They constantly hear how people want streetlights but then it turns out people really don't want streetlights and especially if taxes are going to increase.
Let me lay it out for the council members and the city manager:
You don't put 30 ft. tall streetlights on small residential streets!
Why? Because as much as people enjoy a well lit street they don't want lights beaming into their bedrooms at night. That is horrible! That is a mood killer. That is BB gun time.
Honey, I think we need thicker curtains.
Residential streets can be lit just fine with porch lights. There are lots of groovy porch lights for sale at the sprawling Home Expo off Leucadia Blvd.
Yes, the coast highway business district needs streetlights. But once again, not 30 ft. tall lights like look like something out of an H.G. Well's novel.
Smaller human sized street lights are best. 8-10 feet with softer bulbs. You want the streets to have a warm welcoming quality, not a blinding prison camp vibe.
Street lights in southern California should be solar powered and should push the light down to the street and not out to the sides. I think most of us have visited the Palomar observatory and know how light pollution is destroying that local institution.
Also, you don't try to sneak in a new tax for streetlights, especially in a city prospering like this one. People are not stupid, they see how many pet projects this city has. Now the this council can look forward to liteature in their mail box next election that reads, your name here supported a tax increase in 2005...
Here is a letter that ran in the July 14 San Diego Union Tribune. I noticed it was written by the same guy that did a presentation at the last council meeting about eminent domain.
Flush Encinitas should cut, not raise taxes
The Encinitas City Council repeatedly proclaims that it has done a wonderful job with the city's budget. The city has plenty of money, enough to absorb citywide pay and pension raises and increases in staffing. If things are so great, why does the council proceed so frantically when it comes to obtaining more taxes?
Consider the recent clean-water tax. It was illegally enacted. Then the city spent money to defend it in court even though the obvious outcome would be a legal defeat. Recently, the city sent ballots to city landowners in the hope that we would elect to send the city more money for its streetlight assessment. The city manager sent residents an accompanying letter filled with confusing and scary propaganda that the city would cut services if revenue did not increase. Fortunately, residents voted against increased taxes.
Unfortunately, the council has wasted tens of thousands of dollars on it is failed efforts to raise our taxes. If we trust the city's rosy predictions, the city's income should be increasing in the next few years. Instead of increasing the size of government, let's give tax money back to the residents. Let's use those future revenue increases to eliminate the lighting assessment that the council was trying to increase.
There is also a letter from Surf City Times editor Mike Andreen praising Jerome Stocks in the same issue. click me