Deputy Mayor sidesteps the issues

Encinitas Deputy Mayor Jerome Stocks wrote against my column, “The Encinitas Silver Anniversary Blues,” last week in the June 24 edition of The Coast News. His comments claimed that my column was based solely on exaggerations, and that I unfairly singled him out when it came to decisions made by the City Council. However, what Mr. Stocks failed to do was address the issues I had raised in the column.
He failed to explain why the city only has $9 million to build the park they said would cost $36 million in 2008, or why the park that could have been built two years ago hasn’t.
Stocks wants us to believe the Hall Park can be used when it can’t. He wants us to believe that the park costs $21 million when he knows Encinitas will spend $46 million.
As he often does during council meetings, Mr. Stocks ignored the facts, pointed fingers, cried foul, re-wrote history and used “red herrings” to cover up for his failed leadership. It seems there are things he would rather us not know. The public can judge Mr. Stocks comments for themselves.
On the issue of Encinitas having a $46 million park we can’t use, Mr. Stocks ignored the facts saying that, “The Encinitas Community Park can and will be used, and cost $21 million, not $46 million.” He said the payments on the loan are not added to our property tax bill, but are a line item expense out of the city general fund.
We all know that Hall Park hasn’t and can’t be used today. The park might be used once the toxic soils are buried, but until then, the taxpayers are more likely to see workers in HAZMAT suits than kids in soccer uniforms. He has wasted 10 years.
Financially, Mr. Stocks is ignoring the interest on the bonds used to pay for the park. The city is obligated to pay close to $1.4 million in interest each year. He hopes we won’t notice. What he calls “a line item expense” is money no longer available to improve our roads, schools or parks. It is spent.
When the issue was his vote to increase pensions Mr. Stocks cried foul, pointed fingers and attempted to rewrite history saying, “Houlihan and Bond voted the same way on pension increases, why are they not credited?”
Ms. Houlihan is part of the council that was mentioned. Mr. Bond voted not to increase pensions. If Mr. Stocks is unhappy with the criticism of his voting record he should stop voting to increase pensions.
Mr. Stocks was wrong in saying Ms. Houlihan didn’t have a plan. He was wrong about Ms. Barth, who voted in favor of the $5,750 budget.


Log in with your credentials


Forgot your details?