Opinion
Disagree with your neighbor? Don't just stew over it; write about it. Flag as Inappropriate
Posts awaiting your approval 0
BlueAngel2 June 8, 2013 at 11:20 am
It just goes to show if Stocks or any of his puppets are involved, you will not hear the truth about…Read More this proposition. They continue to confuse the issue. Please do not throw your vote away to ruin our city and enhance the developer's pockets who do not care what they do to our beautiful Encinitas. Vote YES on PROP A!
Status Quo June 19, 2013 at 11:53 am
Looks very much like your Prop A will pass, though 'BA2's tactic seems to be part of the problem…Read More also.
BlueAngel2 June 4, 2013 at 10:40 am
Vote YES on PROP A! The City Council is not experienced in real estate, zoning, construction or…Read More development to make decisions for us.
CardiffCreature June 4, 2013 at 10:44 am
Prop A will not control growth. It will make sure that BOTH the council and the public get to…Read More directly weigh in on the deals being brokered between big developers and the city. This won't end the indirect developer subsidies, but it sure will help.
Lynn Marr June 6, 2013 at 02:26 am
Yes, it will help to slow growth, by making sure that the public approves raising height limits or…Read More upzoning, for developments over the parameters of a MAXIMUM of 30 ft. and two stories. Lower set height limits will not be repealed, because they are not in conflict with the initiative or the General Plan.
David Ahlgren's fear and speculation is not backed up by one single fact. He just raises the usual building industry "mantra" of alleged risks created by unnamed "unintended consequences."
Council's attempt at a preemptive ordinance does NOT guarantee that will be placed on the ballot in 2014, and does NOT eliminate other loopholes such as the "less-than-5-acre" exception, the "categorization of intensity of use" exception, and the height limit exception. The only loophole that Council's drafted ordinance affects is Council's ability to vote by a 4/5 supermajority on upzoing if it is done with respect to a "significant public benefit."
Not only is Council's recently drafted ordinance NOT guaranteed, in that a future Council could reverse it, if it is not enacted through a public vote, but also Council's attempt at preempting the "right to vote on upzoning and raising height limits initiative" DOESN"T eliminate the other loopholes that still exist in our General Plan, Policy 3.12., which exceptions I've spelled out, here.
Lynn Marr June 6, 2013 at 02:37 am
An initiative to Prop A has worked in Escondido, without any lawsuits.
"In the 26-year…Read More history of Encinitas, no council has ever used this provision to approve a major project without first a vote of the people." That's completely untrue. The North 101 and Downtown Encinitas Specific Plans were pushed through by the Planning Department, the Planning Commission and a supermajority of past Council AGAINST the wishes of citizens, against years of feedback from Specific Action Review Committees (Sparc)s and Community Advisory Boards (CABs), who wanted to stay with the limits of the General Plan of two stories, 30 ft, MAX, with certain exceptions, consistent with the Initiative!
Just posting your opinion without any supporting evidence, Mr. Stocks, is only hurting your "cause."
We and everyone we know, all our friends and neighbors, are voting YES on A! Voting YES is best if you want to take back your ability to help slow growth and to take back local control. Yes on A is a vote for Democracy and against insider influence and spinmaster jive promoted by marketing masters of misinformation, attempting to manipulate the uninformed masses with distortions of the truth. We don't need to be spoon-fed our opinions, but can think for ourselves, and act to protect and preserve our community character and our quality of life.
Lynn Marr June 2, 2013 at 02:53 am
I'm voting yes to take back local control in Encinitas, to give the electorate the freedom to decide…Read More if and when we want to raise the height limits delineated in the General Plan, of 30 ft., MAX and two stories, not including basements, by being able to VOTE. Voting is the truest neighborhood needs assessment!
Most people I know are smart enough to see through the hype of the No on A "special interests" who are pro-development. We won't be manipulated by fear of so-called, vague "unintended consequences," and outright falsehoods about not being able to remodel, etc. Passing Prop A will not put anyone in an HOA, lol.
With passage of Prop A we will be able to remodel, to preserve pre-existing historic sites and structures. We still could apply for minor or major use permits without having to rezone, with respect to creating a museum out of one of the Boathouses, for example.
Vested property rights will remain in effect for those structures already exceeding the maximum originally allowed in the GP, and with elevated pads. I'm looking forward to a new day in Encinitas, where we can more fully participate in the democratic process. Public input was overruled by the Planning Commission, the Planning Dept. and a supermajority of past councilmembers with respect to Specific Plans. Those of us who served on Specific Action Review Committees and Community Advisory Boards wanted to approve mixed use, to allow Artists to have studios above their galleries, and artisans to have living quarters above their lofts. That's how mixed use was sold to us. But what happened was so different, and discounted the many hours we contributed, and contributed, before, through the North Coast Coalition to Incorporate Encinitas, to take back local control!
We, and everyone we know, will be voting YES on A!
