Myths Encinitas

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

FISCAL AND STAFF IMPACTS: No fiscal impacts.

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

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

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

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

(2) Said banners shall exclusively promote or depict:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Laughing Stocks

Explain to us exactly what is so delightfully comical about your Deputy Mayor acting out a kind of petulant interruption to the final vote on the long awaited and highly orchestrated event for your many promises to special groups on this momentous Hall park and Moonlight Beach financial package to proceed?  Long sentence that and I apologize.  There are simply dozens of suppositions one could stuff into those several minutes of adults acting like adolescents rather than public leaders.  What the hell . . .?

Don't for a minute think Stocks is laughing with us all.  He laughs at us, believing us stupid, blind and deaf.

This deferential treatment of shiny, smiling Gaspar isn't really new, but it seemed more obvious at this evening's venue despite more than a hundred in the audience and an estimated huge audience online.

Remember the last meeting, June 27 when Gaspar was on vacation? We stared at her empty chair at the end of the meeting when her item was pulled from the consent calendar. Via teleconference she essential challenged City Manager Vina's numbers, staff negotiations, anyone's ability to make a lease decision without her amazing financial acumen? Despite all of the City Manager's figures, Muir's confidence (as fire guy), Teresa's attempt to suggest this as a future agenda item the Deputy Mayor was having none of it. Up to and through the voting she was a petulant brat. She is only too aware that there is a ME in team, despite her hypocritical attack on Barth at that very meeting, saying sanctimoniously there was no I in team.  You can't make this crap up!

Here is the clip of the entire festival of indulgence and time wasting brought to us all by Deputy Mayor Gaspar, the financial wizard.

The Mayor's and Deputy Mayor's  tête-à-tête is the highlight here. And, Gaspar's demand that her wishes and comfort level be honored DESPITE the majority decision and Stocks ingratiating explanatory contortions to appease her are equally gag worthy.

Get a room . . .

Oh, and just for context to the first clip, note the more common demeanor of Mayor Jerome Stocks at the very opening, the onset of this Special Encinitas Meeting.

 

Throughout the meeting he cut some people off, allowed others to ramble, censored some, charmed others.  Bully. Crony. Bully Crony. Every Encinitas citizen needs the visceral political experience of attending one of the 9 meetings left before the election.  The opinions are not unanimous - even among us all here.  But the actual meetings, and the actual words and behaviours in the clips are plain enough to see.  Please pass along links to all of our neighbors, coworkers and friends.  We can do so much better for our community than this.  We have such talent and ethical individuals who actually want to serve. 

You Can't Get Along

 

"Where is the outcry for this issue?" She answers simply, "This is an issue because you can't get along."  Kathleen Lees attempts to make a centrist, non-confrontive series of statements regarding the last minute agenda item tacked onto the July 11, 2012 Special City Council Meeting, the proposed ballot initiative for an elected mayor in Encinitas.  At the core she was naming the problem.

One of the reasons a series of complex posts were presented this last week was this very comfortable, simplistic rendering of the majority's unacceptable treatment of their elected colleague, Teresa Barth, for years.  This is a kind of incivility that millions of people around the country witness each and every day in our culture. It has become a culture of bullys and bigots.  Right here in our council the regular attendees, advocates for their own neighborhoods and interest groups (like last nights skateboarders, dog owners, scientists, traffic critics, sports enthusiasts and league businessmen) all want their voices heard and documented. Even the most outspoken, the bossy, the curmudgeons, the preachers and the politically wonky are supposedly given that right in a democratic system's bill of rights.

The posts on this blog, the clips here and the archived hundreds all show a majority council made up of those who would deny a fully open government, who show intolerance for dissenting opinions, make false acusations and manipulate the process for political gain. The political goal of a zero sum game means a complete blackout of their opposition.

As the clip text states:

Jerome Stocks and the majority on the council over the last six years have shown over and over again their utter contempt for Teresa Barth. Yet even today, with the simplistic "he said, she said" model of reporting by  local news it is all too easy to see controversy and a parity in viewpoints that just doesn't exist. Stocks simply refuses to allow Teresa Barth any position, any voice or any credit as a colleague. She has been "othered" since the day she was elected. That is reprehensible, but even more unacceptable is that Teresa Barth represents the voices of the thousands and thousands of Encinitas voters who have had their votes erased by disenfranchising their choice, their elected official.

We must demand to be heard.  Moreover, it is our moral duty to stand up to the bullying that our elected official is made to endure, despite her consistently respectful demeanor and robust support of the entire community.  If we are attacked for supporting our own right to voice our opinions our defending our public servant we simply don't have to play along.  Confrontation is our right, despite what Mayor Stocks or Deputy Mayor Gaspar may label it this week.

