.
Feedback

Mayor Delivers State of the City Address

Mayor Jerome Stocks announced a long-time coming park has gone out to bid and stated that Encinitas is in great shape. Critics, however, had their own take.

Encinitas Mayor Jerome Stocks recapped recent and past citywide improvements, trumpeted Encinitas’ low crime rate and offered a glimpse of future projects during the annual state of the city address at the Encinitas City Council meeting Wednesday night.

Of the upcoming projects Stocks outlined, the biggest announcement was that the city is seeking bids on a that will be built on a 44-acre site west of Interstate 5 and south of Santa Fe Drive.

“This is not we intend to, we hope to, we wish to, we plan to, it’s out there,” Stocks said. “The contractors have it, they’re putting together their bids."

The Encinitas Community Park, known as the , has been in the works for more than a decade. It will feature sports fields, a skate park and a children’s playground, as well as other amenities. Competing plans, funding shortfalls and environmental concerns have delayed the project.

But now the project is moving forward, and Stocks believes the timing is ideal.

“We have incredibly low interest rates,” Stocks said. “We have incredibly favorable bids that are coming in well under the engineer estimates. And we have the opportunity to try and build a park here before inflation kicks back in.”  

Although Stocks didn’t state when construction would begin on the park, he said the city will make a decision on which bids it will accept in about six weeks.

Stocks also laid out plans for another project that recently went out to bid: .

“We’re going to be expanding the recreational sand area, constructing new restrooms, showers and concession stands to better meet the public’s needs,” Stocks said. And add a garage for the lifeguards’ equipment.”

Among other achievements on his list, Stocks touted the city’s graffiti prevention program and low debt.

“In conclusion, the state of the city is great,” Stocks said.

Several residents begged to differ.

, president of the Encinitas Taxpayers Association, raised

Wagner said the city’s pension system is plagued by an estimated $25 million in unfunded liability, a figure he believes is even higher because of additional city employees and faulty calculations for investment gains that rely on pre-recession interest rates.

“If you want to offer these benefits, pay for them,” Wagner said. “Don’t tell us the state of the city is sound when you’re underfunding pensions.”

“This city council has refused to adopt pension reform,” he added. “Even as our neighbors in Solana Beach and Carlsbad adopted pension reform, the council majority in Encinitas will not allow it on the agenda.”

Other residents brought up concerns about low-income housing and the , a blueprint that will guide development plans for the next three decades.