BlueAngel2 June 4, 2013 at 04:56 pm
YES, YES, YES on PROP A. The citizens of Encinitas will vote to do the right thing.
Greg Hay June 6, 2013 at 07:31 pm
I have to admit, Mr. Stock won me over with his reasoned, well-research, and thoroughly logic…Read More arguments here, concisely pointing out both the pros and the cons.
Because we all know, if anyone would be considered an expert on legislation, it would undoubtedly the person Encinitas citizens just voted out of office (presumably because of overall incompetence), Jerome Stocks.
CardiffCreature June 4, 2013 at 11:04 am
These types of housing will be adopted by the people of Encinitas when the city council brokers fair…Read More deals with the big developers. Don't forget that Prop A doesn't require a vote for major developments if the developers want to develop within their rights.
Jay Berman June 4, 2013 at 11:12 am
Encinitas is pretty much built out, what would a "big" developer develop ? Property owners…Read More should be able to rebuild or remodle or modify their properrties with limited interference from government. We should allow the height limit to go to 33' from 30' so a third story may be built as long as it doesn't interfere with views and it fits in .. We do need more housing and many of the structures in Encinitas are old and falling apart. We need common sense, not more laws and hate for "big" develpers get you nowhere ...
Jay Berman June 6, 2013 at 10:04 am
I think direct democracy doesn't work. Citizens will vote on emotion or hate for developers. We…Read More elect city council to make these decisions. We let our council know how we feel before they make decisions, we show up at council meetings ... ballot box development is just a very bad idea ...
BlueAngel2 June 6, 2013 at 11:32 am
I have already voted and my vote was not out of emotion or hate for developers. If we want our…Read More wishes to be known and heard then voting on an issue is the way to go. Vote YES on PROP A!
Lynn Marr June 7, 2013 at 04:54 am
Jay, thank goodness California has state law which allows for public initiatives. The legislators…Read More felt, and the public concurs, through populist movements, that direct democracy can and does work. If that were not the case, then why trust the public to vote on ANYTHING, or for ANYONE?
I feel that most people in this city can think for themselves, and will VOTE YES to allow the public to vote, in the future, in elections paid for by developers, on whether or not we want to upzone or raise height limits.
SusanT June 4, 2013 at 10:19 pm
No "dueling attorneys": the General Plan now reads max height 30' and no one in the…Read More Planning Dept interprets that to mean one must build to 30' and no less; there is no reason to believe that with Prop A, the Planning Dept will change how it interprets the words "max height 30'." The Coastal Commission gets involved only if a structure or zone tries to be less restrictive (denser, taller) than the max allows. More restrictive, no Coastal Commission approval needed.
Lynn Marr June 6, 2013 at 02:57 am
Lorri, Mr. Sabine, our outgoing, we hope, City Attorney, categorically LIED with respect to his…Read More impartial analysis. It was NOT impartial, and turned the pro-development impact report's speculation and conjecture into a blatant untruth, from "could be construed to raise certain residential height limits," to "WOULD" raise lower set height limits. This was explained to Council, but they wanted to swallow the "bilge" of the Orange-County law firm's prejudiced report, designed to create confusion and manipulate the public and Council with fear.
Everett DeLano, the land use and environmental specialist attorney who wrote the initiative, answered Council's question on Page 60 of the 3/12 Staff Report, on the City's Municipal Election webpage. Only those parts of Specific Plans, policy or Encinitas Municipal Code which are in CONFLICT with the initiative will be "superseded" by it. The 30 ft., two story height MAXIMUM of the initiative is consistent with the same language in the General Plan, which has NEVER been challenged by developers wanting to raise lower set residential height limits. http://archive.ci.encinitas.ca.us/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=697346&dbid=0
Delano wrote and filed a three page letter with the City, which is part of the 3-12-13 Special City Council Meeting Agenda Report (Pages 60-63), in which he states: The Initiative Does Not Increase Maximum Heights
“The Report asserts that the Initiative “could be interpreted to increase the maximum height for certain buildings and structures.” (Report at 15.) This is incorrect. The initiative provides a maximum overall height limit. And while it specifically repeals Zoning Code Section 30.16.010(B)(6)(d) (relating to the determination of finished pad elevation), the Initiative does NOT repeal other sections Code, including Section 30.16.010(B)(6)(a) (relating to height limits for residential buildings). The Report’s reference to Section 9.1 of the Initiative is misplaced, since that Section supersedes provisions ‘which are in conflict.’ Since Section 30.16.010(B)(6)(a) is not in conflict with the maximum height limit in Section 6.1, it is not affected by the Initiative.”
Julie Ann Stricklin May 30, 2013 at 12:29 pm
Hey Karen! What numbers did you bid on and how can I reach you? There were about 12 banners that did…Read More not sell. Let me know how you reach you and I will get that info to you :)
BlueAngel2 May 29, 2013 at 08:59 pm
City Council members are afraid to take on the developers for fear they may not get reelected to…Read More another term. They are selling the citizens of Encinitas for the developer's money and votes. We, the citizens of Encinitas, will decide their fate come election time. Vote YES on PROP A.
