Letters: May 21, 2010

Change doesn’t always do good
The city is about to start the “charrette” process in adopting the new Form Based Code for planning Del Mar’s revitalization. That means the residents are going to be able to see what it is, and if they like it. After over a year developing it, they say the new code will make it easier for commercial property owners to redevelop their downtown property. Personally, I have my doubts.
I have the feeling the new plan will result in the type of extreme “change” we are getting from the Obama administration on everything, and not what we envisioned!
In case you don’t know, the Form Based Codes are how you implement the new Smart Growth Process, which basically means stopping “sprawl” by “filling in” the developed community. Now that is really what we need to do in Del Mar.
It means making the downtown area more dense, larger size (resulting in higher buildings along the sidewalks on both sides of Camino Del Mar) so low-cost housing can be provided on the second floors, less required on-site parking (to be offset by satellite parking lots, or garages to be reached by shuttles – ha!) and providing the city with more property tax and sales tax revenue.
I can’t help but believe the latter is the driving force for changing the way we have been doing planning for a long time! Please participate in the forthcoming “charrette”!

Ralph Peck
Del Mar

Answers to ‘Questions for Tea Partiers’
In response to Judd Handler’s “Questions for Tea Partiers,” (Letters to the Editor, May 7) I’m going to answer them from my perspective. I went to the Oceanside Tea Party on April 15 and thoroughly enjoyed myself.
First, Tea Partiers don’t care whether Barack Hussein Obama is black or green. In my opinion only liberals care about race. Why do you keep bringing it up?
What we do care about is fiscal responsibility, the rule of law, and limits to government described in the U.S. Constitution. We are outraged at the corruption in Washington and have been for over 20 years. And don’t call us Republican either.
We struggled when Bush ran against Al Gore in 2000. Bush is not a conservative. So many of us held our nose and voted for Bush. Ditto in 2004 against John Kerry. Bush was better than the alternatives, but not “our” first choice. We disliked Bush’s spending and deficits.
We fumed when Bush expanded Medicare and added a prescription drug program.
We seethed when Bush spent $700B to save capitalism.
We feel stuck that those in government have the power to dole out money to their friends, that their control of business through regulation ensures a steady stream of money flowing to Congress. Some are protected by taking money of the rest of us. It’s not supposed to work this way. And then fiscally liberal McCain ran against progressive Obama. We had nowhere to go; our votes were shattered by bad choices.
When President Obama spent more money, we sat up. When it became clear that President Obama wanted to change America into his Progressive vision of change, and the corruption became overt we stood up and formed into Tea Parties. We are not going to take it anymore. We cannot take it anymore.

Frank Grant

Barth’s complaint merits investigation
I have read the March 3, 2010, legal opinion letter prepared by Liebert Cassidy Whitmore regarding Teresa Barth’s complaint of sexual harassment against Dan Dalager, and I disagree with Mr. Kreisler’s opinion that no investigation is necessary.
I am an attorney who specializes in employment law and have been practicing for 15 years, handling many cases of harassment. Under FEHA, it is the duty of an employer to take “all reasonable steps” to ensure that the workplace is free from sexual harassment. Mr. Kreisler summarily dismisses Ms. Barth’s complaint because no one else has complained about Dan Dalager’s behavior. It is well established that victims of sexual harassment rarely complain for fear of losing their jobs or other retaliation. Hugging female employees and shaking male employees’ hands is discrimination — the females are being treated differently from the males. Further, Dan Dalager’s comment regarding Ms. Mattson was clearly harassive and offensive.
The city has a duty under FEHA to investigate allegations of sexual harassment, this duty applies even where the complainant does not want an investigation. Clearly, Ms. Barth’s observations of Dan Dalager’s behavior are just the tip of the iceberg.
Mr. Kreisler appears to base his recommendation to brush these allegations under the rug on his conclusion that Ms. Barth is not an “employee.” This short-sighted advice is unsound and puts the city at risk. Although Dan Dalager is not a city employee, the city is strictly liable for his actions amounting to sexual harassment against city employees as the city has now been put on official notice of his propensities.
I request that a full investigation be done regarding Ms. Barth’s complaint of sexual harassment.
I have sent this request to the City Council today.

Diane Bond


Log in with your credentials


Forgot your details?