Thanks to Kevin for taking the time to record the farce, as well as Maggie's wishes of which the majority definitely didn't want a video record.
To illustrate what a farce this subcommittee is, I'll tell you what their findings will be.1) We have a choice between an election or an appointment2) The election would cost us a few hundred grand3) So let's appoint4) Teresa will recommend honoring Maggie's wish and appointing Shaffer5) Kristen will be torn between obeying her Godfather Stocks and trying to appear conciliatory. Stocks wants Old Lady Jacobson appointed but going with Shaffer would be the more conciliatory pick. So it's a toss-up between Shaffer and recommending an appointment with no preferred candidate, in which case Stocks and Bond put in Old Lady Jacobson.
w.c. Pretty much nails it. Like we knew all along... Its Old lady Jacobson as always predicted.As stated, spend your effort and money getting Stocks booted from council if you want any real positive change in Encinitas.
Probably, IMHO, the committee will recommend an individual who will not be running for council in 2012. They want Jacobson in the election and retain power in the long haul.So it is possible that Tony,(if he runs), and Lisa COULD be elected in 2012. I don't see Lisa or Tony being interim appointments.I do feel that the process was handled rather appropriately.
What are you talking about Chris. The person appointed will still be in the election just like Jerome Stocks.
Excuse my naivete, but the way I'm hearing this is that the city council, not the citizens of Encinitas, is going to select the replacement for a (recently, dearly departed) council member with someone who, not only did NOT run in the last election, but we (the citizens of Encinitas anyway...) have little to no clue who they are, their backgrounds, or where they stand on the issues of our city, environment, housing, etc.? Uh... BOGUS!!!Tony Kranz ran a fair, honest campaign in the last election and only lost by a small margin. Yet, it seems that he's not even being considered!! I believe it's only fair and right that Tony's name be thrown into the hat also, if not just appointed outright.After all, in any beauty pageant, when the Queen (and/or subsequent 'princesses') falls from grace, the next in line steps up. That's how it should be.Cheers.
Susan- I was at the meeting and the way I understand it is that Kristin Gaspar and Teresa Barth have been appointed to the sub-committee to discuss if they want to: 1. Hold a special election. 2 Appoint the person who had the most votes after the Councilpeople were elected- in this case it would be Tony Kranz. 3. Appoint someone who agrees not to run in 2012. 4. Appoint someone that will get the majority of Council votes-possible Alice Jacobson. Teresa and Kristin will make a recommendation to the full Council and then they will vote on what to do. So, there are 4 possible options, unless I have missed something.
Why do people think the subcommittee is going to recommend a person for the vacancy?According to Jim Bond there are two options (appoint or elect). According to Jerome the committee will come back with the costs and benefits of each option handed to them from the city attorney and city manager. It has already been researched.Chris, why wouldn't the most appropriate thing have been for the city manager and city attorney to have been asked what the options were and decide right then which approach to approve? In this case, subcommittee==backroom subcommittee==delay
Thank you for posting on the Leucadia Blog. Anonymous comments are allowed, after moderator review.The moderator works at his leisure.