They're still Terrified of Teresa Barth

They are nothing if not relentless in their goal to completely silence Councilwoman Barth and the large number of voters who she represents. The goal in repeatedly bringing back and attacks on Barth seems to aim at destroying her opportunity to come out of exile as the Encinitas preferred mayor. What the hell scares them so much?  Like clockwork every 6 weeks there is some sort of Stocks led power play, masked as a kind of populist move to legitimatize the selection of mayor as fair and civil. 

Review following 2011 mayor selection evening when people turned their backs as Stocks and Gaspar ensconced themselves in the positions of leadership.  

At February 15, 2012 these two acted in concert to introduce a 2 year mayoral scheme that would make Gaspar mayor. This Mayoral Mambo was out of the blue and thankfully didn't get enough votes from their own team. 

Here is what Teresa Barth said at that meeting.  Even now, five months and two council attempts later to get questions answered by staff go ignored.  This is also revealed in the post that follows this clip.

This post from Encinitas You Need Us Blog is a reprint.  It is one of the popular posts on the blog.

They're Terrified

It was highly entertaining in these last few days to read all of the comments following Jerome Stocks embarrassing letter in responding to Teresa Barth's letter in Encinitas Patch.   First, it was appropriate for Barth to publish her perspective as her voice on the council is so consistently ignored, dismissed or drowned out by four others of the super majority. On the other hand Jerome Stocks gets his bully pulpit on the dais, control of the agenda, a North County Times (NCT) reporter who acts practically like his publicist and other media focus and framing.

Yet the Stocks letter is a gigantic overreaction to Barth's statement of her experiences.  He and his cronies have treated this woman's minority voice on the council with irrational fear.  What kind of power toppling abilities does she have that motions, agenda item requests, counter arguments, insights from other California cities, advocacy for residents, (even a vote for the mobile home tenants for God's sake) might she bring down for them?  These mighty majority act like theirs is very fragile platform. They may be correct. There are hours of meetings which are pretty fact-free or so orchestrated for confusion it is difficult to mount rational responses. There is not a lot of 'there' there.  We know its been years since anything has been built or accomplished.  Even the General Plan Update (GPU) is being sold as a hoax by the council who brought it to life.

Undeniably there is a great deal of money behind these big boys.  Nobody needs to be told that, although it would be helpful if we could be reading in the press the names behind those who back this cabal at city hall.  It is well past time for that preliminary investigation.

Yet, these comments in the letters here and here are a wonderful sign that there are so many articulate, informed and savvy people paying close attention to these (mental and emotional) lumbering brutes who think the city is theirs and the inhabitants are all asleep or imbeciles.  Wide awake comments at NCT's, A"So Much For Democracy" Raspberry discussion thread brought another batch of insight and resistance, though the regular majority's gang were still there crying about that mean (how dare she) Barth and anyone who would attack poor Stocks and Co.

If you wrote a comment speaking out for Barth, against the Crony Club - give yourself a pat on the back.  Several comments were inexplicably deleted.  I hope they might be recovered as they belonged with the rest.  Imagine if 40 people responded rapidly to an engaging story for challengers to the monopoly or to a hit piece.  This would be a revitalized, engaged community before the election was even under way.

6 weeks later . . . 

Mayor Stocks argues again and Deputy Mayor Gaspar has full blown Poutrage

following Councilwoman's speech and the many remarkable speakers in support of democratic process, dissent and Teresa Barth personally.

Activists / Advocates Speak Out - A Sampling of the Dozen

2012 Council Candidates also speak out. 

Lisa Shaffer published her statement prior to the this March 28 meeting and EYNU captured it. And Tony Kranz spoke out at this meeting with his own unique experience and perspective on the faux populist and criteria arguments.

Wed. night - Now 16 weeks later (whoops their skipped opportunities). This winner take all crowd in the majority again can waste time - supposedly on the people's business - to distract and abuse the public on this political attempt to garner complete control of the city council process in Encinitas.

This ordinance is STILL poorly written, still without answering repeated questions for more detail and still politically driven, and not much more. Nothing is broken here, it's fixed. The personal grudges of this majority are frightening in their relentlessness and viciousness. What do they fear? And a special note to the old guy who has vowed to bow out and vowed to change the mayoral selection to an elected option. Sometimes you just don't get what you want. Please let go of your grudge from years ago. You and Muir can take the higher ground.

ATTENTION:  All hands on deck for Wednesday, July 11, 6 pm special council meeting to be held at Encinitas Community Center.  The financial bamboozlement of the Hall Property park and the Moonlight beach improvements will be item #1,  this mayoral grab action is #2 on the agenda.  Bring your cameras and enthusiasm.

