Wednesday, October 31, 2012

(rush draft) Will the UT Defend its Reasoning?

Papa Doug tosses out a last minute endorsement for Stocks, Muir, and Forrester. 

Either we are super crazy or Papa Doug's UT has no shame.

Here is some stuff the UT writes:
This trio represents the best possibility for the city to continue on its path of fiscal responsibility and economic development. 

Quietly raising business fees (Fred?), is pro-small biz?
Borrowing money and using that money to fill reserve funds is smart? Only from the perspective that you can spin the high reserves and not tell the public about how you got the reserves.

Not having enough money for the crown jewell project of the council majority, after 10 years to save up (and borrow $20 million twice), is fiscally responsible.
Blowing millions on stupid real estate deals, keeping the pubic unaware of the actual costs for borrowing (AGAIN) for building the hall park, lying to public about the costs of the Hall park and breaking the law on restricting access to financial documents, giving massive pension increases, not paying for the pension increases, hiding the true nature of the pension underfunding, lying about revenue projections, giving raises through the worst economic downturn, blowing money on stupid public records law violations, underfunding streets repairs (hiding the BDI past 4 year out) and refusing to release to the public the current roads repair underfunding levels after spending $100K on software that allows the city to update the underfunding report at a touch of a button!

The candidates most likely to be the top vote getters in this race can clearly be divided along ideological lines, with the above three pitted against Lisa Shaffer and Tony Kranz, who represent a more liberal point of view. 

Left versus right. Keep that in mind future anti-establishment campaign workers. Don't be greedy.

A win for Shaffer and Kranz, along with the general disposition of Teresa Barth, would flip the majority of the council in a direction that would lead away from economic vibrancy. 

Things are bad when the "liberals" are the only credible candidates supporting real pension reform. also chairman of the San Diego Association of Governments and board member at North County Transit District. 

The UT forgot about the Sprinter mismanagement and that under Stock's leadership SANDAG  has grossly borrowed and does not have a balanced Transnet budget. It could have, and provided better long-term economic stimulus to the county.

Stocks’ calling card has been to keep the city on a path of improved quality of life and fiscal responsibility. 

There is no way someone at the UT could put there name to this statement and defend it if they knew anything about Encinitas.

When asked about his record, he points to projects like the Whole Foods mixed-use complex and the Encinitas Lofts developments as the right direction for the city. 

Jerome did that? Huh? How did he do that? Was he an investor or something?

Mark Muir is a former fire chief of Encinitas and was appointed to fill the vacancy left by the death of Maggie Houlihan in late 2011.

Also appointed to fire chief under the appearance that he was given job with no competition or a record of even applying for the job, after working on his buddies council campaigns.

Forrester would be the newcomer. He is a real-estate broker and lawyer who once served on the Olivenhain Town Council and has been on several city task forces, including the Encinitas Ranch Specific Plan Task Force. 

Did he speak out against the way ERGA was organized?  He won't answer questions about his statements that there is no open government problems in Encinitas, making it ironic if he gets elected.

All three — Stocks, Muir and Forrester — oppose the Right To Vote initiative, which if placed on a future ballot and enacted would send all zoning changes that increase density to the voters for approval. Such planning by strangulation is anathema to improving the quality of life in Encinitas. 

Why? Increasing zoning is a rare event and the Right to Vote initiative does not change anything related to current property rights. It does mean that windfall profits can't be gained by buying off a favorite council member. Remember Prop A (local agriculture to be upzoned to suburbia). Jerome and Muir loved it. The voters did not want it. The voters could have just deferred to the electeds, but they did not.

The anti-business side of the ballot is represented by Shaffer, a business ethics lecturer at UC San Diego, and Kranz, a printing company executive who ran unsuccessfully in 2010. 

This might be true, but I couldn't say that and I doubt the UT could defend this. Examples?

Their point of view on the greater intervention of government — say, as represented by support of the Right to Vote proposal — is unwelcome in a sputtering economy. 

The right to vote only moves the approval from the council to the people. No more or less intervention, no?

They also oppose Proposition K, the Encinitas ballot measure that would make the city’s mayoral spot an elected one rather than an appointed one. 

How can they be for and against the right to vote? That's really awkward.

This last minute editorial is just in time for one more mailer to include the UT endorsements. Do most people know this is Papa Doug's endorsements?  A lot do. A lot have already voted too. 

My money is on this scenario, Jerome freaked out and called in his favors at the UT. The UT didn't interview the candidates and it was believed they would not be endorsing during this election at all for local city council races. Why the change of heart and why was it written by someone who didn't know squat about Encinitas. 

