Crossing Over to Cadmus-Pros and Cons

New Encinitas railroad crossing proposed

What we know for sure is that the status quo sucks. The proposed Cadmus crossing is an intriguing idea.

Closing the train track crossing may seem extreme at first glance but I think it's a good idea. The chaos of the Leucadia Blvd intersection is getting worse and worse by the week.

The only reason Cadmus is even worth discussing is that Cadmus does not connect to Neptune Ave. This prevents Cadmus from becoming a busy thoroughfare to Beacon's. It's odd because Cadmus is one of the few streets that doesn't connect to Neptune Ave. What luck that is.

I think the traffic signal at the Leucadia park/coast highway 101 should stay so that if you are leaving Beacon's you can make a left turn. And if you are going north on Hwy 101 and you want to Beacon's you can make a left turn with a green arrow. There needs to be a pedestrian crossing here as well. I guess you will have to cross the tracks illegally if you want to get to 7-11 and the dry cleaners. Maybe we can work safe legal pedestrian crossings over the train tracks into this plan.

Encinitas Blvd is a prime example of a major thoroughfare with a business district and an entrance into the coastal part of downtown and the beach. Right now traffic coming down Leucadia Blvd is expecting the same thing but instead finds that Leucadia Blvd is more of a sleepy neighborhood road. Unfortunately this sleepy road is being used by commuters coming off the freeway during rush hour. This causes all kinds of gridlock and madness with the combo of the dysfunctional intersection. Cars from I-5, cars from San Elijo Hills, pedestrians, cars coming in and out of 7-11, people trying to take their kids to the elementary school, surfers trying to get to Beacon's, and the train mucking up the whole process.

The ultimate solution would be to lower the tracks like in Solana Beach. Since the cost for such a project is out of reach we have to think out of the box and look for a cheaper solution. Luckily, La Costa Ave and Encinitas Blvd are not affected by the train. Those two locations are equipped to handle the thoroughfare that Leucadia Blvd is not (La Costa Ave needs some improvements as well. See Leucadia!: La Costa Ave Expansion?).

The concern about doing this diversion around Leucadia's dysfunctional intersection is the ripple effect to Encinitas Blvd and La Costa Ave. Drivers may soon learn to avoid Leucadia Blvd and use Encinitas Blvd or La Costa Ave instead. Can these two other intersections handle the impact?

We need to be intelligent about this and look at the traffic studies and see if the new traffic imposed on Encinitas Blvd and La Costa Ave will work. Also, there needs to be fair warning to commuters from the freeway all the way down Leucadia Blvd that there is no direct access to the coast highway. A nice sign before the Leucadia Blvd off ramp on I-5 warning that there is no direct access to the coast highway would help prevent some confusion. A series of signs the whole route would be ideal.

Cadmus needs to have a very large sign declaring that there is NO beach access in order avoid cars going down that street and then having to make u-turns. That would be horrible, even catastrophic for the people that live on Cadmus.

An intersection tells us certain things. A stop sign tells us this intersection is fairly busy. A traffic signal tells us that this is a very busy route. People naturally assume that there is beach access at the traffic signals. We must make the new intersection as idiot proof as possible so not to destroy the quality of life for the people on Cadmus.

One thing that will improve for the good people of Cadmus is that they can use the light to make a left turn onto the coast highway. Right now making a left turn off Cadmus is pretty hairy.

Closing the Leucadia Blvd train track crossing will solve the problem of accidents at a dysfunctional intersection, but in turn it may force that traffic onto La Costa Ave and Encinitas Blvd. I don't know if there is much we can do to improve Encinitas Blvd but La Costa Ave improvements must be made in conjunction with the Leucadia Blvd project.

I don't know if the traffic studies are ever available for public review but it sure would be nice to see the numbers. The numbers should dictate the design. The idea is good but does it work with the numbers?

One of the most appealing things about this proposal is the train quiet zone. Imagine, no more horns blaring away. You could actual have a conversation with your cup of coffee at the Pannikan.

Culturally people are going to be upset about the direct route to the coast highway and Beacon's being closed. But I think this intersection project will jump start other infrastructure improvements needed for business and life to flourish in Leucadia.

Today is National Buy Local Day

Today is National Buy Local Day. Be sure to get out and enjoy this nice weather and support some of our cool little local mom&pop business. I plan on stopping in Ducky Waddles and Lou's Records myself.