Myths Encinitas - People's business continued . . .

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

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

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

Subcommittee Ambush for Super majority Goal. 

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



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



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

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

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



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

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

Myths Encinitas

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Following this meeting Teresa Barth stated,

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

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

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

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

We Write Letters

Update: Video Clip added 5/18/12, 11 am

Ideally, well composed commentaries and letters like this one will be seen in many different venues.  In the event that an Encinitas voter doesn't read the Coast News paper or hasn't paid the online fee to read these citizen-generated pieces, this blog might be the place a connection is made.   For that reason we are advocating redundancy.  Good stuff shouldn't go unread. 

Message from the Mayor: ‘Your input is unwelcome and irrelevant’ 
By C.J. Minster May 14, 2012

Once again the mayor of Encinitas has demonstrated his disdain for what you, as citizens of Encinitas, have to say.

At the May 9 Council meeting, a resident requested a revision to the April 18 Minutes (not yet approved and posted) to reflect more accurately the main point of a statement she had made during Oral Communications.

Mayor Stocks, in his usual snarky tone, stated that the topics of the presentations should not have been in the Minutes at all, and that the City Clerk had erred by including them. He said that it is Council policy to have “action” minutes that only state who spoke during Oral Communications, but not what they spoke about. He said, “I’m not sure when we got away from that.” He went on to say, “There is absolutely no reason to take up what they addressed.” Video Link

Mayor Stocks’ statement indicates the following:

• He must not be reading the Minutes (even though Council must approve all minutes before they are posted) for, in fact, all Minutes for regular Council meetings from at least 2002 up to the present briefly describe what each person addressing Council during Oral Communications spoke about.

• Underlying his stance against including brief documentation of what citizens take time and effort to present is a message to the public that our input to the City is unwelcome, unimportant, has no relevance to what Council should consider or not consider, and is best forgotten.

But this time Mayor Stocks wasn’t able to rally support around his position. Council voted to put a discussion of this topic on a future Council agenda. Mayor Stocks was the only council member who voted against doing so (Jim Bond was absent).

Mayor Stocks, we get your message loud and clear, but we’re not buying it. And, we have a message for you: “You aren’t our king, and this City is not your realm.” Fortunately, we live in a democracy. Watch us vote you out in November!

Thanks to C.J. Miinster for this at the Coast News.

Update: Sorry for the oversight. Here is the full length video clip. Go to the 3 minute mark to capture the incident C.J. is writing about in her commentary.

Myths Encinitas

At the last council meeting the mayor and deputy mayor offered up their facile argument that city rules and processes were more important than emotional issues.  Gaspar repeated it over and over - process, rules, process, etc. Embarrassing.

These are myths. Encinitas City Council Majority Myths. "Myths Encinitas"

Pay attention, because they don't mean it.  This is not about policies or rules, because there isn't a meeting this year that Jerome Stocks hasn't played around with Roberts Rules of Order, Council Policy, the Brown Act,  basic rules of courtesy and etiquette or a combination of all of the above rules and processes.

At this very same meeting, following the embarrassing Gaspar process yappity yap and directly after being called on this very thing by Sandy Shapiro, Jerome Stocks blew off the time overage for cronies and funding friends.

 Legally there is nothing as definitive as Sandy Shapiro reads from the city document for the Oral Communications.  The point is that this small allowance for citizens to speak to their issues at the start of each meeting is used as political manipulation. 

As stated in the video slides, this wasn't about the Historical Preservation group, event or fascinating video. (This is a worthy event.) This is about the Stocks, Bond, Muir and Gaspar pretending to be following official rules when they act without flexibility, openness, transparency, understanding or compassion. It's merely political word games, bullying and the marginalizing of their perceived enemies. Stocks' behavior is so different with buddies and cronies and funding sources.

"Myths" Encinitas

Mondays may need to become Myths Encinitas feature day.  Today will kickoff a recent Myths Gaspar version.  Kristin Gaspar is quite the myth maker and she was to be central.  But, seriously, our mayor, Jerome Stocks lives and breathes myths and has years on the deputy mayor.  Jim Bond creates his version of history of his 20 years on the dais most every meeting.  At the last meeting Kristin turned on Teresa Barth and wailed,

"Teresa, that is why this council has supported you 100% of the time when it comes to agendizing issues."

[yabba, yabba, yabba . . . ]

"The public has a right to know that a hundred percent of the time we have supported you in your agenda . . . your items agendized, 100% of the time."