Pence Sinitas April 19, 2012 at 12:26 pm
Great job Ed and Lisa! The pension issue continues to grow while Stocks and the council majority try to sweep the issue under the rug.
Chris may April 19, 2012 at 12:31 pm
Under the 'great' facade is a Specia Use Park that is called a community park. The name was not what the citizens wanted. The other amenities do not include basketball, tennis, volleyball, racketball or anything else that would qualify it to be legally called a community park. The plan out to bid was rejected by the planning commission inspite of the city claiming it was approved.
There are unfunded pension obligations. The mayor had the permit for a fellow council member who died in office rejected and well as the banner permit rejection. The mayor uses a blog post to unfairly attack a fellow council member. Yes, all is great if you believe what you were told. Those who are active and aware of the activities of this council know that the majority council has had a strangle hold on our city for too long. It is time for a change for the sake of fairness and propriety.
LBart April 19, 2012 at 12:58 pm
Did the Mayor really mean that we know what the bids are for the park? How could that be when they're supposed to be sealed? I hope he will clarify what he meant. It's great that the bid package has gone out. The community looks forward to participating in the discussion about how much we can afford to build and how we move forward.
Judd Handler April 19, 2012 at 01:40 pm
Did King Stocks offer a rebuttal to Mr. Wagner's pension reform concern?
Gerald Sodomka April 19, 2012 at 03:21 pm
Mayor Stocks offers a rebuttal to Mr. Wagner on the U-T Sign on San Diego website.
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/apr/18/encinitas-mayor-touts-budget-programs-annual-speec/ You can also read Wagner's rebuttal to Stocks' rebuttal, Stocks fails or refuses to understand Calpers unrealistic estimates on the rate of return on its investments. He seems to be alone in his Pollyannaish stance on this. Of course, he voted for the big pension increase a few years back. He doesn't dare admit his mistake of burdening the city with a huge financial obligation in the future. That would put his reelection in jeopardy.
change4encinitas April 19, 2012 at 10:35 pm
Sate of the City address - My Version
-Financial crisis in the horizon: Underfunded liabilities will get worse with time. Using CALPERS estimate for rate of return will prove very costly for taxpayers. Mr. Ed Wagner told the truth. -No leadership in General Plan Update -$1M of taxpayers' money wasted with MIG that ripped us all off. -Big retail boxes, including Wal-Mart invading the El Camino Real Corridor. Council majority turn a blind eye, too greedy to forgo these precious sales tax revenue. -Still no movie theater in Encinitas. -Still no performing art center in Encinitas -Citizens having to sue to have access to public information. -Repeated lack of decorum at council meetings. Good thing the weather and surf is great. There is nothing our mayor can do to mess that up!
Charlie McDermott April 19, 2012 at 11:28 pm
The fact that CalPERs is enabling cities to accrue massive liabilities while only making minimal payments does not make Jerome an honest mayor.
It is akin to having a $50 million dollar credit card balance but only making a few $ million per year while accruing new incremental liabilities every day and telling everyone you are in great financial shape. The pension crisis HAS already happened and we are NEVER going to catch up because we are 30 -40% underfunded in EVERY city plan. If this was a private pension the Fed would have already seized the program and executives would be fired. If we were +/- 10% then yes I would feel ok. Do not vote for any current incumbent (except Teresa) and avoid any candidate that does not understand the gravity of the situation. The bottom line is that Jerome, Kristen, Marc, Jim and city management do not want to deal with this issue because their paymasters will not support them in the next election. The plan is to accrue massive retirement packages and stick the next generation with the bill. However, this current trajectory they have us on will certainly take our city to the point of a cash crisis like Stockton CA and then we will have brutal reform - mass layoffs, asset sales, and negotiations with creditors. The city's plan is to develop the hell out of our town (revenue creation) and then to take on more debt (kick the can). Read the pension docs for yourself. http://www.encinitastaxpayers.org/blog_2/
change4encinitas April 20, 2012 at 02:37 am
No, Ed's comments came after the emperor of Encinitas made his speech. Not sure what he could have said since these were undeniable facts.
S. Daly April 20, 2012 at 02:51 am
I am sickened by how this city has been run. Stocks is a complete buffoon and should be removed from office immediately. What a greedy, evil person to do this to our beautiful city. People have to stop buying-in to his spin on everything and do some research to learn about the real facts. All of these posts are a great start into Stock's destructive ways. We can't allow this to happen anymore. He needs to go and take his cohorts (Muir, Gaspar, and Bond) with him.
Mo Betta April 22, 2012 at 12:10 pm
Where do get "Dump Stocks" stickers?
Lynn Marr April 22, 2012 at 01:50 pm
Of course Stocks' State of the City address spins the facts & distorts the truth, as usual. He, with the help of his cronies, positioned himself to be mayor when he's set to run for re-election by for the third time passing over Teresa Barth, who has been twice elected for her position on Council. Stocks did not mention that both he & Bond had supported now discredited Dan Dalager, with all of his conflicts of interest, while in office, for his re-election, including Stocks' making "robo-calls" for Dalager in 2010.