Why Buy Local?

• Local businesses produce more income, jobs, and tax receipts for local communities than big box stores do.
• Local businesses are more likely to utilize local ads, banks and other services.
• Local businesses donate more money to nonprofits and are more accountable to their local communities.
• Supporting local businesses preserves the economic diversity of our communities and the unique character of our neighborhoods.
• Supporting local businesses is good for the environment, because it cuts down on fuel consumption. Buying locally produced goods reduces the need to ship goods from thousands of miles away and also cuts down on the distances shoppers travel.

* And don’t forget to also buy Fair Trade, organic and green!

ON SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 18TH, LET’S BUY LOCAL!

www.buylocalday.org

Surfers, be sure to support your local shapers. Avoid outsourced "pop-outs" from Thailand and China. Thank you.

>>>a number of assumptions I find disturbing<<<

YOUR WATER BILL

by Herb Patterson

The City of Encinitas is planning to move the San Diegito Water District [SDWD] into the new Mossy Public Works Yard. Moreland and Associates prepared the study allocating costs to the various entities [only the SDWD is technically a separate agency – the rest are simply departments of the City]. In the study, Moreland made a number of assumptions I find disturbing.

The first assumption is that the SDWD owed a capital cost donation to this project. Why? The study does not indicate that the SDWD would then own some portion of the property. What equity does the SDWD receive for the expenditure? When the City bought the SDWD property for the new library, it purchased the land and received title for payment – why is that apparently not happening here?

Assuming you believe it is appropriate for the SDWD to donate towards the purchase price of the Mossy property, I would suggest a long look at the methodology used to determine the cost. Moreland estimated that building a similar facility for the SDWD at $300 a square foot and then used the number of SDWD employees [a rounded off 23] as a percentage of the total employees using the yard to arrive at a square foot per SDWD employee of about 364 square feet. That was then multiplied times the $300 figure to arrive at the capital cost. The only problem with this is that about half of the SDWD employees are field workers, not desk bound. A good portion of the SDWD land use would be for parking vehicles and equipment in garages, car ports or parking places. Should the SDWD pay $300 a square foot for a parking place? I don't think so.

Among the other items left off the Moreland report, there is no discussion of the previous locations used by the SDWD. Wouldn't it have been instructive to see a breakdown of the office space and the parking/garage areas? Wouldn't some comment from the SDWD on what their needs were be appropriate? Why is there no discussion of alternative locations and their availability?

I have no problem with the SDWD moving in to the new Public Works area if they pay rent, and pay for whatever alterations necessary for their operation, but having to “up front” the capital expense appears to be a way of transferring the cost to acquire the Mossy location from the City to the SDWD.

This is useful to the City because they can raise your water rates [without a vote] to pay for it. If the City is transferring costs from the City to the SDWD, it is illegal under Prop 218. I have my doubts that the proposed Capital Improvement “donation” from the SDWD meets the Prop 218 definition of Capital Expense and may well be illegal regardless of the intent of the City.

Why does the Moreland report have no alternative scenario for a straight rental of City property to the SDWD? Might that be cheaper for SDWD in the long run ? Nobody knows because the report ASSUMES that the SDWD will buy into the Mossy location.

Since alternatives to the Mossy location were not even looked at, the cost estimate for an SDWD building are imaginary and poorly applied, a review of past locations usage was not done, and the actual needs of the SDWD not even addressed in the Moreland report, I believe it is premature to expect the public to buy into a solution that has the appearance of transferring capital costs from the City to the SDWD. The City Council, sitting both as representatives of the City as a whole and as Directors of the SDWD, have a fiduciary responsibility to both the citizens of Encinitas and the customers of the SDWD. They do not appear to have done that duty in relation to the ratepayers of the SDWD.

Please attend the special Council meeting on 11-29 at 6:00PM in the Council chambers for a discussion of the SDWD water rates – want to guess which way they are going?

Even More Beacon's-post planning commission thoughts

I attended a portion of tonight's planning commission meeting about the proposed Beacon's beach trail access. I arrived at 6:15 and I left right around 8:00 pm when public comments were still taking place.

Here is my 2 minute take on the whole thing:

The conceptual plan presented by the city was fairly weak and seemed to be lacking a lot of detail. Maybe this was because they are proceeding slowly and carefully due to all the public interest.

