus Vina and Parks and Recreation Director, Lisa Ruloff I found City Council Candidate's Lisa Shaffer's Facebook entry says what many of us were thinking. I for one reject the tired cliche of lemons to lemonade, but find Shaffer's perspective thoughtful and visionary. Such a truthful take compared to the local stenographers reporters for the council in the local news stories here, here or here .

Last night the City Council approved borrowing $8 million, reprogramming another $7 million, and spending over $19 million to build what is called the "full park" (ie, skatepark, dog park, and ball fields) at the Hall property off Santa Fe, as well as improvements at Moonlight Beach. The vote was unanimous, and if I had been on the Council and presented with the same question, I would have said yes, too. The community has waited long enough for a dedicated dog park, a public skate park, and additional playing fields. I strongly support organized sports, having played myself, and with 3 of our 4 girls having been on soccer and softball teams growing up.

There are many things that might have been done differently that might have enabled us to make these investments with less debt, with the ability to consider other financing options or phasing.

But the new team, led by Gus Vina and Lisa Rudloff, made the best of what they inherited, and fortunately interest rates are low, so lemonade is being made from some lemons and some sugar. I look forward to joining the rest of Encinitas in enjoying the new park.

Question: Am I the only one confused here? what happened to concern over funding etc.? I had to leave early, perhaps I missed something....like windfall grants or....?

Lisa Shaffer for Council 2012 Yes, there are concerns over financing. The City Attorney, selected and empowered by the Council majority (who we can change in November), assured the Council that the financing strategy was legal. Does that mean we should incur debt without a public vote? NO. Not in my view. But that was not offered as an option because continued City delays put us up against a funding deadline from the State for the Moonlight Beach money. By bundling Moonlight Beach and the Park, the degrees of flexibility on the overall vote were severely limited. It shouldn't have been presented that way, but it was. The new debt puts us at risk of not being able to address future needs such as stormwater drainage adequately - if we wanted to undertake a major capital project to address flooding, we don't have the borrowing flexibility.

The issues were not discussed and debated the way they should have been. The reality is that the way the package was presented and the way promises have been made to many important constituents for many years, the Council had no good options. The problem needed to be fixed long before we got to this City Council performance.

That's why I said that if I had been presented "with the same question" I would have said yes. But I would have tried hard before getting to this point to have provided opportunities for more open discussion of options; for planning that gives time for consideration of new questions that arise; and for including ordinary community members in stakeholder discussions, since we are all stakeholders in the Park.

Question: Ok, but bottom line Stocks gets to say to the voters "I built this park"...no?

Lisa Shaffer for Council 2012 Yes, you're right. Everyone on the Council said yes - we are ALL building this park. Of course there's no doubt there will be a groundbreaking with photo ops for all the Council members who are running this year. Absolutely. And all of us in Encinitas will be paying for it. But don't forget the other bottom line, which is that our kids and our dogs and our families will ultimately have a nice park, even though it comes at quite a high price financially and otherwise.

I don't want to be misrepresented as being against any of the important constituencies that the park will serve. I'm for a better process for making big public investments in a way that brings the community together rather than being divisive as this has been for the last 10+ years.

Confessions of a Recovering Engineer

Pay Attention Rob Blough! and all the Encinitas Engineering Department.  This is also dedicated to the council majority and the people who refuse to question the status quo for any reason . . . just because.

This reprint from Strong Towns blog by Charles Marohn (in its entirety) is for you.

It is also in vindication of the hundreds of citizens who have attempted to be heard by engineers at city hall.

After graduating from college with a civil engineering degree, I found myself working in my home town for a local engineering firm doing mostly municipal engineering (roads, sewer pipe, water pipe, stormwater). A fair percentage of my time was spent convincing people that, when it came to their road, I knew more than they did. 

And of course I should know more. First, I had a technical degree from a top university. Second, I was in a path towards getting a state license (at the time I was an Engineer in Training, the four-year "apprenticeship" required to become a fully licensed Professional Engineer), which required me to pass a pretty tough test just to get started and another, more difficult, exam to conclude. Third, I was in a profession that is one of the oldest and most respected in human history, responsible for some of the greatest achievements of mankind. Fourth - and most important - I had books and books of standards to follow. 

A book of standards to an engineer is better than a bible to a priest. All you have to do is to rely on the standards. Back in college I was told a story about how, in WW II, some Jewish engineers in hiding had run thousands of tedious tests on asphalt, just to produce these graphs that we still use today. Some of our craft descends from Roman engineers who did all of this a couple of millennia ago. How could I be wrong with literally thousands of years of professional practice on my side? 

And, more to the point, what business would I -- let alone a property owner on a project I was working on - have in questioning the way things were done? Of course the people who wrote the standards knew better than we did. That is why they wrote the standard. 

When people would tell me that they did not want a wider street, I would tell them that they had to have it for safety reasons. 

