i love your blog, but this non- anonymous isn't working. i liked it better when people were free to speak- without fear of scrutiny. The blog sort of lost its cache. Please bring back the way it was..Also i saw your blog on the school district bond. What about the Pacific View planning commission Aug. 5 at 6;00 p.m.? You o.k. with the houses being put there?
Read the PC Agenda here.
I agree. the blog in its current format still provides anon comments and it just makes posting more time consuming. Why would you make free speech more difficult? Are you trying to diminish the comments on the blog?
ReplyDeleteI thought the blog was more interesting before the big brother sign in requirement was implemented.
Release me from these chains and let freedom ring.
yeah. I agree with anon
ReplyDeleteso do I
ReplyDeleteanon is good. Big Brother is bad
ReplyDeleteFor the better part of a decade, the Encinitas Union School District has tried to up zone the land usage designation of the downtown Encinitas located Pacific View Elementary School in downtown Encinitas.
ReplyDeleteEUSD is now arguing before the Encinitas Planning Commission Thursday evening, August 5th that having finally fulfilled the requirements of The Naylor Act; that says that school districts wishing to sell large parcels of property must A) Designate it officially ‘Surplus’ and B) Offer it at .25 cents on the dollar to the local municipality, in this instance, the City of Encinitas; that the California Education Code requires the City to up zone the school grounds to R-15, or 15 new residences per acre downtown, without recognizing the zoning requirements of the Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan, or the City’s General Plan.
The disheartening part of this legal ploy is that because of fatigue surrounding this City/School District confrontation; the City just might advise the Planning Commissioners that a down-zoning document can be interpreted into an up-zoning document.
Because, now, the school district is claiming that California Education Code 65852.9. (a) enacted by the Legislature to stop Cities or Counties from down-zoning parcels to Open-Space thus devaluing them financially, now must be narrowly interpreted by the City into requiring the City to up-zone the Pacific View Public/Semi Public land-use designation of the school site to Residential R-15, a substantial increase in dollar value, meaning more money to the district; but at what cost to the City, and downtown?
There is language in the Ed. Code that states, “It is therefore the intent of the Legislature to ensure that unused school sites not leased or purchased for park or recreational purposes pursuant to Article 5 (commencing with Section 39390) of Chapter 3 of Part 20 of the Education Code can be developed to the same extent as is permitted on ‘adjacent’ property.”
“Adjacent”s definition, taken out of context, is being interpreted as meaning contiguous; meaning if there is a residence contiguous to the school site then the City must up zone it to R-15. This is EUSD’s position on August 5th. The City Attorney’s interpretation of the down-zoning act might trump all five planning commissioner opinions.
But there is hope; later this same Ed Code says, ”...the city or county having zoning jurisdiction over the property shall, upon request of the school district, zone the school site as defined in Section 39392 of the Education Code, consistent with the provisions of the applicable general and specific plans and compatible with the uses of property surrounding the school site. “
Also is states states, “The school site shall be given the same land use control treatment as if it were privately owned.” Imagine if a private individual made this up-zoning argument before the Planning Commission? Think the City Council Chamber wouldn’t be jam-packed?
And finally, the Public/Semi Public Pacific View parcel also sits adjacent to a planned P/SP corridor along E Street, with the Library, City Hall and the Transportation Center on the east side of E Street and the P/SP school grounds on the West side; this is by design and plan, not accidental.
EUSD should not be allowed to up-zone the Pacific View Elementary parcel exclusive of the downtown Encinitas Specific Plan nor the Encinitas General Plan. A complete reading of the Ed Code cited should make that clear to everyone.
For the better part of a decade, the Encinitas Union School District has tried to up zone the land usage designation of the downtown Encinitas located Pacific View Elementary School in downtown Encinitas.
ReplyDeleteEUSD is now arguing before the Encinitas Planning Commission Thursday evening, August 5th that having finally fulfilled the requirements of The Naylor Act; that says that school districts wishing to sell large parcels of property must A) Designate it officially ‘Surplus’ and B) Offer it at .25 cents on the dollar to the local municipality, in this instance, the City of Encinitas; that the California Education Code requires the City to up zone the school grounds to R-15, or 15 new residences per acre downtown, without recognizing the zoning requirements of the Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan, or the City’s General Plan.
The disheartening part of this legal ploy is that because of fatigue surrounding this City/School District confrontation; the City just might advise the Planning Commissioners that a down-zoning document can be interpreted into an up-zoning document.
Because, now, the school district is claiming that California Education Code 65852.9. (a) enacted by the Legislature to stop Cities or Counties from down-zoning parcels to Open-Space thus devaluing them financially, now must be narrowly interpreted by the City into requiring the City to up-zone the Pacific View Public/Semi Public land-use designation of the school site to Residential R-15, a substantial increase in dollar value, meaning more money to the district; but at what cost to the City, and downtown?
There is language in the Ed. Code that states, “It is therefore the intent of the Legislature to ensure that unused school sites not leased or purchased for park or recreational purposes pursuant to Article 5 (commencing with Section 39390) of Chapter 3 of Part 20 of the Education Code can be developed to the same extent as is permitted on ‘adjacent’ property.”
“Adjacent”s definition, taken out of context, is being interpreted as meaning contiguous; meaning if there is a residence contiguous to the school site then the City must up zone it to R-15. This is EUSD’s position on August 5th. The City Attorney’s interpretation of the down-zoning act might trump all five planning commissioner opinions.
But there is hope; later this same Ed Code says, ”...the city or county having zoning jurisdiction over the property shall, upon request of the school district, zone the school site as defined in Section 39392 of the Education Code, consistent with the provisions of the applicable general and specific plans and compatible with the uses of property surrounding the school site. “
Also is states states, “The school site shall be given the same land use control treatment as if it were privately owned.” Imagine if a private individual made this up-zoning argument before the Planning Commission? Think the City Council Chamber wouldn’t be jam-packed?
EUSD should not be allowed to up-zone the Pacific View Elementary parcel exclusive of the downtown Encinitas Specific Plan nor the Encinitas General Plan.
You got to slander people anonymously on this blog for 5 years, wasn't that enough?
ReplyDeleteWe can still slander people at free will. Nothing has changed but extra key strokes. Its a blog. All the comments are all anonymous. Please don't waste life.
ReplyDeleteSo now anon comments are considered slander?
ReplyDeletei like that it is not anon anymore, there are a few people who have nothing to do but post stupid insulting comments, at least having a google account makes it more work for them to post serial stupidity....and it has worked, the stupidity for the most part has found some other outlet
ReplyDelete