The sea wall is a no-go. Everyone hates it, nearby bluff residents, environmentalists, surfers, beachcombers, etc. The mere fact that Surfrider Foundation will sue over the sea wall makes finding an alternative all the more attractive.

We have a grant for 2.8 million bucks for this thing but the presented plan comes out to 5 million. The city has no extra money for anymore capital projects. We just borrowed 20 million and it's all spent. Let's do a Beacon's beach access for 2.8 million. Let's work with what we are given.

My architect wifey made a rare appearance tonight and soaked in the presentation. We ducked out early and went out to dinner where she sketched out a really solid plan on her placemat. Her plan should only cost around 3 million. She is going to draw up a rough draft of her idea and submit it to the city. I will post the plan on this blog. It's a good idea and doesn't have a sea wall.

For those of you who didn't make the meeting you missed 3 oddball minutes by unsuccessful city council candidate Paul "Pablo" Martens where he ranted about hurricanes in the 1800's and paleontologist in the future. FYI, he talks in that voice all the time.

For those who stayed, how did the commission end up voting? This meeting was about the EIR only. What happened? What happens next?

And dammitt, I can't believe I missed My Name is Earl and The Office. I really need Tivo.

NCT.com story:
Beacon's Beach report criticized at meeting

Union Tribune

Beacon's Beach part 3

You can download the Beacon's Beach pdf plans from the city website: click me


If you download the big Graphics zip file you will find good pre-visualizations on files 2.2-10 through 2.2-14

Today's NCT story: Surfrider to challenge Beacon's Beach study




The public meeting is tonight at city hall 6:00 pm

Beacon's Beach Trail Photos with Captions

click all images to enlarge
Read the previous post about the proposed Beacon's trail here: Leucadia!: Beacon's Beach Trail Access


Here is cliff erosion meeting the beach sand. The experts will tell you that the majority of our beach sand comes from the cliffs and that is why we cannot build sea walls of any kind. As a 36 year old surfer who grew up in Leucadia I can firmly tell you that there is a clear difference between dirt and sand. Classic Leucadia beach sand is mostly black and is sticky. It comes from huge sand basins offshore that spring and summer south swells push onto the beach. During the winter when we have big north swells and storms we lose a lot of sand. It's the ebb and flow of the beach. I believe the Surfrider Foundation has a political agenda against beach property owners so they overhype the amount of "sand" we get from the cliffs.

The natural beauty of the bluff and vegetation meeting the beach is superior to any kind of wall. But what about safe public beach access? Is there a happy medium?

The trail and it's switchbacks are pretty cool. When I was a kid the switchbacks were concrete ramps that were slippery with sand and impossible to walk up in flip-flops. The current trail has some dicey sections that are sure to fall during the next good rain storm.

When Leucadia Blvd was extended to El Camino Real the city was thinking about the Ecke's new golf course and shopping center. Did they realize they were also linking the new shiny mega-sprawl known as San Elijo Hills to Beacon's (and the dysfunctional Leucadia/Vulcan/Hwy101 intersection). The Union Tribune reported that 170,000 people visited Beacon's last year. While I don't trust those beach people-counters that much (your surfboard appears to be getting counted as you walk by) it's obvious that since San Elijo Hills was built, Beacon's beach and it's soft breaking beginner friendly waves are more crowded than ever.


The new plan must address drainage.

The parking lot is always busy. It's a great place to pull up in the evening and watch the sunset. Unfortunately there is only one decent bench on the north end of the lot. I failed to take a photo of the north end but there is a lot of un-used space. There is a pay phone used by illegal aliens and drug dealers, a bike rack, one of those nice tiled art trash cans, a planter and not much else. This would be a good area for porti-potties.

Bonus photo, a Ron Stoner shot of Billy Hamilton surfing Beacon's in the mid 60's summertime.


Several items which I think are noteworthy; the bluffs are effected by the wind. When Beacon's had thick healthy kelp beds not only did the surf stay glassy and good all day but the cliffs were not taking a constant beating from the wind. Our kelp beds are still trying to recover from the horrid chopping they took from the last and possibly illegal midnight run by the Kelpco and their kelp cutter ship.

Also, when I was a kid many areas of the bluffs were always damp, wet and drippy. Wild tomatoes grew all over the cliffs. Now the bluffs are bone dry and therefore brittle. You know when you build a sandcastle how the sand needs to be damp so it will stay up? The bluffs are the same way. Now that Encinitas has turned into suburbia, rain water no longer soaks into the ground and slowly seeps it's way towards the ocean. Now it just quickly runs off down the streets, into the gutters and goes gushing out into the ocean. I don't think this is reversable.

