ERAC = The Big Lie

What makes ERAC, Element Review Advisory Committee, the big lie is the premise that this is a citizen participation group.  This is a hand picked group to bring the council majority the alternatives to housing and land use preferred by the financial backers they represent.

This is business under the guise of public participation. And the formation of this group has nothing to do with the legislative directives to update the General Plan to reflect the sustainability criteria for economic, resource, climate and other future stresses on our community.

This is politics.  Everything Jerome Stocks does is about politics of winning.  And governing?  You must spend many hours reviewing city council minutes and archived videos to find actions in support of the public good versus someone's profits or personal property rights. The entire offensive move of blowing up the General Plan Update is fairly obvious if you track the history. From the consultant interview committee, to the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) selection and presence at the many public workshops, there are layers of half-truths and flip-flopping declarations.

From the very beginning Stocks has maintained his position of plausible deniability by staying far away from involvement at the local level and uttering next to nothing of his deeply embedded position within the SANDAG plans as a member, then as chair, when at the end of each city council meeting he'd give glib, condescending or unsubstantial reports if he reported at all.

"Plausible Deniability - A condition in which a subject can safely and believably deny knowledge of any particular truth that may exist because the subject is deliberately made unaware of said truth so as to benefit or shield the subject from any responsibility associated through the knowledge of such truth."

Three months ago Mayor Stocks made it clear he is looking at ERAC for the alternatives that best serve his interests.  Despite any previous language of just another arm or citizen outreach, the group was designed to serve the council majority.

As with the original inflammatory rhetoric Stocks used last September to blow up the General Plan Update, his arguments are specious.  There is no logic.  Any complaints could have, should have been handled within the contracted process.  Citizens were given false choices when there were solutions at hand.  The need for ERAC was and is a lie.  Everything about it is a lie.  Citizens who have dutifully attended every meeting and schooled themselves know it is a lie.  ERAC is Encinitas newest, biggest lie created for political capital.

This week the ERAC facilitator Peder Norby's contract is on the agenda.  Norby is a vitally important scapegoat for Stocks et al.  Whether Peder Norby is your best friend or he eats kittens for breakfast, he is clearly serving the agenda laid out by those in charge.  He should go. 

We all still have our facts, our research, our issues and our feelings for our community.  We need to find the real answers and solutions, but to trust the mayor or the council majority to provide this is a big mistake.  They made the problem, they can't fix it.  And, they don't intend to fix it anyway.  Do we have a park yet on the Hall property?

Note: The big lie does not mean that there are no citizens sitting in earnest on this committee.  This is by no means mean as personal attack on individuals.  Even Stocks best friends my believe they are right in their opinions.  What is critical is the silencing of any dissent outside of the majority favored views and goals.  That isn't citizen participation, it's manufactured consent and it's a big lie. 

Walking

Frankly, 5" heels aren't a real  issue of sacrifice for most in Encinitas. But, sacrifices are an understatement when it comes to walking in and feeling safe in Leucadia, New Encinitas, Cardiff, etc. Perception alone of a street being unsafe can discourage walking.

Today at City Council there is an agenda item: 

Approve the Transit Feasibility Study Interview Panel’s recommended consultant, and authorize the City Manager to negotiate an agreement with Parsons Brinckerhoff in the amount not to exceed $100,000 to assist the City in developing the Transit Feasibility Study.

Before saying more, this blog is against the city recommendation primarily because Parson's Brinckerhoff sounds like a character on Gilligan's Island, or one of Mitt's friends.

Seriously . . .

The real reason for rejection of this recommendation is NOT disappoval of a study. Criticism centers on the SANDAG and NCTD connections to this firm appear hard wired in the agenda packet information  We in the public know that neither power base, SANDAG or NCTD, or their Encinitas vassal, Mayor Jerome Stocks, is receptive to public sentiment or any dissenting council voices and have never been.  We don't need to pay money for we Encinitas serfs to be targeted for the continued assault of these unelected overlords.

That said, the concept of 21st century revised way of thinking about circulation in a multitude of forms is not in and of itself bad or wrong headed.  Not just shuttle buses, not just bike lanes or traffic calming - but a serious pedestrian commitment are all needed.  Examples extend back thousands of years and even in just the last century there have always been exemplars of allowing for all forms of travel in cities around the world.  If you have lived or traveled in the cities described below, you know this to be true.

Look at cities such as New York, Boston, San Francisco, London, Paris and Barcelona. These cities have beautiful streets that encourage walking. Commuters in these cities happily walk 15 or 20 minutes from a subway or rail station, or from a parking garage, to their home, workplace or school. They don't hesitate to walk a half-mile to visit their favorite shop, cafe or friend.

In addition to changing terminology, we need to modify a pervasive American planning standard: the dogma of the one-quarter-mile walking radius. If you look at development plans, you'll see circles drawn around transportation nodes to show the presumed limits of how far Americans are willing to walk. [ . . .] A quarter-mile is 1,320 feet, walkable in about five to six minutes.

Walking infrastructure is a lot cheaper than subways and buses. It is good for your health. It makes our cities lively and supports the businesses along the way. He is right; it is time to change our mindsets.

More in the Washington Post

We know that our traffic engineers are riddled with dogma from another era, so vigilance is appropriate.  A fully integrated system of shuttle buses, commuter buses are a necessity for a city committed to reducing fossil fuel use, carbon emissions, air quality, valued time and money; but, who is designing this master plan is vital.

We Write Letters, Blog, Participate & Protest Too

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

Tuesday is Dues-day: SANDAG Forecast 2050

Today is Dues-day, introduced last week, featuring Mayor Rotation. 

The dues?  Paying attention . . . Yes, by simply schooling yourself on how our local governance is organized, who are the players, what are the screw-ups, where is the money and what things get reported you can legitimately call yourself a citizen, an advocate for democracy.

For most people local politics only becomes a reality when you are afraid for your home, your property or your neighborhood. Fears can be physical, financial and cultural.  Fears can be great motivators, as so many activists' stories of initial involvement attest.  Fears can also be manipulated with lies, so some video evidence might help set some records straight.


First, SANDAG is the acronym for San Diego Association of Governments.

In October 2009 a demographer from SANDAG gave a comprehensive presentation of the region's Forecast 2050 land use strategy.  This plan was and is the driver for all of the land use controversy going on now across all of Encinitas and with newborn activist ferociousness in New Encinitas.  It doesn't help that misinformation is throwing fuel on this fire to distract people's passions toward the wrong targets. The clip below should clarify some of this deliberate confusion.



SANDAG is essentially a shadow regional government made up of area mayors, council members, county supervisors and policy planners. Although many members were voted into their community offices, they are appointed amongst their councils to hold a seat on SANDAG, like Jerome Stocks was in Encinitas. Stocks has been appointed by his council cronies for 6 years. He now chairs SANDAG, ironically through simple rotation method.

SANDAG planning is behind this Dues-day Citizen Tip.  Mayor Jerome Stocks, the Encinitas city planning staff, the city manager, the city attorney and the rest of the city council are all aware of these facts and this background.  There is no confusion, only super majority council misdirection, drama and blaming about who or what is directing land use, housing and traffic elements in the General Plan Update.

Cross Posted at Encinitas You Need Us Blog.