Tuesday, October 17, 2006

“It barely pays for what we spend on gas and lunches,”

“This job is very rewarding in many ways,” Mayor Christy Guerin said. “I can think of a thousand reasons” to serve, and pay isn't one of them, she said.

“You do it because you love the city,” she said.

Guerin said people who talk to her are amazed that council members earn so little. “It barely pays for what we spend on gas and lunches,” she said.

from the UT link

Before the pay raise city council members were getting a check for $898.00 a month, that comes out to $224.50 a week, or $56.12 a day (four day work week, the city is closed on Fridays).

Where is Mayor Guerin eating lunch at everyday?

Feel free to get a burrito at Juanita's every once and awhile.

At the new pay scale of $1,077 the council members will have $67.31 for lunch and gas everyday.

If they stay local in Encinitas their gas bill shouldn't be all that bad, they are not commuting to San Diego on the south 5.

Any suggestions for good lunch specials around town for the council?

14 comments:

  1. I bet they have nice lunches. They have $10,000.00 birthday parties!

    ReplyDelete
  2. if budget is a problem and the bribes from the ecke's just aren't coming in,
    i suggest the councilpersons try the cafeteria at scripps hospital on santa fe.
    Good home style plates for dirt cheap, plus you can play the piano in the lobby with greasy fingers from the enchiladas.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mayor Guerin didn't mention the $500 a month expense account for the council people. That money could be used for the three martini lunch. For Mayor Guerin, the other perks include the $85,000 a year job with Bilbray after his election, which coincidentially seemed to happen after her help in sending out personal letters endorsing him. The deputy sheriff's association endorsed Bilbray. Does it help that her husband is on the board of directors of the deputy sheriff's association?

    There's 85,000 reasons for Mayor Guerin to serve.

    Try brown bagging it, council people.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Del Taco is really cheap and its right across from the new boondoggle

    ReplyDelete
  5. Check out Long-

    Citing the council's recent approval of $300,000 to $400,000 to build sidewalks in Leucadia, Long said, "This is something as a volunteer I would have taken on myself. I'd say put the sidewalks in and blow the (state) Coastal Commission off."


    Why doesn't he go out tonight and build some sidewalks. Actions speak louder than words- Blow-hard.

    ReplyDelete
  6. re Maggie's libel lawsuitOctober 18, 2006 2:06 PM

    libel 1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander which is oral defamation. It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity (like a newspaper, magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie. Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact, and is not clearly identified as an opinion. While it is sometimes said that the person making the libelous statement must have been intentional and malicious, actually it need only be obvious that the statement would do harm and is untrue. Proof of malice, however, does allow a party defamed to sue for "general damages" for damage to reputation, while an inadvertent libel limits the damages to actual harm (such as loss of business) called "special damages." "Libel per se" involves statements so vicious that malice is assumed and does not require a proof of intent to get an award of general damages. Libel against the reputation of a person who has died will allow surviving members of the family to bring an action for damages. Most states provide for a party defamed by a periodical to demand a published retraction. If the correction is made, then there is no right to file a lawsuit. Governmental bodies are supposedly immune for actions for libel on the basis that there could be no intent by a non-personal entity, and further, public records are exempt from claims of libel. However, there is at least one known case in which there was a financial settlement as well as a published correction when a state government newsletter incorrectly stated that a dentist had been disciplined for illegal conduct. The rules covering libel against a "public figure" (particularly a political or governmental person) are special, based on U. S. Supreme Court decisions. The key is that to uphold the right to express opinions or fair comment on public figures, the libel must be malicious to constitute grounds for a lawsuit for damages. Minor errors in reporting are not libel, such as saying Mrs. Jones was 55 when she was only 48, or getting an address or title incorrect. 2) v. to broadcast or publish a written defamatory statement. (See: defamation, slander, libel per se, public figure)

    Copyright © 1981-2005 by Gerald N. Hill and Kathleen T. Hill. All Right reserved.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Bowman did not "publish" his sign stuff. It has been published here, but not by him.