The majority of our sand migration down the coast is blocked by the Oceanside jetties. I don't see how our local cliff erosion is supposed to make up this massive quanities of sand that no longer reaches us.

Beacon's Beach Trail Access

click all images to enlarge


I'm well overdue blogging about the proposed Beacon's Beach trail refurbishment.

I've been meaning to stop by the city and check out the plans in person before I started whining about it on the internet but I lag.

This Thursday, 6 pm at city hall there is going to be a public meeting about the new Beacon's trail. If you frequent this part of Leucadia you know that sections of the dirt trail down to Beacon's beach are constantly collapsing. The other popular beaches in Encinitas; Swami's, D-St and Grandview all have nice staircases while Beacon's has a rapidly eroding dirt trail.

Here is the pdf link about the meeting from the city website, click me

Here is the Union Tribune story that ran about the Beacon's trail the other week: click me

You'll find in that article that the Surfrider Foundation is against any sort of sea wall at the base of the trail and will sue the city to block it.

I personally view the wall as less of a sea wall that will disrupt sand migration and more of a basic retaining wall that will keep the trail from sliding down the cliff ( I must again note that I haven't yet seen the actual plans).

The Surfrider Foundation has a no tolerance policy towards sea walls. I think sea walls should be considered on a case by case basis.

The city has proposed building a 450-foot-long sea wall – the length of the beach – to keep the bluff from crumbling, said John Frenken, the city's park and beach superintendent.

The sea wall would be 17 feet high, but most of it would be below sand level, leaving about 6 feet visible. Steel anchors would be connected to bedrock to stabilize the upper bluff face. The $5 million project includes building new stairways, a lifeguard tower and showers.

Missing from this plan are some sort of public restrooms. Porti-potties would be fine even.



A friend of mine who grew up in Leucadia posted about the Beacon's trail on a surfing message board and a representive of Surfrider posted this reply:



First, I am responding to this without the consent of the current Executive Committee of the San Diego Chapter of Surfrider Foundation. But I have been part of the leadership for some time. For the record, all of the following comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of other Surfrider members, the San Diego Chapter, or National. I'm simply trying to give some of the principles on which Surfrider has based their actions.

The San Diego Chapter of Surfrider Foundation has been very active in fighting seawalls for a over 10 years. The reason we're opposed to them is because they impede the natural migration of the coast eastward, as historically has occurred for millions of years. Why does this matter to surfers? Impeding the natural sediment flow takes away the public's beach to preserve structures that have been built on an eroding bluff. You don't build in a floodplain because your house would get washed away; similarly, you don't build a house on an eroding bluff because it will fall in the ocean. The public's use of the beach serves more people than a few homeowners. It's unfortunate for the homeowners, but the public deserves to keep its public resources.

On the Beacon's issue, we were asked to review redesign plans several years ago because there is an active slide in the area. The SD Chapter was not comfortable endorsing the plan because it called for permanent or semi-permanent structures on the bluff; endorsing that would have contradicted our then-active lawsuits in Solana Beach.

This is an extremely complicated issue with many angles/facets. The bottom line is that Surfrider Foundation is opposed to armoring the coastline. The coastline is a dynamic - not static - environment. Our infrastructure, urban planning, and future development should reflect that.

I'm sure many of you want to send me email and get more specifics. Unfortunately, I have a full-time job like (most) of the rest of you and a wife (read - I don't have time to answer everyone's questions one-on-one). I'm trying to give you the gist of Surfrider's stance, but our attorneys at Coast Law Group can elaborate in far greater detail than myself. I have volunteered with the Chapter for nine years while working full-time as an environmental consultant and wildlife biologist. I've been to many public hearings (taking time off from work or in the evenings) while serving as Chairman of the Chapter. Our attorneys also work pro-bono on Surfrider issues and volunteer much of their free time while trying to raise families and make ends meet amidst SoCal's high cost of living. I encourage all of you to contact our full-time employee, Bill Hickman (bill@surfridersd.org) or better yet, come to a Chapter meeting and get involved. Educate yourselves. We need more people to get involved and understand the full effects of coastal armoring.