When they answered that a wider street would make people drive faster and that would be seem to be less safe, especially in front of their house where their kids were playing, I would confidently tell them that the wider road was more safe, especially when combined with the other safety enhancements the standards called for. 

When people objected to those other "enhancements", like removing all of the trees near the road, I told them that for safety reasons we needed to improve the sight distances and ensure that the recovery zone was free of obstacles.
When they pointed out that the "recovery zone" was also their "yard" and that their kids played kickball and hopscotch there, I recommended that they put up a fence, so long as the fence was outside of the right-of-way. 

When they objected to the cost of the wider, faster, treeless road that would turn their peaceful, front yard into the viewing area for a drag strip unless they built a concrete barricade along their front property line, I informed them that progress was sometimes expensive, but these standards have been shown to work across the state, the country and the world and I could not compromise with their safety. 

In retrospect I understand that this was utter insanity. Wider, faster, treeless roads not only ruin our public places, they kill people. Taking highway standards and applying them to urban and suburban streets, and even county roads, costs us thousands of lives every year. There is no earthly reason why an engineer would ever design a fourteen foot lane for a city block, yet we do it continuously. Why? 

The answer is utterly shameful: Because that is the standard. 

In the engineering profession's version of defensive medicine, we can't recommend standards that are not in the manual. We can't use logic to vary from a standard that gives us 60 mph design speeds on roads with intersections every 200 feet. We can't question why two cars would need to travel at high speed in opposite directions on a city block, let alone why we would want them to. We can yield to public pressure and post a speed limit -- itself a hazard -- but we can't recommend a road section that is not in the highway manual.  

When the public and politicians tell engineers that their top priorities are safety and then cost, the engineer's brain hears something completely different. The engineer hears, "Once you set a design speed and handle the projected volume of traffic, safety is the top priority. Do what it takes to make the road safe, but do it as cheaply as you can." This is why engineers return projects with asinine "safety" features, like pedestrian bridges and tunnels that nobody will ever use, and costs that are astronomical.  

An engineer designing a street or road prioritizes the world in this way, no matter how they are instructed:

• Traffic speed
• Traffic volume
• Safety
• Cost

The rest of the world generally would prioritize things differently, as follows:
Safety

• Cost
• Traffic volume
• Traffic speed

In other words, the engineer first assumes that all traffic must travel at speed. Given that speed, all roads and streets are then designed to handle a projected volume. Once those parameters are set, only then does an engineer look at mitigating for safety and, finally, how to reduce the overall cost (which at that point is nearly always ridiculously expensive). 

In America, it is this thinking that has designed most of our built environment, and it is nonsensical. In many ways, it is professional malpractice. If we delivered what society asked us for, we would build our local roads and streets to be safe above all else. Only then would we consider what could be done, given our budget, to handle a higher volume of cars at greater speeds. 

We go to enormous expense to save ourselves small increments of driving time. This would be delusional in and of itself if it were not also making our roads and streets much less safe. I'll again reference a 2005 article from the APA Journal showing how narrower, slower streets dramatically reduce accidents, especially fatalities. 

And it is that simple observation that all of those supposedly "ignorant" property owners were trying to explain to me, the engineer with all the standards, so many years ago. When you can't let your kids play in the yard, let alone ride their bike to the store, because you know the street is dangerous, then the engineering profession is not providing society any real value. It's time to stand up and demand a change. 

It's time we demand that engineers build us Strong Towns.

 Strong Towns blog and website have dozens of good posts and resources. And BTW, engineers, you can console yourselves that you don't suck as bad as the economists.

Beware Polarizing

Don’t let anyone tell you there is only one way or only two ways of viewing something going on in our fair city (not even bloggers). People arrive at their worldviews through their experiences and information sources and the ever publicized 'gut.' Seldom are things simply black and white because we live in a sea of greys.

In order to build real community for Encinitas, these disparate worldviews need to be addressed if we are to connect the dots of really large issues of living our lives and local government issues. It could take years if we did it with real leadership and community involvement. For now we’ll need to seek where we can find alignments for some immediate sense of victory and hope.

One thing has aligned our community and gives us immediate hopeful anticipation. That's a fervent belief that our Mayor Stocks and this majority rule needs to end with this 2012 election. Encinitas Undercover blog, tongue in cheek called this Jerome Stocks unites Encinitas showing the growing number of cars with the Dump Stocks bumper stickers.

Less clear cut has been the General Plan Update process. ERAC (erase) in particular has been a hotbed of divisive energy from the deliberately accusatory onset. Everything about the forming, the application process without proper vetting or criteria, the completely non-transparent, non-public approach to member selection, the ‘volunteer’ facilitator running all of the ERAC meetings (and upcoming open houses, workshops) and the dubious weight that will be given any ‘findings’ of this group sends to the council majority should give us pause.  These are clear warning signs that the process, the motives and the goals demand scrutiny and conversations, lots of communication and more disclosure.