    This signs are gone, now. Maggie should drop the lawsuit. She cannot prove that these signs harmed her reputation. Just as in the clown caper, people feel sorry for her, and the signs may well backfire.

    Bowman has said he did not put up the signs. This could be true, as the Mexican workers could have been angry that the crosses were taken down. Also, that would explain the Vote No on Maggie signs, also painted out by a Mexican hired by the City. Bowman would have known that Maggie Houlihan is not running this time. The workers might not have known this.

    This could be viewed as "inadvertent libel," since no malice can be proven on Bowman's part. It cannot be proven that he errected or painted the signs. Also, calling someone, a political figure, a "whore," cannot be proven to damage her reputation. Whoever put up the sign might have given the word whore a different connotation. Many people have said that most politicians are prostitutes. That certainly can be said of Christy Guerin, in my opinion, who takes money from the Eckes, from the County for "retirement disability," from the City, including her expense account, and from the Fed. Govt, thru who her oil-drilling promoter buddy, Bilbray.

    Dalager goes along with Christy Guerin. So he needs to be ousted, too.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Don't get hung up on the $1,000 a month (like they want you to). Little Jimmy Bond makes $56,000 a year, Christy makes $39,000 and the rest are $32,000, $33,000 and $35,000. The the monthly increase they gave themselves is just pennies in the big picture but they do like to put it to the taxpayers every chance they get.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Perhaps they could get their own table at Encinitas Cafe. It is great place to entertain. Their downhome cooking is great and they have great variety on the menu.

    They could eat with Gil who seems to eat their everyday. He is their buddy and he seems to want them to approve the land use upzoning on the brown property.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Yes I eat breakfast there everyday I am in town. Old habits die hard. The cafe opens about 5:15AM, always has, so that the flower growers could eat before going to work at 6:45. Used to be that on any given morning you could find 15 or 20 of them eating breakfast there, and occasionally at lunch there were as many as 40. Now it's just a few of the remaining retired ones and myself. Try the oatmeal pancakes, pretty good, and the bacon if your a meat eater couldn't be better. I like to think I everybodys friend and please your always welcome to come in and chat. The council members don't join me but that's probably because I have spoken unkindly about everyone but maggie at meetings. Oh well, they miss out on interesting conversation and a different point of view. I have no idea what the land use upzoning on the Brown property is going to be I'm out of the loop right now on that. I went to their meeting but I didn't come away with anything like a clear vision of what is going to happen there. I am slowly preparing another site for my business for the day when I get asked to leave. Something is going to happen there, make sure you get your two cents in.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Rico's has good chicken tacos.

    ReplyDelete
  12. My suggestion to all the council members...skip lunch! You all could live off your fat for a very long time.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Council paid too muchOctober 18, 2006 8:35 PM

    We went to the Council meeting tonight. A very slow night. Only two speakers for oral communications, and #4 was pulled from the Consent calendar, about some planning and building modifications, so two speakers on that.

    The rest of the meeting was taken up by people applying for the vacant planning commission seats. We stayed and listened to Bruce Ehlers. We were home, this time, by 6:30. For this, Council gets paid so much?

    The $500 per month expense accounts were mentioned, too, that Council neglected to bring their many benefits up, when they voted to give themselves a 20% raise. That is, all but Stocks, did. Dan Dalager said nothing then, or tonight, while we were still there.

    Maggie Houlihan voted no on Item #4, the only one, this time. Good for her for daring to be the only dissenting vote.

    Dan Dalager goes along with everything that Christy Guerin does. Too bad. One of the speakers talked about making it easier for the skateboarders. Dan Dalager could have commented on that. But no. Mum was the word.

    Christy Guerin looked real grumpy when the speaker brought up her condescending remarks in the Union Tribune article. Thanks, JP, for posting it!

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for posting on the Leucadia Blog.
Anonymous comments are allowed, after moderator review.
The moderator works at his leisure.