Wednesday, August 06, 2008

Nanninga calls for open dialogue and public vote regarding the Naylor Act and Pacific View School property

For Immediate Release:

Tuesday, August 5, 2008


Encinitas council candidate Bob Nanninga calls for open dialogue and public vote regarding the Naylor Act and Pacific View School property


Encinitas- Encinitas City Council candidate Bob Nanninga is asking all parties to come clean about who knew what and when regarding the Naylor Act and rezoning efforts by the Encinitas Unified School District in their attempt to develop the Pacific View Elementary school site .

The Naylor Act (Education Code sections 17485-1750) requires school districts, who propose to lease or sell land used for outdoor recreation and open space land suited for recreational purposes, to offer to lease or sell a portion of the land at discount to either a city or county, whichever has jurisdiction.

“It's clear the Encinitas Unified School District is not dealing in good faith with the City of Encinitas, downtown residents, and Encinitas citizens. At issue is who at the City of Encinitas knew what when, and why the Encinitas City Council is only now learning about the Naylor Act from local reporters as a result of Planning commission deliberations. Something is not right here.”

Encouraging Encinitas residents to do the same, Nanninga has requested of the City clerk copies of all correspondence between City Council members, Planning director Patrick Murphy, Encinitas staff , EUSD superintendent Lean King, consultant Dee Snow, private contractor Peder Norby and developer John De Wald.

This Public Records Act request includes all letters and emails, meeting agendas, meeting minutes and meeting dates between parties dating back to January 2006 regarding the Pacific View Advisory Committee and EUSD efforts to rezone the Pacific Elementary school site and the creation of a new zoning designation not recognized by the city general plan.

A well known community advocate and downtown businessman, Nanninga is also on record stating any rezoning of the Pacific view property, and changes to the city's General Plan, must be decided with a vote by the people of Encinitas.

Bob Nanninga, Candidate, cell 760-840-0838

www.nanningaforencinitas.org

32 comments:

  1. Great Job Bob!

    You continue to gain my respect!

    Sniff out the councilmembers selling out Encinitas residents for developers profit.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bob, you have put the voice back into the people! I take my hat off to you. The Naylor Act is a law that all council should be aware of as it affects the public's right to maintain public property. The current "deal" has been on the books for over 5 years. Anyone who can't appreciate the ramifications resulting from council members who knew about this law, but ignored it, should be stripped of their right to vote -- what good is a vote that just reelects a known name -- kinda like trying to pick the winner in a horse race by name because you are too stupid and/or lazy to read the stats. The house wins. GO BOB!!!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. You just know Stocks and Bond were behind the City dealing to develop the lot. they were dealing with King.

    They always sell the public out for their developers buddies.

    Waite until after the elections, the lake property will be ushered quickly to council for a rezone.....

    Plus I guess about 10 greenhouses/Agg area throughout the City that will be developed including density bonus. Meaning packed generic subdivision. Yuck!

    Plus the Employees union will get another increase in their retirement perks....

    It all will remain the same.

    thats the way it works.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This is without question the smartest and bravest move by any of the politicos. One wonders 'why' the city council incumbents have not called for the same information.

    Way to go, Bob!!!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Barth and Houlihan were actually the city liasons on this project with Dee Snow. Not everything works like a television show.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks Bob. I wonder if Coucnil ever consulted with City Attorney Sabine? If so, what did he advise them to to? I will put in an inquiry and then report that is cannot be given to be becasue of client/attorney privilege, or better yet it will come back completely redacted (which means that all lines will be blacked out with a marker).

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hey J.P. Is there is spell check on this blog. I am feeling pretty incoherrent this early in the AM and my spelling is awful on the last post? I still think you can all get my meaning so I won't correct it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. How can they say they didn't know about the Naylor Act? My recollection is that the Lake drive regional sports park was land owned by Cardiff Elementary School District and the city purchased it through the provisions of the Naylor Act. I also recollect that Bond, Stocks and Hollihan were on the council then and had to be well aware of how the city got the land.

    Heck, they authorized the action and the funds to buy the land and developed the Cardiff based regional sports park.

