Ponto Settlement
The big item on tomorrow's City Council agenda is the approval of the settlement with Carlsbad over the Ponto development. Not sure what to make of this. Splitting the costs seems reasonable enough but how is Encinitas going to pay for it? The NC Times says that we will get the money from "developer fees" and "traffic impact fees." Why does the settlement only cover the improvements on La Costa from 101 to Vulcan? That is only about 30 feet of roadway. What about the rest of La Costa?
Labels: city council, ponto
posted by dosten at
9:18 PM
16 Comments:
the real trick is that Encinitas will take on responsibility for any lawsuits. Encinitas constantly invites lawsuits and if there is any eminent domain for widening the street expect an expensive lawsuit.
The reason we have so many lawsuits is because we have an incompetent city attorney, Glen Sabine. We pay him over 700,000 per year to give Council and staff bad advice. We need a new City Attorney.
With the current three man majority you will not get a new city attorney.
This settlement is in the best interests of Encinitas and was supported unanimously by all 5 City Council Members as reported out by the City Attorney.
It's usually better to reach a reasonable and thoughtful settlement than to hurl taxpayer dollars at lawyers.
Jerome Stocks - a bag full of hot air.
Might I suggest that this blog avoid the fate of the Leucadia blog, by avoiding the petulant name calling and threats of violence.
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=12885680&postID=189752078330240862
Yes, I don't feel "safe" posting on leucadia.blogspot.com anymore. Why associate with a bunch of crude and rude people? I like JP, but he does need to moderate his blog more, so there is consideration, courtesy, and true freedom of expression. An anonymous bully or two can run the "good guys" off!
I also feel that we do need an elected City Attorney.
I don't understand why Encinitas had to sue Carlsbad in the first place only to end up splitting the costs? It wasn't clear at the meeting what the original amount that Carlsbad was going to pay was? I feel the intention all along was to split the costs between the two cities?
It seems like this lawsuit just made money for some attorneys. At least Carlsbad citizens do get to elect their City Attorney, Ron Ball.
I agree with what Jerome Stocks just had the courage to post, under his own name:
"It's usually better to reach a reasonable and thoughtful settlement than to hurl taxpayer dollars at lawyers." However, this "settlement" could have been reached without a lawsuit having been filed by our City Attorney after closed session consultations with Council last December 21, for which "special meeting" the City Attorney also gets to bill at the rate of $150 per hour.
The toxic element on the Leucadia Blog that has been spreading falacious comments, representing the Encinitas Chamber, is Mike Andreen. He has admitted his identity on the blog.
He has some sort of agenda and some hate to share.
The Chamber's stance of Streetscape in Leucadia seems very unfriendly to businesses and the community that is working together to improve the Leucadia area.
Downtown has experienced wonderful improvements. When you consider that the North 101 Specific Plan began at the same time as the Downtown Specific Plan and nothing has been implimented on the North 101 Specific Plan, why is the Encinitas Chamber trying to kill the improvement plans? It would seem that they should be supportive.
It is interesting that Bob now is promoting respect when he was totally disrespecful of the presenters and the rest of the audiece with his cat calls and heckling at the Streetscape workshop last week.
That he was,
towards the end of the meeting the crowd had had enough.
I said "Might I suggest that this blog avoid the fate of the Leucadia blog, by avoiding the petulant name calling and threats of violence."
I said nothing about respect in my earlier post.
I feel the consultants were being disrespectful of Encinitas residents. Public workshops should allow for the public to be heard, and not limited to the public listening high priced consultants say the same thing over a series of highly orchestrated "meetings."
At this point I have no respect for the process, as I was told the last workshop was going to address landscaping, sidewalk treatments, and hardscaping features such as benches and street lights.
That didn't happen. When does ecological wisdom get factored in to this multi-million dollar project?
Bob,
We who were there, heard you interrupt the presentation several times. Everyone else, but you, knew that this was not the time for public comments. The city, Peltz and all involved have been doing all they could to receive public comments, just not during a presentation.
Just because the presentation was not halted to hear what you needed to say, does not mean that,"...consultants were being disrespectful of Encinitas residents."
If Bob lived in Salem back in the witch burning days I can just hear him say "burn the witch, burn her" - without a trial, without any sort of presentation of facts. Mob Rule is his preferred mode of operating, aparently.
Bob, you had bad behavior at the Streetscape workshop - why don't you just admit it and apologise?
Your message of using native plants has been heard and you know that "ecological wisdom" will get factored in - with or without your "input".
Bad behavior? From an environmental activist perspective that was good behavior.
Go figure.
And with all due respect I don't "know that "ecological wisdom" will get factored in.
Hence the reason I was there.
Apoligize? I don't think so.
Bob, if you think you had appropriate behavior at the last Streetscape workshop and won't apologise for it, I am so glad that you did not get elected to City Council. That was totally disrespful to the presenters and the audience who wanted to hear the presentation.
Do you honestly think that was interupting and catcalling was ok? Do you like that when you are doing performances or in charge of a meeting?
Post a Comment
<< Home