See you in the water,

Brian Woodward
Advisory Committee
San Diego Chapter
Surfrider Foundation

I hope Surfrider presents an alternative idea instead of just shutting down this proposal.

Here is a photo I took of Beacon's during our last 7 ft+ high tide. As you can see even with this extreme tide the surfline does not reach the cliffs.



Granted the waves are not very big this day. A high tide during a gnarly winter storm may reach the base of the trail and the sea wall. I guess the fear is that the beach sand will be stripped away from the wall during such a storm.

So my question is, could we design a sea wall that is jagged shape, something that sand can cling too? Could we design a sea wall with nook and crannies that plants could take root in and birds could nest in? A smarter better sea wall? Any engineers out there?

It seems to me that a lot of people on both sides of the coin have never even spent any quality time at Beacon's are going to be making some big decisions on it's future.



Can we preserve the natural beauty of the bluff and still have safe passage to the beach?


North Beacon's has an old sea wall that juts out into the surf during high tides. Sand seems to be doing a good job of staying around here. In fact there is too much sand on the reef for the waves to be as good as they can get there.

Encinitas Citizens for Residential Stability

I love the name Encinitas Citizens for Residential Stability so much that I'm starting another post about the short term rental drama.

Coastal panel to weigh Encinitas vacation rentals

It's a shame the Encinitas Citizens for Residential Stability can't just ban short term rentals behind the iron gates of the fading pink stucco 80's ghetto condo complex that is Sea Bluff.

From the NCT:

For more than two years, city officials have wrangled with regulating vacation rentals.

In February, the city was scheduled to bring its ordinance banning new short-term rentals to the commission for approval, but pulled back because of a negative recommendation from the panel's staff.

If permitted by commissioners, Murphy said he would negotiate an "over-concentration clause" akin to an existing city ordinance that prohibits bed and breakfast establishments from operating within 200 feet of one another.

The city has argued that plenty of short-term lodging exists at the city's hotels and motels, where year-round vacancy rates range from 34 percent to 53 percent.

"You can't put a family in one room," said Chris Carrico, who manages vacation rentals at the 255-unit Sea Bluff complex in Leucadia. "Vacation rentals let families enjoy time together for a week at the beach. Hotels don't supply that."

Some 75 of the condos at Sea Bluff are rented to short-term tenants, she said, adding that the clause proposed by Murphy would effectively prohibit new landlords from renting short-term.

That's what members of Encinitas Citizens for Residential Stability have argued for.



I used The Google to find some Encinitas beach house rentals. This first link is to a Sea Bluff rental:

http://www.choice1.com/sea_bluff_1822_parliament.htm

"Sea Bluff is a one of a kind gated community. Located in Leucadia in the city of Encinitas, this 50 acres of ocean front property has 255 townhomes, beautiful landscaped grounds with over 900 trees, large green belts, and security guards 7 days a week."

It must be frustrating to be a full time Sea Bluff resident. The reason paranoid people move into gated communities is to seal themselves off from the rest of the world. Imagine the horror of having the rest of the world come to you.

http://www.vrbo.com/96415

http://www.beachhouse.com/8029.htm

http://www.vamoose.com/search?region=5&vID=248&query=

Previous post on this issue: Leucadia!: Limitation, not ban, urged for Encinitas. Mayor Guerin's blood boils

Election Night with Colbert

Are the cult of personalities hurting Encinitas?

Encinitas is a beautiful place. It's unique beauty attracts a lot of respectful quality people. It also attracts a lot of strange people who want to exploit Encinitas for personal gain.

I've been doing my best to create a scorecard of who is who in the this town. The heavy hitters and the players.

I have decided on something.

I believe this town has been held back by our local government due to the strange cult of personalities. Infighting and personal vendettas have suppressed the progression of our infrastructure. The politics of this town is basically that of ASB high school blown up on a larger stage.

Too bad it's our tax dollars that are going along for the ride.

When I hear that the train tracks were not lowered because this person got in a fight with that person, that the flooding is jacked because this guy didn't communicate with that guy, that one person knew about federal funding that the town could have accessed but didn't tell anyone about it out of spite; it's enough to make you throw up.

It seems like we discuss personality traits just as much as we discuss issues.

Hopefully we can begin to start getting shit done is this town instead of playing out this bizarre soap opera.

Let's end the personal drama. Your city council is nothing more than glorified pothole fillers and they can barely do that. There is no true leadership or any kind. There is no clear vision of the future.

