Commentary: The Coast News urges ‘Yes’ vote on Prop A

I don’t agree. Read that
http://www.dailynews.com/opinion/20101028/hector-de-la-torre-why-you-should-vote-yes-on-prop-19

Best regards, Janett

Where Pam Slater-Price currently lives isn’t actually relevant. She lived in Encinitas for many years, and continues to have connections to and a great love for our city. She was on Encinitas City Council, and was one of our first mayors. She continues to live in North County. She’s also represented Encinitas for many years on the Board of Supervisors. Even though we’re not registered Republicans, we voted for her every time we could. She makes non-partisan decisions, and has shown good judgment, including endorsing Dave Roberts, a Democrat, who won the election, to replace her, as Supervisor.

How long has Lisa Shaffer actually lived here, six or seven years, total? Teresa Barth, before she was elected, was mainly involved in Cardiff politics, and as a member of friends of the library, that Pam Slater-Price helped to open, in Cardiff. Barth seems unconcerned that most of the planned high density development is to be located in Leucadia and Old Encinitas. Mayor Barth apparently has become corrupted by the political process, by those playing to her ego to garner favor and influence.

Tony Kranz went to school in Encinitas, but was gone, first to Alaska? and then, was in Minnesota, during the time that the Special Plans, which he seems so concerned about, were pushed through the Planning Department, the Planning Commission and by previous Councilmembers to OVERRIDE the will of the public, who participated on the Specific Plan Action Review Committee and the Community Advisory Boards, with a 4/5 Supermajority vote of Council, disallowing a PUBLIC vote, to upzone and raise height limits.

Passing Prop A would rectify that inconsistency between what the public wants and what city staff and Council have favored, because of development pressures, including the need to fund ever increasing pension liabilities, operating and maintenance expenditures and escalating Capital Improvement costs. Passing Prop A would prevent Council from again disallowing a public vote, in the future, prevent this disconnect from the needs of our neighbors, of our friends and community members, from happening again.

Not only would the 4/5 majority vote of Council to disallow a public vote if Council deems a “public benefit,” but also the height limit, definition of intensity of use, and the five acres or less exceptions or “loopholes” would ALL be eliminated. Council has not addressed significant loopholes and exceptions in its attempt at a preemptive ordinance, which we have NO guarantee would be put on the ballot in November of 2014. Again, after passage of Prop A, ALL those exceptions and loopholes will be eliminated, putting the power to decide back in the hands of community members.

Passing Prop A will bring our General Plan into consistency with what the public wanted, and still wants, to be able to vote, so that we can have some local control, so that we can have some sense of neighborhood self-determination, to preserve our community character and quality of life. Teresa Barth and LIsa Shaffer are not using their own inherent intelligence and common sense, but are instead relying upon the conjecture and speculation of an Orange County Attorney, who wrote a biased “impact report” under the direction of the City Manager, without public input or Council’s consent, an outside attorney who does NOT have Sections in Real Property Law (including land-use, zoning, initiatives).

North County attorney Everett Delano, who wrote the initiative to be consistent with the wording in our original General Plan and Encinitas Municipal Code Zoning Definitions, does have these specialties. DeLano knows and understands both Coastal Act Law and local land use and zoning codes, as evidenced by his simple, to the point, five page initiative, compared to the bogus, 37 page “impact report written by Joel Kuperberg for his out of county, prejudiced law firm, Rutan & Tucker. DeLano has repeatedly explained, the initiative is consistent with the GP.

Building height that is set at lower limits in residential zones, including for accessory structures, will be not be any more likely to raise height limits after Prop A passes, than these lower height limits have been raised, NOW, under our current GP. No developer has challenged the wording in our GP, Policy 7.10, saying that the MAXIMUM thereby set of 30 ft., two stories, should allow them to build 30 ft. structures in residential zones where a lower 26 ft. height limit is in effect due to Encinitas Municipal Code. Those sections of EMC are NOT in conflict with the GP OR the initiative, Prop A. To stretch to that interpretation, to postulate otherwise is disingenuous of Kuperberg, Barth, Shaffer, and all of Council. To stretch the truth that way is an bald-faced attempt to confuse and manipulate the public with fear, obfuscation and falsehoods.

Councilmembers don’t want to use their own common sense and to think for themselves, but want to be spoon-fed by staff and outside contractors/consultants, aligned with development interests, political influence peddlers who find ways around having to register as lobbyists, although they are most assuredly lobbying for redevelopment, since Encinitas is nearly “built out” according to our General Plan.

We truly appreciate Jim Kydd’s endorsement, his reasoning, his down-to-earth, civic pride, and his love of our community’s unique character. Thank you, Mr. Kydd. Because UT is so pro-development, you are now the only local paper to offer a perspective not blatantly slanted toward building industry interests. You provide a forum for both sides of every question, a great opportunity for us to express our opinions. We’re grateful you see the wisdom in voting YES on Prop A!

Sorry Susan Turney, who signed the papers as the pawn for Bruce Ehlers and his gang. Jim Kydd states in his commentary: “She has been a long-time Encinitas resident.”. This is not true. Slater left Encinitas for RSF 20-years ago and now lives in Del Mar. Why doesn’t she live here? Is Encinitas just not good enough for her? And anytime anyone else from out of town says something you don’t like, you and your kind attack them as outsiders. Frankly, someone who doesn’t live here, but owns property has more of a right to express their opinion than Slater. She need to keep her opinion in Del Mar where she lives. Oh and I don’t remember Slater proposing to get rid of the 4/5 exception when she was on the Council, nor do I see her proposing this in Del Mar. Oh, that’s right, the reason she can live in such a nice place is because her husband is a big developer/property owner in Del Mar. Oh, can Susan Turney explain the over $4,000 contribution from a Carlsbad nonprofit?