You won't learn what is going on fiscally by reading the UT.

Olivenhain to Experience Density Bonus

Encinitas is home so some of the developers who helped create the density bonus law. Leucadia has seen it in action for many years now and had reached out to the rest of the city for assistance.

From the InBox:

Lest we be written off as a bunch of NIMBYs, I would like to state that we are not opposed to building in our area, just inappropriate building.  Just as other areas of Encinitas, we have a strong affection for the character and lifestyle that our neighborhood affords us.  While Cardiff is known for its beach feel, Leucadia, its funkiness and the downtown area is known for its great shops and restaurants, Olivenhain is known for its country feel and horse lovers.  Those of us who have chosen to make this area our home want to preserve the very character that drew us to the area.

The developer of the proposed high-density project purchased the Dana Rullo Stables, located at the end of Desert Rose, at the very height of the real estate boom.  Their decision may have been questionable since other builders, more familiar with the property and the cost of development in the area had passed on the opportunity to buy and build.  It just didn’t pencil out.  When the development was pitched to the surrounding area, it was presented as an 8-home community, with homes and lots similar in size and character as the existing homes.  With the collapse of the real estate market, it became clear to the developers that they would not be able to sell the 8 homes for the price that they had projected.  So instead, they are using the bonus density law that was intended to assist low-income folks to afford homes to make the project viable.  In practical terms, what this means is that one of the 16 homes would be “affordable” housing and the others could be sold at market value.  So, this enables them to build twice as many homes and sell them for half the price they would have sold the 8 homes for, netting the same profit.  On the surface, that doesn’t sound too unreasonable until you look at the actual implications of the high-density project.

In order to cram 16 homes into the available space, they will have only 5’ setbacks from the property line.  The pictures below depict the typical home spacing in Olivenhain versus a high-density project.  While some folks would embrace the lack of a yard to maintain and the close proximity to their neighbor, those folks are not found in Olivenhain.  Instead of conforming to the current half-acre zoning, some proposed lots are closer to one-fifth of an acre.


Fortunately, the bonus density law does not permit a community to build an inherently unsafe community.  There are numerous concerns related to the safety of not only the future residents but also the people who live in the area.  It is widely known that the emergency services do not meet their goals for response time in Olivenhain.  A fire truck, without EMT services, is not parked in the neighborhood about 10 hours each day to respond to fires.  Since it is not EMT staffed, it affords no additional support for medical emergencies.  Even if it were, it only offers coverage half the day.  You had better plan your medical emergency well!

LB NOTE: This must be wrongish, if not way off base. Isn't every firefighter paid as a firefigher/paramedic in Encinitas (although that doesn't mean that FD management ensures that all firefighters are competent paramedics)?

The fire department has required the developer to install an eight-foot, non-flammable wall along two sides of the community.  Since it backs up to an ecologically sensitive wetland, there can be no openings in it that would permit human traffic.  This has the potential to trap people in their yards in the event of a fire coming from the West or South.

LB NOTE: Much more of a public safety issue is all the density that is being put up NEXT to a freight train rail road, back here in Leucadia. See this and this

See if you can get the Mark Muir on record saying that all the extra people on the corridor is not going increase the chances that the emergency medical response in bad train derailment situation will be overwhelmed. If they are overwhelmed it increases the likelihood of a triage situation, where black tags are being issued to people who might survive but resources are so inadequate for the disaster that people with a better chance of survival are selected to live.  Those given a black tag are given pain medications until they die.

The last time the city was asked, they either did not know or wouldn't reveal what is being hauled on Leucadia's tracks. I was told, when the train derails the FD will check the markings on the tanker cars, get the manifest from the train engineer, and/or wait for the Rail Road company to send the manifest.

Back to Olivenhain,

A Mitigated Negative Declaration was performed, in lieu of a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the property.  The irony of this is that the developers are represented by an attorney who would have an EIR required for a single-day event in San Diego and a sea wall that has been in existence for over two years.  A full EIR is absolutely warranted due to serious concerns about downstream erosion, removal of all existing Eucalyptus and Torrey Pine trees, unstable soils in the area and increased traffic on neighboring streets, including Rancho Santa Fe.

The parcel of land is bordered by wetland on the east side.

The developer touts that this development will actually improve the wetland area by installing the eight-foot wall and restoring the some of the native vegetation.  The fact is that during its almost six years of ownership of the property, they have done nothing to improve the wetland area, in fact, they were cited this year for multiple violations.  The picture below shows where the wetland had been dozed with a tractor.