 

Bridging differences is extremely hard work. For those more interested in being elected than in governing it gets much simpler - especially with a great deal of outside funding. This is important because it has always been the offensive moves of this council majority to pit neighbor against neighbor, business against environment, community against community to create division. In the past the big discord delivery system was the Hall Property. Via distortion, omission and outright lies throughout his campaign, Stocks painted his election opponents as anti-sports, anti-park. His majority council member colleagues did the same. In past campaigns he also claimed anti-business and improper FPPC smears against Maggie Houlihan. Fear, division and claiming success for others' accomplishments have worked well for the mayor.

Wednesday night, April 18 Stocks has scheduled a state of the city speech. I suspect we’ll see what will provide the 2012 official gimmick with its capacity for creating polarity and distrust for his campaign assault. I predict GPU, with ERAC (erase) specifically as the savior for all prosperity. You can be sure the unfunded pension liability will not be addressed honestly. Expect blaming for screw ups, great photos and fantasy deadlines for, Hall Property, Moonlight, Santa Fe underpass and Leucadia Streetscape. Oh, maybe he'll figure a way to shoehorn his greenishness with his electric car, home solar panels; plus he'll claim the future electric charging station and farmers market as his self-promoted green badge.

Let’s not let the Stocks campaign propaganda talking points or the General Plan Update misinformation, including nationally funded conspiracy theories, our local provocateurs or our divisive deputy mayor split our communities. What could be more divisive than having each open house pick where the big density numbers should be located? That begs for people to revert to their worst natures. I hope that we can show this council majority and the city staff and facilitator Norby that we want a united community, despite our different worldviews and our varied community characteristics.

Nurseryman Hall Is Gone

Today the North County Times includes the obituary article for Robert Hall with a photo from the Hall family.

"Robert Hall, one of the big names in the region's flower-growing industry and the former owner of a 43-acre property that's slated to become an Encinitas city park, died of cancer Dec. 20 in Leucadia."

"Known for his ability to capitalize on innovations in the nursery business and put them into large-scale production, Hall at one time had more than 80 acres growing under plastic in Encinitas."

Warm wishes to the man's family and friends in their loss. Though this isn't actually a post about Robert Hall or the mess our mayor Stocks or the city has made of the park plans following purchase of Hall's property in 2001 for $17.2 million. No, this is about our imaginations, our visions regarding Encinitas precious agricultural acres - a swath that runs through the heart of the five communities - and our sustainable future, our homes, our foods, our land use and economy. For the late Hall and so many of his fellow nursery owners hit hard by globalized business flooding the US economy with cheap imports, many have chosen upzoning of Agricultural land as the only land use option.

Editor's Picks

Alternatives that retain, but rethink the Agricultural land use are available all over the world. In response to climate change, peak oil, unemployment, food security and food safety; localized food production is increasingly pursued as a serious community investment. The following video from Civil Eats shows one Wisconsin town's approach to historic unused local greenhouses.

"It all seems like such a waste of resources and energy and a sad reminder of the pace our economy has slowed to. In the face of this hardship, ideas such as The Greenhouse Project in Central Wisconsin offer respite. A group of passionate people, working on a volunteer basis towards providing “opportunities for participation, education, cooperation, and action to support a local food economy in Central Wisconsin” have banded together and successfully started renovations on a dilapidated 38,000 square foot property in downtown Stevens Point. The vision is to create a self-sustaining, multi-faceted production and education center, where rural farming techniques can coalesce with a thriving urban community ready to learn about them."

Will Allen and Growing Power mentioned in the video clip - visit blog for this dynamic man and his impact in Wisconsin.

Greenhouses, Greenhorns and Green Houses (oh my)

And the concept in the video of teaching people how to farm, how to grow food directs me to this fantastic group of organized young farmers called The Greenhorns. What they wouldn't give to have access to Encinitas greenhouses and possible eco-communities for farmers-in-training on agricultural land! Tiny homes densely clustered next to agricultural training facilities is even a tourist enticement. This is a density that is growing in popularity and would make some sense for other infill areas around this community. Do we ever hear ideas like this from our city council chambers? From our local press? From critics of the ongoing GPU land use element draft? If not developer-led housing and big box commercial land use, what?

Lastly, a short trailer about Transition 2.0. movie soon to be released. Transition is an international movement wherein communities are rethinking the way they view their communities and the future.

Isn't this what a General Plan Update asks of us, to envision our future? All over Encinitas people are up in arms over the draft GPU. What we are not hearing are alternative plans, other ideas. The strength of local businesses, co-ops over the vulnerability of relying on multi-national chains like Walmart? Let's get those facts out into the open. If we throw into the mix the whole range of unsustainable current systems failing all around us, these alternative examples in imagining our future are food for thought. They are presented for that purpose and to encourage us to look beyond the short term to the future for the next several generations. And, they are encouraging despite the unmistakeable challenges.