Monday, June 23, 2008

Three meetings on Wednesday night June 25

San Dieguito Water District - one item

Joint City & SDWD - three consent items and one regular item

Council Meeting

Three Presentations

Three Consent Items

Four items on the Regular Agenda

Make appointments to the Youth Commission

Appeal concerning Planning commission appeal of the Walgreens drug store on Encinitas Blvd.

Introduction of an Ordinance to require recycling of construction and demolition materials

Council discussion and direction on whether to include on the Nov. ballot the 2% Transient Occupancy Tax on short term vacation rentals.


  1. Seems like a late night at City Hall.

  2. I sure hope they vote to put the 2% ToT tax on short term rentals. I am sure it will get over 67% in November.

    You play you pay. Including landlords making huge profit by slowly turning our town into Mission Beach

  3. The question is whether or not to bring it to a vote again, as it failed in June, thereby leaving Short-term rental paying less than hotels, motels and B&B's.

  4. Let them all pay the same. 2% which is a very small cost for nice beaches they get to enjoy. If we don't import sand, we will have ocean up against Seawall armorment. That does not sound like a nice day at the beach for those staying in short term rentals.

  5. Last anonymous comment is incorrect. The sand tax only pays for Moonlight beach sand importation and not for bluff areas.

  6. The Council can lick its wounds, but the Voters have spoken.

    The only issue left to question for November might be whether or not the 10% TOT on hotels is now still appropriate.

  7. observations@cox.netJune 23, 2008 12:23 PM

    Eight percent seems fair.

  8. 10% to 12% seems more fair.

  9. Aceti spoke at oral communications and asked them to put it on the ballot again.

    I think Hotels should only have to pay 8% TOT, as well.

    Short term rentals that are not hotels or B&B's, also have to pay a $150 PER YEAR "permit fee," which is like another tax.

    According to the law, Council and public employees are not supposed to use taxpayer monies to advocate how to vote in elections. I don't think the pro argument should have been written by the City. The anti-argument was not written. It was not well noticed. The person who said he was going to write the NO argument and rebutal didn't end up doing so.

    We don't need so much sand, every year. Because some is good, doesn't mean that more is better.

    Surfing conditions would be better with less sand. The City supports the Chamber of Commerce and the Coastal Coalition. As publically subsidized agencies, they should not be sand lobbiests.


Thank you for posting on the Leucadia Blog.
There is nothing more powerful on this Earth than an anonymous opinion on the Internet.
Have at it!!!