If approved as presented to the City Planning Commission, the developer would provide only an average  environmental buffer zone of 25 feet.  This is entirely inconsistent with the other developers who have had to provide a much wider buffer zone.  Three properties immediately to the south of the proposed development had to provide a buffer of 100 feet.

It may be argued that this issue concerns only the neighbors in the immediate area.  The fact is that it will have a detrimental effect on all of the residents of Carlsbad, San Marcos and San Elijo who traverse Rancho Santa Fe each day.  Anyone who does, knows what the estimated additional 180 vehicle trips per day will do to their travel time.

A group of concerned neighbors have banned together, as Save Desert Rose, to make certain that any building in Olivenhain be done in a thoughtful, well-planned and character-preserving manner.  At the very minimum, a full Environmental Impact Report should be required of the developer to make certain that any development is safe, doesn’t create environmental issues and is consistent with the area.

The developer is scheduled to present the project to the City Planning Commission this Thursday, November 1st, at 6:00pm.  It will be held at the Encinitas City Hall, located at 505 S. Vulcan Street, in Encinitas.  It is imperative that all concerned citizens show up to raise their voices against reckless building.

What does your candidate for state assembly think about the density bonus law? What position does the City's high paid Sacramento lobbyists take on the density bonus law? What position does your City Council candidate take on using our high paid lobbyists to address the density bonus law?

For more information or to contribute to support the efforts of your neighbors, please go to:

Friday, October 26, 2012

more sand no more tourists

The sand dredger has been pumping sand all night long. Now they are pouring it on George's.

A couple big storms will wipe a away this multimillion dollar project, which is suppose to bring more tourist money to Encinitas. But how can that work if the parking at George's was already full, even when there was no sandy beach some years ago?

On the surf side of things, George's had a crew of guys hitting it up. George's had been working with these little wind swells.  

Does tourist season and election season coincide? Everyone loves puppies, apple pie, and sand.

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

SD Rostra on Signage & More

I know three people who would write a blurb for SD Rostra on Encinitas' phony pension reform and our city's future budget mess, if they thought they would publish something that outlined Jerome's history.

They did publish this about the signage stuff. Hat tip to Barry.

North Coast Current Chimes in on independence in the local media. Hat tip NCCurrent.

And another reason to go to City Hall -> Blodgett and Helmreich on display. Both are icons of Encinitas.

Saturday, October 20, 2012

Why the meeting was cancled

Big deal. The meeting was cancelled and the public didn't get a chance petition the council in public. That means no rancor and that's good right? What is not good is how the city operates. 

The following is a pretty weak example of manipulation over something 99% of the public would have a knee jerk positive reaction to, so it sort of depreciates the efforts others have taken to expose manipulation and outright lying about more substantive issues. However, can you read this and then tell us what  gives the city manager authority to cancel a meeting?

Credit to the people who questioned authority when something didn't seem just right.

 On Oct 16, 2012, at 5:53 PM, "Andrew Audet"  wrote:

Dear Mayor Stocks

The city code below defines the dates for council meetings. The code also defines the process for cancelling a meeting.

At your earliest please let me know why the meeting was cancelled. Thank you very much.

Kind regards
Andrew Audet
city code:
2.20.040 Regular Meetings. (Ord.2001.21)
A. Regular meetings of the City Council shall be held on the second, third, and fourth Wednesday of each month.
B. The City Council may, by resolution, designate another date, time and location for a regular meeting.
From: Jerome Stocks []
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 3:13 PM
To: Andrew Audet
Subject: Re: Cancelled meeting

Again, from the City Clerk to whom I recommend you ask follow-up questions:

... Resolutions can only be passed by the City Council at a public meeting.  However, a resolution is not required to cancel a meeting.

Kathy Hollywood
City Clerk, City of Encinitas

 On Oct 17, 2012, at 2:34 PM, "Andrew Audet" <> wrote:

Mayor Stocks-

Thank you for your prompt response. Do I understand correctly that your answer is the city has no business on behalf of the taxpayer to discuss?

Can you please cite for me specifically where in our city codes it defines, states or codifies that the city manager may cancel a meeting? This is my third request for specifics.

Thank you for your prompt response.

Andrew Audet

 From: Teresa Barth
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 4:20 PM
To: Kathy Hollywood
Cc: Gus Vina
Subject: Cancelled council meeting procedures

Hi Kathy

I was contacted by a resident who had the following procedural questions about the cancelled meeting.  Can you help me answer her questions?

