ENCINITAS' ENERGY FUTURE: HOW WOULD THE POWERLINK FIT IN?
Monday, March 31st Forum Starts at 6:30 and Ends at 7:30
At the New City Library Join the ETA and representatives from both SDG&E (a Sempra Energy Utility[1]) and the Utility Consumers Action Network (UCAN[2]) to talk about the Sunrise Powerlink[3]. The forum will help residents understand some of the debate leading to decisions that will be made by the California Public Utility Commission(CPUC[4]) regarding our future energy infrastructure.
Please come to ask questions about the costs to ratepayers and benefits for utility users of the Sunrise Powerlink.
This is the first in a series of Encinitas Taxpayer Association community forums. Through these forums the Encinitas Taxpayer Association hopes to help develop community dialogue on issues that are both complex and important to Encinitas taxpayers and ratepayers.
Library Address:
540 Cornish Drive
Encinitas, CA 92024
For more information and updates go to:
www.encinitastaxpayers.org [5]
Or contact the ETA at:
info@encinitastaxpayers.org
760.840.9529
Links:
------
[1] www.sempra.com
[2] www.ucan.org
[3] www.sdge.com/sunrisepowerlink
[4] www.cpuc.ca.gov/puc/
[5] www.encinitastaxpayers.org
Let’s have a county wide tax initiative to fund the purchase of coast property to return the coastline to its natural state. It would be less than $5 per person per year. A mere fraction of what each one of you is paying to have our kids die in Iraq to try and lower oil prices.
ReplyDeleteI'd vote a big yes.
I fully agree.
ReplyDeleteI think the Encinitas Taxpayers Association should lead the effort.
Upfront Honest information about the benefits received for the costs.
What a great project. What a great coastline we will have.
Thanks Encinitas Taxpayer Association!
The State of California refers to this as the Planned Retreat option.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate the ETA promoting a fair ballot initiative for the Planned Retreat Option.
ReplyDeleteIt will be great. A program clear represented with benefits to the public and costs.
I will vote yes for it.
Another good ballot measure would be the Hall Regional Sports Complex vs. a scaled back City Park. I am voting for the scaled back city park.
To offset the costs, I will be voting no on the Regional Sports Complex. No need for us to build sports field for the Carlsbad crowds to hoard.
A linear coastline park and a City Scaled back park would be a huge win for Encinitas and mother earth. Plus my wallet would win.
Let’s make it happen. Thanks ETA!
http://coastalmanagement.noaa.gov/initiatives/shoreline_ppr_retreat.html
ReplyDeleteThe complete link. You will need to cut and paste. What a great program.
ReplyDeletehttp://coastalmanagement.noaa.gov/initiatives/
shoreline_ppr_retreat.html
I am voting yes!
I think this post is about energy independance?
ReplyDeleteIf so, it would help if homeowners could sell excess energy back to the Utiliy company.
There is an article about that in today's NC Times.
I love people who have nothing to lose advocating for others to lose what they have!!!
ReplyDeletewhat are you talking about? All property would be purchased.
ReplyDeleteNo-one looses anything. Everyone wins including mother earth.
I think its a great idea
Are "we" going to buy just the west side of Neptune? What happens when Neptune Avenue falls into the ocean? Do we buy the houses on the east side too?
ReplyDeleteSteve Aceti's Quality of Life tax will put artificial AND EXPENSIVE beach nourishment sand on the beach.
ReplyDeleteRemember when Leucadia Redevelopment was proposed and rejected? One of the reasons it was rejected was fear of eminent domain being used to push out long time residents.
ReplyDeleteWhy would forcing bluff top homeowners out of their homes be any different than that?
to wear the advocate hat-
ReplyDeleteanon 3:41- Yes. and Yes over the next 2000 years.
anon 5:10 - Yes. and no one would be forced out of their home. They could sell if they choose. The could keep their property as well with no seawalls.
the program sounds like a winner for everyone. Especially mother earth and all of gods creatures that depend on natural beaches.
Lets do it!
How did it go? Sorry I couldn't attend. I was disappointed Council voted that the sand "replenishment" was to receive a negative environmental impact declaraton. I think that was at the 3/19/08 Council Meeting. Of course excess sand does affect the tidepools, and the kelp, as well as the quality of the surf, by reducing it!
ReplyDeleteIt passed, unanimously. No one came forward and warned we have plenty of sand. I don't get that we are going to tax more for more sand, treating individuals renting out a room, or a house, for short term rentals, on a seasonal basis, say, and residing in part of the home, just the same as a hotel.
Please, we can vote no on that new tax. It will be on the ballot in June.