That's horse pucky, a flat out lie myth - three times!. There are hundreds of examples in the years Barth has served where she receives 0% support.   The example below was chosen because it illustrates the lengths the council majority and their personal consigliere  Sabine will go to frustrate the simplest of requests, even if it would be a gesture of cooperation with the minority voices on the council, provide goodwill to the community and help mitigate the disastrously bad press (in this instance) nationwide regarding the Surfing Madonna.

I'm not going to write out the entire transcript, but I'm struck by the relentlessness of the attorney to make Teresa Barth jump through hoop after hoop.  The hypocricy of demanding adherence to a rigid council policy standard while letting Stocks violate it repeatedly.  Some highlights:

"That's why you folks play the game," said Sabine (?). . . . "Go through the findings" . . . Stocks interruptions . . . disregard of mayor Bond and meeting rules. And even at the end of the meeting, Teresa Barth cites reference to adding an agenda item from a book the attorney gave her. He responds with 2/3 majority means a 4/5 vote required . . . "

It seemed to go on and on . . .

For additional background to this particular meeting, the clip link here shows the public's speeches regarding the Surfing Madonna. They are two of the many last year around this time.

Correction: The clip made of Kristin Gaspar's non-agendized attack on Teresa Barth faded out before she'd finished her spittle flecked assault. The following is the closing of that tirade to frame herself as a victim(?). It doesn't really make much sense, but it is included to keep all the myths of this speech together.

"And, ah, I don’t know where else in life it works that you treat people that way and then you expect that when it come time for one person to cast that one vote, that my vote will drift your way. It just doesn’t happen in the real world and that’s why I’ve stated before that I’ve always felt like the ball was in your court when it comes to that vote and I treated everything with a fresh perspective. And I quite frankly I’m tired of carrying the burden of that victim role. Um . . . Because it’s not my burden to carry. Um . . . So, I wanted to clarify that and also on the two years, the intent behind that was to make certain that a councilman had served for at least two years before becoming mayor. It wasn’t to do anything else, other than that. It was the intent that we discussed it before was that if you had an election the highest vote getter could be someone new to the process. I was one of those people new to the process and it was to avoid that situation."

End.

Our Mayor Tightly Wound

Editor's perspective

This view is not reflected in candidate's positions, council member's positions or other citizens.  It is in fact honed from a life of observation and views related to social justice and citizen participation echoed around the country. 

It's almost a national pastime for those who hold all the power to routinely blame the victims of that power that they wield. Ask anyone who has been silenced or marginalized by institutionalized practices of wealth and power.

Encinitas has its own beach town version in our local political scene, funded by great wealth in land use and construction (among others).  There are big political and financial players in the region who do not want anyone to challenge the control this council majority who serve them has maintained for a decade. Stocks, Gaspar, Muir and Bond are their representatives.  The upcoming election is one of many threats to this established power base.  Gaspar as mayor, no matter who wins or loses the election will be a way to keep the overlords happy.

Councilwoman Barth Encourages Citizen Participation

This clip is the bit that led into Gaspar's poutrage in the preceding post below.  For those who watched Gaspar lash out at Barth without any truthful evidence - again - this clip shows how desperate the mission must be to get that contrived ordinance in place.

It really isn't about Teresa Barth.  It isn't about poor Ms. Gaspar having her own problems with what she claims does and doesn't offend her.  This is raw political power maneuvering, framing and the dozen speakers and many dozens more watching at home and in the council chamber and those who watched clips after know this. 

Maybe the deliberate framing to make Gaspar the victim works for the powers that be.  This doesn't mean the press should continue to lap up what they've been spoon fed.  I'm talking to you Jon Horn, Barbara Henry and Wehtahnah Tucker. Enough with the false equivalency when one lone voice to represent half of Encinitas is shut out and public speakers are treated with barely veiled contempt. Thankfully, there are so many willing to be vigillant.  As several speakers said, they didn't want to be at the city council meeting for more than 4 hours last Wednesday night or any night.

Press

Council postpones decision on mayor selection process

Encinitas mayor proposal tabled after heated debate

City Council to Continue Talks on Mayor Selection Process 

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

Cheese Stands Alone

It's rare that the crony club doesn't back the big cheese.  Last night's council meeting was a treat.  Patch has the story this morning so take a moment and read the whole thing.

In a 4-1 vote with Encinitas Mayor Jerome Stocks opposed, Wednesday night Council adopted a policy that bans council members from messaging via their cell phones or wireless devices, like tablets, while they are on the dais.

Oh, do go say a few words of delight in the comments section for this victory for Barth who has addressed issues of technology along with open government and respect for colleagues and public consistently. And good for the others to have made the brave move to let the cheese stand alone.  More please . . .

Update: Coast News also has an article online about this no-texting at the dais resolution. Show this great little local paper some high traffic, enthusiastic commenting love.