I would really appreciate it if you could verify that I am correct in the following conclusions:
In order for council to cancel a regularly scheduled meeting, they must designate another date, time, and location via a resolution..
A resolution must be passed by a council majority in public.
Resolutions are assigned numbers so that they can be located in city records.

Teresa Arballo Barth
City of Encinitas
 Encinitas - Five Unique Communities. One Great City.
 Correspondents should be aware that all communications to or from this address are subject to public disclosure and may be reviewed by third parties.

From: Jerome Stocks []
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 10:24 AM
To: Andrew Audet
Subject: Re: Cancelled meeting

Mr. Audet, below please find a response from the City Clerk to Council Member Barth's similar request:

Teresa – here is the information you requested.

1.    If a meeting is canceled for lack of business, there is no such requirement.  This is consistent with the City’s past practices of canceled meetings.
2.    Correct
3.    Correct – resolutions are given an assigned number for identification purposes

Let me know if I can be of further assistance

Kathy Hollywood
City Clerk, City of Encinitas

Correspondents should be aware that all communications to and from this address are subject to public disclosure and may be reviewed by third parties.


On Oct 17, 2012, at 10:16 AM, Andrew Audet wrote:

Dear Mr. Mayor:

This is my second request, can you please cite for me or direct me to the city code that allow the city manager to cancel a city council meeting. Thanks greatly.

Andrew Audet

From: Jerome Stocks []
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 6:40 PM
To: Andrew Audet
Subject: Re: Cancelled meeting

The City Manager cancelled the meeting due to a lack of agenda items. This reduces the overtime/evening staff costs.
I am curious as to why you would care about such an issue and look forward to your response.

Jerome Stocks
City of Encinitas


From: Kathy Hollywood []
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 6:06 PM
To: Andrew Audet
Subject: RE: Cancelled meeting

Attached is a copy of City Council Policy No. C019.

Kathy Hollywood
City Clerk, City of Encinitas

Correspondents should be aware that all communications to and from this address are subject to public disclosure and may be reviewed by third parties.

From: Andrew Audet
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 10:41 AM
To: Kathy Hollywood
Subject: Cancelled meeting

Dear Ms. Hollywood:

If you would be so kind could you please provide me the specific city code that defines the process and under what circumstances the city manager can cancel city council meetings.  Your prompt response is appreciated.

Thank you
Andrew Audet

From: Gus Vina []
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 6:04 PM
To: audet
Cc: Kathy Hollywood
Subject: Inquiry

Andrew, fyi.

Statement regarding the cancellation of the City Council meeting for October 17, 2012.

There were no business items to be placed on the agenda for the October 17, 2012 City Council meeting.  The City Manager confirmed this fact with the Mayor and consequently canceled the meeting.

Thank you.

Gus Vina
City Manager
City of Encinitas

Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 6:15 PM
To: Andrew Audet; 
Subject: Fw: Illegal cancellation of regular Council meeting by city manager Re: Inquiry

Sent this to Gus and the Council.

To: "Gus Vina" <>
Cc: "Jim Bond" <>, "Jerome Stocks" <>, "Mark Muir" <>, "Kristin Gaspar" <>, "Teresa Barth" <>,, "Claudia Bingham" <>
Date: Thursday, October 18, 2012, 6:11 PM


You have only provided a statement of your actions.   You didn't answer the question of where in the municipal code do you have the authority to cancel regular scheduled Council meetings.

By your actions, you have told the Council that your power and authority usurps their power. 
Oddly enough, the Council members meekly went along with your actions. 

Your actions consisted of conspiring with Jerome Stocks, the mayor, to subterfuge a power grab in which the legal authority to cancel regular scheduled meetings was the responsibility of the Council as a whole.

Please answer the question:

Where in the municipal code are you given the authority to cancel regular scheduled Council meetings?

<> wrote:

From: Gus Vina <>
Subject: Inquiry
To: twicesites
Date: Wednesday, October 17, 2012, 6:11 PM


Statement regarding the cancellation of the City Council meeting for October 17, 2012.

There were no business items to be placed on the agenda for the October 17, 2012 City Council meeting.  The City Manager confirmed this fact with the Mayor and consequently canceled the meeting.

Gus Vina

City Manager

City of Encinitas 


Here's the stuff that the city clerk attached after being asked for the specifics:

When the city is right about about something they stab at members of the public with the sharp end of the municode (ie city law). They cite the specific sections of the law. 