    Why can't they repeat themselves and build another regional sports park at the Pacific View School site?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Another park? With an ocean view? You've got to be kidding!
    School district employees don't get a lot of perks, so they are entitled to either an ocean-view office or a little investment money on the side by helping developers a little. I say support hard-working school administrators and board members who hardly work for our kids!

    ReplyDelete
  10. I vote for an Scripps style aquarium with a tide pool exhibit for the kids.

    ReplyDelete
  11. When I found out the city was giving up control of this land, first I was angry. I spoke to some of the people involved in the compromise and they said it was a done deal. So I just became resigned to it, and sort of backed away from my interest in the politics of my new city.

    I spent most of my life in Manhattan. The jewel of that city, one of the things that makes it desirable to the entire world, is Central Park.

    That unused land would have brought a good price even in 1850, and I'm sure the money could have been put to good use by the city. But it was set aside as a park, and wasn't developed, and now is the keystone to several trillion dollars worth of recession proof property.

    My argument was to be that selling this may make sense in 2008, but what about 2108, or a hundred years after that. When I found out that this was not going to happen I felt rejuvenated.

    Somehow there were others who thought like I did, and then had a law passed to implement looking beyond immediate needs to the long term future.

    Great work Bob.

    Arodb

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thanks for the follow through on this Bob!

    Ah, I love election years in Encinitas. So much more gets done (well, promised anyways). Maybe we should make it an annual free-for-all ;)

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hey aqua dude,
    You mean you want a Scripps-style aquarium just like the one they built at Legoland?

    Wait! Don't tell me! You also want a regional sports complex at the Hall Property, just like the one they already have at the YMCA.

    I know. Lets donate the Pacific View property to the SRF. Then, they can move their facilities back away from the bluff edge, and they won't need Steve Aceti to lobby for taxpayer-subsidized sand anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  14. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Personally I envision Historic School House Park. The old school house dates back to 1885, the property should be acquired by the city as key piece of Encinitas history. The founders of Encinitas sent thier young children to be educated here.

    The 2.8 acres between E and F street, 3rd and 4th would best serve the community as a passive use civic space.

    ReplyDelete
  16. THe key to this whole issue is to let everyone win. The school district would like to have the money for their academic goals. The city probably would like to have some of the property for a park site.

    I believe there is a deal in here for perhaps 60% of the site devoted to residential uses (PRD? - low density) and 40% devoted to parkland. The City should negotiate a below market purchase price and the developer an above market price involved with an exchange of existing real estate (small office building).

    The current impedement to the sale of the property is that even if the school district offered it to the city, and the city accepted and paid below market price, the proceeds would all go to the state and not the school district.

    I see the sucess of this project in a deal struck between 3 parties outlined. A project as described is palitable to the Planning Commission, the neighbors, the school district and a developer.

    ReplyDelete
  17. THe key to this whole issue is to let everyone win. The school district would like to have the money for their academic goals. The city probably would like to have some of the property for a park site.

    I believe there is a deal in here for perhaps 60% of the site devoted to residential uses (PRD? - low density) and 40% devoted to parkland. The City should negotiate a below market purchase price and the developer an above market price involved with an exchange of existing real estate (small office building).

    The current impedement to the sale of the property is that even if the school district offered it to the city, and the city accepted and paid below market price, the proceeds would all go to the state and not the school district.

    I see the sucess of this project in a deal struck between 3 parties outlined. A project as described is palitable to the Planning Commission, the neighbors, the school district and a developer.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Yes, good job, Bob, I agree!

    From the beginning I have advocated that this should become a pocket park. Glenn Sabine, our contracted City Attorney who also represents Council and staff of La Mesa, not the citizens, is not giving good advice to Encinitas City Council; that is obvious.

    The Save Pacific View group was given misleading info by the Encinitas Union School District. We were led to believe, it's either mixed, high density use, or high density medical office buildings. EUSD said it "wasn't in the business to be a landlord," and that was the reason for the ill-advised proposal to trade. At first EUSD said rezoning wouldn't be necessary. Then Superintendent King changed his story. No re-zoning should be allowed. Downtown Encinitas has enough development in the planning stages with Pacific Station, now involved in litigation. No EIR is adequate, currently, because we do NOT have an updated traffic circulation element. This went back to the Traffic Commission and will come back to Council when the General Plan is finally reviewed.