Lynn Marr June 6, 2013 at 03:03 am
We are voting YES, and recommending that all our friends and neighbors do so, too!
Daniel Woolfolk (Editor) May 23, 2013 at 10:33 am
Are you getting the message from Facebook or Patch?
Batman June 1, 2013 at 09:03 am
No, the world is not overpopulated. This zero population growth scheme is anti-humanist (Luciferian)…Read More doctrine. Humans only live about 75 years. It wouldn't take long for widespread birth control and abortion to wipe us out. Exterminating humanity is the ultimate goal of marxism, facism, feminism, totalitarianism and every other "ism" on the planet.
Frank H. Robles May 17, 2013 at 06:34 pm
He should have been locked up with buddy "Duke Cunningham", they both took money from the…Read More same contractor, who's also in Jail...!!!
Status Quo May 19, 2013 at 11:49 am
Thanks Arthur,
For charting a path, for some Republicans who lost their own way.
As our current…Read More President attempts to spin things his way, cogent thinking Republicans will pick their way through the morass - created from bad management and being lied to by their Government in-power.
The Wiki-like views expressed in some comments here, is simply not reality - but does come-across as grasping at straws to stuff their own straw man argumentums being propped-up by the left.
This path is yellow-brick wishfulness to pull-off, and tricky as truth catches up to knock 'em down over time. At this time, the Monkeys of Mayhem are flying with both wings a flappin' - causing sweat to well up for the man behind the curtain and trying to look in control. Why does, that US Constitution continually get in Mr. Obama's way?...
Process, which Mr. Issa is following - to inconvenience of the lever puller. Checks and balances, is a hinderance to President Obama's ideology, and he seems to find disgust in the Limitations of Government prescribed in the Bill of Rights?
BlueAngel2 May 20, 2013 at 11:19 am
I was under the impression that posts were not to be insulting to other posters, but it appears…Read More Stocks takes a lot of liberty in that area. I guess we should assume that is the "nature of the beast" so to speak. He has a bad habit of name calling when people don't have the same views as he does.
Daniel Woolfolk (Editor) May 21, 2013 at 11:37 am
BlueAngel,
I hadn't seen that one. I deleted. Please flag comments that you feel are inappropriate…Read More and that will help out. I don't look at every comment.
Also, I would urge you to change your user name to your real name. People who use their real names do have more leeway and their comments tend to be more constructive than those of anonymous accounts.
BlueAngel2 May 21, 2013 at 06:24 pm
Thank you Daniel. I will stick with my current user name. It is effective.
Donald Sonck May 14, 2013 at 09:04 pm
Waxman couldn't "fight" his way out of a wet paper bag, let alone on his political voting…Read More record.He has been a wacko liberal California Conressman for far too long! Now he's joining forces with his Senate contemporary, Barbara Blockhead, err, Boxer, to pass carbon tax legislation....yet another job-killing measure for the entire country! These are just a couple of far too many looney-tunes representing our state in Washington. Maxine Waters is another. Love your blogs, Arthur!
Arthur Christopher Schaper May 14, 2013 at 09:19 pm
David:
Please follow me on Twitter @ArthurCSchaper
Please also visit:
waxmanwatch.blogspot.com…Read More
Spread the Word -- End the Reign of Waxman the Taxman!
Arthur Christopher Schaper May 14, 2013 at 09:22 pm
Indeed, Issa is going after bigger fish, of Leviathan proportions!
Benghazi-gate, Solyndra-gate…Read More Fast and Furious-gate, IRS-gate, EPA-gate
The Obama Administration has been a "gated community" of corruption and scandal. Only now the "floodgates" of media scrunity had to be unleashed, or else they would lose what little credibility they have left.
Frank H. Robles May 14, 2013 at 02:00 am
Oh Yeah...!!! KG ...LOL with you...!!! Good sense of Humor on a lot of your post's...!!!
Arthur Christopher Schaper May 14, 2013 at 06:51 pm
At this point, who cares where Mr. Stevens "shoved his show."
He died serving his…Read More country, yet the Chief Executive and his state department did not serve him.
It's time to shove the "Obama side-show" out of Washington for good.
Komfort May 14, 2013 at 07:02 pm
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57584252/benghazi-timeline-how-the-probe-unfolded/?tag=socsh
Debbie3231 May 7, 2013 at 10:38 am
My heart breaks when I read these stories. However, we all need to be reminded every day the pain…Read More and suffering of the millions and millions of innocent and defenseless animals who suffer at the hands of humanity. I will never understand for as long as I live how mankind can be so callous and brutal in the way they are able to treat the defenseless and why. Thanks for your letter and reminder to us all.
Please Vote June 18th and Vote No on A
6 Comment Recommend Dody Crawford