In this case, more than a couple people were asking for the city to cite the section and verse of the law that allows for the city manager to call off a meeting. I only had time to skim the emails, and I didn't see it. Did you?

BTW, if there really wasn't any business planned for this week's meeting, why wasn't the cancellation at least mentioned at the council meeting the day before agenda packets are normally released to the council?  That's how things would roll in the real world.

Below, citizens held a mock council meeting allowing citizens to speak at oral communication, the night of the canceled meeting. Some people cared that the meeting was canceled. I think they were more concerned about HOW it was cancelled. 

It is reported that Lynn was given only one minute to speak and she didn't complain about it.

Thursday, October 18, 2012

In prep

Jerome and CM Vina stood behind the meeting cancellation, in writing. Stand by.

SORRY FOR THE DELAY. We have real jobs and busy lives.

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Spy Cam above Leucadia Blvd

They should live stream it on the Internet so we can watch the mayhem of Leucadia Blvd unfold anytime we want.

Dude with a broke guitar

Send us songs about Tony and Lisa and we'll happily post them too. We're happy to give equal play time.

City Manager Approves Night Off

The council has regularly scheduled meetings. The schedule is approved by the legislative body (ie the council). The next meeting is tomorrow night. It is canceled.

According to our source (someone fact check this please) the council did not vote to cancel tomorrow's REGULARLY SCHEDULED meeting, as they usually do when they want to skip one for summer recess.

It sure looks like Mayor Stocks did not want to hear anymore blubbering from the public (he's recently not responding to questions, so you'll have to ask him yourself about this).

He sure seems to be getting getting sick and tired of those stalkers and whiners with nothing else better to do than stand up for fair play at city hall. Man, how stupid are those people? Politicians are supposed to cheat, manipulate, and spin, right? That's what they are paid to do. See how upset he got when the public forgot this:

Canceling the council meeting allows Mayor Stocks and the rest of the council, if they go along with this, to stay away from the public. The Mayor surely needs a break.

Canceling the meeting was done behind closed doors (according to one source, do your own fact check and let us know). According to our source the meeting can't be canceled like that (same).

Who's going to ask  City Manager Vina why he is going along with this? Maybe the City Manager can explain why the cancellation process was in compliance with city policy and law. Don't be surprised if he doesn't respond. He's getting good at not responding to questions that reveal "mistakes."

Sunday, October 14, 2012

O'side gets Cardiff sewer pipe sand

And beach goers get to smell the ship exhaust, when calm onshore winds blow.

Saturday, October 13, 2012

Fallout from the Midnight Cowboys' Ride

In 1999 much of the general public and media were thrilled to get behind USA's victory in the Women's World Cup.

Some of us will remember that there was a bit of controversy about the game ending penalty shots. USA's goalie stepped forward too early. That is a rule violation. Some would say minor, not a capital offense. Some said it was just gamesmanship. They won, right!   

Who cheats if they don't think it will give them an advantage? Certainly, Muir and Mayor Stocks thought they would get an advantage by posting signs early. To them it is just gamesmanship. They probably considered that even if they got caught few voters will find out or care and that complaints can easily be dismissed.

The problem is bottom-up as much as top-down.

I've run across way too many 20 somethings who believe that cheating is only cheating if they get caught. The lesson in getting caught cheating? Answer: the cheating wasn't done well enough, not that cheating was wrong. Many voters will say that what Muir and Jerome did was minor or gamesmanship and irrelevant.

They've balanced the budget, are building the park, and keeping us safe, right? We love Encinitas and are very satisfied. Incumbents should be reelected (Muir and Stocks)!


If small violations matter they must matter regardless of party affiliation or alliances. There should be no mutual defense alliances when it comes to following the rules and both sides should be willing to abide.

If the rules suck, change them. If someone cheats, they should make up for it.

In this case, how should Muir and Stocks make up for a extra weekend day of signage? How about Muir and Stocks take down those signs for one weekend day? That's not even punitive. Other ideas?


Below are a few clips of how things are going. I don't think it is likely that Muir and Stocks are going to be willing to even the playing field. I haven't heard of them offering to make up for it.

Watch this 10 News footage.  I'm voting for Jerome because he is so fun to watch.

This was a random clip, which turned out funny so we kept it. It is 98% out of context. See for yourself here. Send us another shot and we will swap it out.
This is probably what got Jerome so happy:

 Don't forget that the 1999 soccer team were treated as heroes by many.  Some of the people bringing up the cheating were labeled curmudgeons.