    I attended the first meeting at Paul Ecke and the next meeting at Oak Crest, both times making oral and written comments. Although I signed up to be, I wasn't "in the loop" and WAS NOT NOTICED of the recent Planning Commission meeting. I am glad there was reported to be "standing room only."

    For many years the fields at Pacific View were used to play soccer games, and for neighborhood ballgames, as well.

    ReplyDelete
  19. 3:39-

    What?

    Please don't post when stoned.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Thank you to Bob and Joe for speaking for themselves on this (and their own) blog.

    I would invite any candidate to discuss their position on NCTD and it's impact on costal Encinitas.

    Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  21. WAIT, this is public property and the only winners should be all of us, the public. The land was was bought, developed and maintained with our tax dollars. No one should consider anything else except what is good for the community. Developers be damned. School boards should only be concerned with PUBLIC BENEFIT.

    Put the use to a vote of the taxpayers not some people looking out for their own best interests. Do not rezone this property without a vote of the people. Any city council person or board of education person that doesn't have the community as a whole as the beneficiary should be throw out of office.

    THROW THE BUMS OUT.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I agree.... the politicians can not be trusted.

    Jerome will do what his developer freind told him to do.

    Same as Jim Bond

    Same as gomer....I mean Danny.

    Maggie will actually listen to the public.

    Teresa will listen to the public and already knows what the public wants.

    Put it to a vote by the people? whats the harm. The same as the Lake property rezone. put it to vote.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I dunno, dude. Do you have what it takes to be on the Encinitas City Council? I haven't met you yet, but I hear you are a nice guy, but are you up to the task? I haven't looked at your web site, but I will real soon. I just don't know, can I trust someone who runs a cafe? Can I trust a good looking fellow? Do you really have time for a position on the Council? Will you cry if something makes you upset?

    I hear you are a good person,... don't get me wrong, but if I could only Email you and have you answer all MY IMPORTANT QUESTIONS then I could tell everyone on this blog how cool you are because, I am, like, the bomb around town here, no question, straight up dude.

    I may run for city council some day, so you'd better kiss my ass...just speaking in a psychobabble kind o' way, ya'll understand, cuz I love you all. LOL!!!

    It's day two and you haven't answered my Email yet. S'up?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Here comes the none-sense.August 07, 2008 10:12 PM

    Whatever dipshit?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Honest in EncinitasAugust 07, 2008 10:19 PM

    Lets disect this-

    "I don't know dude"= I think I sucked someones penis when I was drunk.


    "Do you have what it takes to be on City Council?"= Can I bribe you like I did the other male horn dogs?
    ...

    Too be continued......

    ReplyDelete
  26. profile of a north county developerAugust 07, 2008 11:01 PM

    Profile of a north county developer,

    1980's High school drop out.

    Small time pot dealer.

    Becomes small time coke dealer.

    Nancy Reagan's War on Dope gets too hot so he stops dealing and invest in real estate despite crappy market and double digit interest rates. Develops a drinking problem. Knocks up girlfriend.

    Early 90's to 2000-slum lord who let's classic beach properties fall into disrepair. Gains 30 lbs.

    2000 to present-Bald and divorced but has new psycho 25 year girlfriend with tattoos. Slash and burn developer who bulldozes community character and replaces with generica because it will sell to transplants from Arizona.

    ReplyDelete
  27. School House Park. Very cool!

    Consider us another Encinitas family for Bob Nanninga.

    ReplyDelete
  28. ....love the profile of a north county developer!

    ReplyDelete
  29. ....love the profile of a north county developer!

    ReplyDelete
  30. Dr. Save a Hood,
    Feel free to Email me at bob@nanningaforencinitas.org

    ReplyDelete
  31. Can I just say that the campaign fundraisers at local encinitas homes for Bob Nanninga are so cool!!!
    The best meet and greet political event I have attended. I tip my hat to Bob for being so willing to answer all the questions thrown at him.
    Bob fundraiser are the too much fun!! I am ready for the next one!

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for posting on our blog.
Anonymous comments are allowed after moderator review.
The moderator works at his leisure.