Stocks HAS NOT SHOWN GOOD LEADERSHIP. He brags about dumping construction dirt from Pacific Station onto our beaches, in Leucadia. The before photo he showed, of Stonesteps, didn't show any cobbles! Stocks doesn't mention the failed lawsuit in which he & his cronies tried to prevent the public's access to public documents, refusing a draft document that was NOT protected through the California Public Records Act, from a road report long since completed by the consultant. Stocks has consistently supported Bond's public statemen that "if we were doing something wrong, then someone would sue." Well, we HAVE sued, thanks to Kevin Cummins and his Calaware Attorney, Dennis Winston, who prevailed in Court against the City. Of course Stocks and Bond don't have to foot the bill, the public does! As for accounting methods used by CalPERS &the city, Stocks only wants to believe and to promote his version of the truth, which is a lie!
Lynn Marr April 22, 2012 at 01:52 pm
Special Presentations, such as the Mayor's State of the City Address, should allow for public comments, afterwards. They’re "on the agenda," although not formally listed as agenda items. That only five members of the public could speak about the mayor’s address at the beginning of the meeting, during oral communications, is UNFAIR.
Unlimited time is allowed for special presentations and proclamations, during Encinitas Council Meetings, yet public speakers are currently allowed only 15 minutes, total, 3 minutes each, for oral communications, before agenda items are heard. Council should respect its duty to honor the public trust by encouraging citizen participation, by allowing us time to question or comment on special presentations. In fact, why can’t special presentations be listed as agenda items? Listening to the public needs to part of Council's decision making process. Council could also allow up to 30 minutes for oral communications at the beginning of the meeting. Usually less than 5 speakers submit speaker slips, but up to 10, at three minutes each, easily could be heard, which is not excessive, in terms of Council’s priority of listening to citizen input. The “15 minute rule” as Council policy is demeaning to the public and isn’t "set in stone." It's unnecessarily restrictive, and puts those who can’t stay to the end of the meeting, due to childcare issues, for example, at an unfair and disheartening disadvantage.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Encinitas Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Vicki Campbell June 17, 2013 at 04:42 pm
Prop A will help residents and stop greedy developers from buying city council. Vote YES
Rick Moore June 18, 2013 at 09:27 am
I wholeheartedly agree with the recommendation that folks read the initiative. When you readRead More sections 6 and 9, you will see that Prop A sets a 30-foot or 2-story ceiling across the entire city, overriding lower height limits in many areas. The Downtown Specific Plan limits residences to 22-26 feet, as detailed on the DEMA website, so Prop A would actually allow the building of taller homes. It makes no exemptions or allowances for historic buildings like La Paloma, church towers or other structures over 30 feet high; the only exceptions are medical complexes and public high schools (see clause 6.2). Rebuilding or renovating (more than 50%) would require expensive public votes. Should the SRF be required to pay for an election to rebuild the Lotus Tower? Such contingencies are allowed for in our Historic Overlay Zone, which would clearly be overridden by Prop A. So is the Encinitas Preservation Association's plan to convert one of the boathouses to a museum. Again, Prop A would require an election (see section 4.1, clause e), which the EPA cannot afford. Prop A would thus favor large developers who have the money, time, lawyers and other resources to campaign for their project. How many nonprofits and small businessmen can afford to spend a minimum $30,000 just to get their project on a general election ballot (upwards of $300,000 for a special election like this one)? Yes, folks, please read the initiative, especially Section 9, which lays waste to anything that conflicts with it. That's why this has been dubbed Propzilla. I trust that most Encinitas citizens are smart enough to see that this meausre is deeply flawed, problematic and counter-productive. We can find much better ways to limit growth and preserve community character.
BlueAngel2 June 18, 2013 at 10:20 am
SAVE ENCINITAS FROM RANCID DEVELOPERS. VOTE YES ON PROP A!
BlueAngel2 June 15, 2013 at 09:47 pm
It would NOT surprise me. I thought we dumped Stocks. Why is he still around?
Encinitas YES on A June 16, 2013 at 02:44 pm
My YES on Prop. A sign was stolen yesterday. Other YES on Prop. A signs are disappearing. YetRead More another deceptive and untruthful mailer from the opponents of Prop. A was in my mail box. There's a shrillness and desperation in their opposition. They can't rely on facts and fair play. Polling data not looking good?
BlueAngel2 June 16, 2013 at 03:17 pm
YES ON PROP A will be victorious!
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 aboutRead 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!
TB-ENC June 7, 2013 at 02:01 pm
How is this not a racist group with Hispanics in California at 14 million second behind whites atRead More 14.8 million. We only need one chamber to represent all Californians.
BlueAngel2 June 8, 2013 at 02:09 pm
So any group other than white is a racist group?
Miranda Klassen June 5, 2013 at 10:39 am
Congrats to all on the groundbreaking. Reesey has done an incredible job with making Lux what it isRead More today!
BlueAngel2 June 4, 2013 at 10:40 am
Vote YES on PROP A! The City Council is not experienced in real estate, zoning, construction orRead 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 toRead 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 orRead 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-yearRead 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.
Greg Hay June 6, 2013 at 07:19 pm
Lies, lies and more lies. That's all the supporters of "No on Prop A" can come up with.Read More Even their slogan is weak and devoid of anything of substance… "It's not what it seems"… Really, THAT'S your argument against it?
BlueAngel2 June 6, 2013 at 07:22 pm
YES on PROP A which is NOT deeply flawed and very well written.