A Strong Poltical Figure: Still Impacting Elections

Last Week's The Coast News, page 1 

Maggie Houlihan's image being on the art banners around town, and the fallout, caused great distress to many people. It became mired in fighting over what should/could be posted on the city light pole banners. 

Houlihan's posthumous image in the community was strengthened by the banners. Her image is active in the current election and her endorsements were found on page 1 of The Coast News

The banners let the people know she was a community hero and supported the arts. If you like arts and heroes vote for Maggie. Because that's no longer an option, people can vote for her quasi-proxies.

The expenditure of money on the page 1 advertisement is evidence that people believe Maggie is still an important political figure influencing elections.  Perhaps, she was also a political figure when her image was placed on the city's streetlights?

Thursday, October 11, 2012

Encinitas Mayor to fight imaginary beach rock menace

From Jerome Stocks Mayor of Encinitas

 re: September Update.

 Hi John, I got a call from one of the members of my college surf team. “

Hey Jerome, what’s up with all the rocks on the beach in Encinitas?” 

We’re fixing it right now, I told him. “We are dumping 1.4 million cubic yards of sand on beaches in 5 cities all over San Diego County, including the beaches in Encinitas.”

 “Is that near Cardiff or Moonlight Beach?” he wanted to know.

 Sure is, Leucadia too, I told him.

 “Covering the rocks?”

 Yes and protecting the bluffs, too.

 “Nice," he said. "But what about the surf? You are not going to mess up the surf breaks are you?”

 No. It didn't in 2001 and it won't this time either.

 “Oh, O.K. then. Bye.”

 I tweet about these things from time to time. You can follow me on at @JeromeStocks.

 Enjoy your week, Jerome Stocks Mayor City of Encinitas

  The above letter is not satire. 

If you look closely you will see some rocks in this photo, taken 10-11-12
From Encinitas Patch
Batiquitos, Moonlight and Cardiff beaches had been scheduled to receive new sand this month as part of a regional project—but that timeline has been pushed back about a month. According to an update from the City of Encinitas, the setback is due to a holdup on equipment—and to avoid impacting grunion runs, nearby nesting and foraging shorebirds, and lobster season.

Monday, October 08, 2012

Leucadia Town Council Candidate Forum Tuesday Night

Ask the candidates running for Encinitas City Council some questions in person.
Tuesday 7-9PM at Encinitas Community Center (1140 Oak Crest Park Dr, Encinitas).

Thanks Ruthless Hippies for the reminder.

Saturday, October 06, 2012

Fun with Mayor Jerome and Mark Muir

It is like a cool little party. Mark Muir and Jerome Stocks have been out late at night playing with campaign signs for close to a decade.

Cheaters. Big deal.

It is not like they lied about the Hall park, gave cronies millionaire jobs, gave developer bros millions in taxpayers dollars, tried to cover up public safety misconduct that put people at risk, or let staff lie about a stupid streets condition report. How about selling out our future on a 35% pension spike for all employees or giving staff a 15% pay raise through the recession? All really good ideas. 98% are satisfied.

Hum. Muir and Jerome must worry a little bit that the public will not like the cheating. Why else would they be out in the middle of the night doing this stuff? Don't these guys have something better to do?

What is up with the Mayor? Is he drunk or sleep-deprived, because I am 98% sure he has watched TMZ. Any dude who has watched that show knows that paparazzi-types can video and ask questions when important people are out in public doing stupid things.  

Super Not Green SOMETHING (updated)

A big ol' ship has been cruising up and down the coast. Looks like a sand dredger to me.

Because there is sand on our beaches already and we are going into winter, this ain't going to bring any more tourists than were going to come anyways. Hope there is no El Nino to strip ALL the sand (new and old) off the shoreline.

It takes a lot of energy to pump and haul sand.  That ship doesn't burn its (bunker?) fuel very clean. There is a brown plume coming out the ship's exhaust stack. More CO2 and particulates into the atmosphere! But its okay, I'm sure there were several other "green" projects approved last week.

TCN: Sand dumping to begin in October. 

Update: The smokey ship has been circling outside of south George's. That's where the sewer outfall is. That ship probably is working the pipeline. We are 98% certain that the sand dredger will not pollute as much.

Friday, October 05, 2012

The Sound of Chainsaws in the morning

North Leucadia tree canopy destruction continues. Streetscape in limbo. Breakfast at A Little 'More impossible due to noise.
Carry on...

Thursday, October 04, 2012