Monday, August 13, 2012

What's missing in this scene?

click to enlarge

Here's a clue: guess who's responsible.

14 comments:

  1. This is NOT a Leucadia issue- I had the same requirement in old Encinitas. Gravel is better than curbs and gutters in the context of storm water runoff. Some who have planted grass have seen it die because their neighbor will park on it every day ( public street and all). Check out some properties on Cornish for an example.

    Sidewalks and streetilights blow and utterly destroy what ambiance might exist in these semi-rural neighborhoods.

    The fact is, the city got sued for not doing enough in terms of storm water and this is the result. Calling city staff names for implementing what was agreed to is not exactly fair. If you don't like it, and I personally don't, then we need to let folks such as CERF and Marco Gonzales know. There are alternatives, but everyone needs to agree or we will just get sued again.

    Grass and planted areas would be great, but the property owners and their neighbors with extra cars all need to work together to keep these areas looking nice.

    ReplyDelete
  2. What the hell are you babbling about Peaches? This area is blight because all the plants did not received water and died. Its the same old thing all the time. No water equal dead. Its that simple. Irrigate or die. Without water all plants will die.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The photo was not intended to be related to previous posts.

    Anyone else see something that is missing?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yea. The banners are missing. Every year, at this time. Banners art up with art and LeucadiART Artwalk logo and, thanks Fred, artwork. The LeucadiART banner was put on private property and not at Leucadia Roadside Park.
    It has been over a year since Stocks used his back room power to intimidate all three MainStreet programs and the Artist Colony to have Maggie's image removed from the Arts Alive Banners. He also was responsiable for denying the permit for her memorial.
    Now, no banners permits are issued until the wording of the banner policy is re written. The old policy did Not mention anything about political images, even though the tribute to Maggie was never intended to be anything close to a political statement. It was to honor her dedication and service to our community.
    Stocks is making sure that no banners go up at all until after the election. None, no matter how noble or worthy the cause or appealing the artwork. Stocks caused the Maggie/Banner issue, memorial permit rejection and the current no banner policy.
    A new banner policy could have been written and approved in a day.
    Stocks cares more about Stocks than all the positive civic programs that are being denied previous access to promote worthy causes.
    DUMP STOCKS

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

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks, the community for the kudos. Paula deserves half the credit for hanging and taking down these banners with me several times a year for various events like Arts Alive, LeucadiART WALK, Light Up Leucadia, and the Leucadia Lore "Burma Shave" style poem. The polls also make way for the Del Mar Fair promotions. When I noticed they were vacant the other day I thought "shouldn't the LeucadiART banners be up? There's only 2 weeks till ARTWALK." I then inquired why and was basically told the majority of the council put a moratorium on all banners. Jeepers Wally. Restoring support of local commerce would be nice.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Outside of that main issue, there are other things MISSING from that photograph. Some good some not.

    GOOD: The eroded narrow dirt path that was unsafe and never maintained.

    GOOD: The 40 MPH speed limit sign.
    (Already making a big difference).

    BAD: A safe bike lane. (But that's in the works).

    BAD: Flowers, like the ones they put at Leucadia Roadside park. (Also in the works)

    BAD: Attractive street lights. (Also in the works)

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

    ReplyDelete
  9. OK, try again...Fred! Who told you there was a moratorium on all banners?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I know that at the Council Meeting that was to be followed by a closed session (due to threat of litigation by Ian Thompson, Maggie's husband), but which closed session was cancelled, Mark Muir made the motion to allow the permit holder, Danny Salzhandler, to remove the plastic stickers that had to be applied to Maggie's image in order for them to be installed while the Constitutional questions of free speech were debated.

    Stocks seconded the motion, but UNFORTUNATELY, MADE IT A CONDITION OF THE MOTION THAT THE CITY WOULD ACCEPT NO NEW SIGN APPLICATIONS UNTIL COUNCIL CONSIDERED AND IMPLEMENTED UPDATED SIGN LANGUAGE IN EMC.

    I objected to this, immediately, wrote letters to the editor, as this is limiting free speech. It takes TWO READINGS to change municipal code. The issue of updating sign code was NEVER SUBSEQUENTLY AGENDIZED.

    My feeling is that the people organizing Artwalk, should have tried to apply for a permit. If they were not allowed to do so, they should have gone to Coast Law, as Ian did, on behalf of Maggie, and the ACLU! If they are denied the right to apply for a permit, they should have considered installing the banners without a permit.

    It's ILLEGAL for the City to effectively suspend CURRENT SIGN CODE, CURRENT EMC, until new code is established. Even if existing law were "suspended" it would take TWO READINGS OF THE ORDINANCE SUSPENDING THE EXISTING ORDINANCE, TO ACCOMPLISH THE SUSPENSION; BECAUSE THE LAW CAN'T BE CHANGED WITHOUT TWO READINGS!

    Hey, this may sound complicated, but the fact is, those who want to install banners, but are afraid to do so, without "permission" when no permit applications are now allowed for signage in the public right of way, are giving away their freedom of speech to a corrupt bureaucracy , supported by a "bought and paid for" City Attorney who seems NOT to care about the intent and letter of the city law, NOR the Constitution!

    If the Artwalk Banners are disallowed, then ALL of Stocks campaign signs should be ripped out, if they are in the public right of way!

    Existing sign law is FINE. Fairly recently it was updated by so-called sign-law "expert," Glenn Sabine's partner, Randal Morrison. What happened re Maggie's image was AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION ON THE PART OF JEROME STOCKS DIRECTING GLENN SABINE, SYCOPHANT, THEN DIRECTING CITY MANAGER, ALSO SERVING AT THE PLEASURE OF COUNCIL MAJORITY, AND EFFECTIVELY, THE CURRENT MAYOR, TO DENY THE APPLICANT, DANNY, to be able to hang up the Arts Alive Banners with Maggie's image, in tribute, on the back.

    ReplyDelete
  11. There is something very wrong here.
    We have too long been under the thumb of this, now, super majority council. They have intimidated community groups, commission heads and members, deceived the public, rejected citizen efforts to honor a dead council member, had a permit for her memorial rejected, alters documents, lied to the press, borrowed tens of millions dollars without public input, ignored public input, attempted to spot zone and raise height limits in areas of the city. They now have a super majority and can now do whatever they want without public consent.

    DUMP STOCKS AND THE MAJORITY COUNCIL.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Fred: The city will need a better definition of "attractive streetlights" :-) ... the blue-light specials its installing around town might be energy efficient, but I don't care for the depressing "workshop" look of the streets at night these days.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Note: my comment reads that its BAD that attractive streetlights is missing from the photo. I agree with your take on blue light specials. I've seen better looking interrogation lights.

    ReplyDelete

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