We need to end the drama and invest our energies into the infrastructure. Let the residents live their lives. The council members and surrounding court need to back away from themselves.

Someone posted a comment that Encinitas had been "Guerinized". That made me laugh at first but you know what? That sucks.

What is an example of Guerinization? Well, one of the new ordinances that was put on the owner of the new D-St Bar&Grill (located in the historic La Paloma building) is that there is no dancing allowed. Think about that for awhile. A small town ordinance designed to legislate your behavior.

A very powerful and influential out of towner is the loathsome Michael D Pattinson, a carpet bagger developer who would raze the entire town if left to his own devices.

When you speak in front of the city council are you there because you truly love Encinitas or are you there out of some need to feed your ego?

If you are on the council are you there because you love Encinitas or because you seek higher office down the road?

If you are just a normal salt of the earth kind of person going about your business, trying to make a living, doing all the right things like paying taxes and working hard and trying your best to enjoy life in Encinitas; your daily routine is affected by morally corrupt adults who are still stuck in a high school mentality.

That's weak.

Keep Your Eyes Peeled

Limitation, not ban, urged for Encinitas. Mayor Guerin's blood boils

Encinitas short term rentals; uncouth party pads or nice family vacation destinations?


Union Tribune story by Angela Lau today on the short term rental ban drama, click here

Excerpts from the article:

*The city's attempt to ban new vacation rentals leased for 30 days or fewer has been dealt another blow by the California Coastal Commission.

The commission's planners have once again rejected a citywide ban on short-term rentals and have recommended, instead, a partial prohibition covering just residential areas east of Coast Highway 10l.

*City officials had estimated Encinitas has about 110 vacation rentals and are now taking an inventory of how many are west of Highway 101.

*Yesterday, news of the rejection outraged ban supporters but instilled some hope among vacation rental landlords whose properties are west of Highway 101.

Harry Fund, a member of Encinitas Citizens for Residential Stability, which supports a citywide ban, said of the rejection: “That's ridiculous. You can't do that to a city. It absolutely goes against what the city believes. It's absurd.

*“There are not enough vacation rentals. A ban will decrease access to the coast,” Carrico said. “A lot of the complaints have not been validated. We had a very quiet summer.”

Murphy said he had expected obstacles in pushing through the proposed plan because Coastal Commission planners had rejected a similar proposal in February.

At the time, the city withdrew its application to avoid a definitive commission vote that would seal the fate of the proposed ban.

This time, however, the city will not back off. A gung-ho City Council decided in August to make its case before the commission, with Mayor Christy Guerin then saying the city will bus ban supporters to the commission meeting if necessary.


And in the North County Times a story about the new senior citizen complex Mayor Christy Guerin has this quip about the Coastal Commission: "The issue about the Coastal Commission really makes my blood boil." link

Okay first, the fact that a group of people named themselves Encinitas Citizens for Residential Stability is hilarious. What are we, San Elijo Hills now?
Boys, what we gotta do is form a committee. No wait, a task force. Yeah, that's the ticket.

I always love a good compromise, especially when it leaves both concerned parties unhappy. I like this, new rentals should be at least 200 feet apart, similar to existing restrictions on bed-and-breakfast inns.


For those of you out there that believe the Coastal Commission does a good job of protecting our coast you need to be deeply concerned about the venomous hatred Christy Guerin has for them because she is going to work for your new congressman Brian Bilbray.

Pablo picks up a few more votes!!!

Here is your updated vote count:

CITY OF ENCINITAS CITY COUNCIL
DAN DALAGER 9509 32.26%
TERESA A. BARTH 7214 24.47%
DOUG LONG 6298 21.36%
THOMAS L. BROWN 5131 17.41%
PAUL 'PABLO' MARTENS 1327 4.50%

They are still counting absentee votes.

source

*I'm really not all that interested in this. I just want to put in some distance from my baby seal clubbing post.

Dalager celebrates election victory by clubbing baby seals

Re-elected Encinitas city council incumbent Dan Dalager celebrated his sweeping victory at the polls last Tuesday by clubbing baby seals.

Dalager encouraged residents to drop by his small business centrally located on Second Street to talk about city issues in person; and to feel his soft new seal pelt sash that he is making.

"Encinitas is the greatest place on Earth." said Dalager in between kill strokes. "The library is on time and on budget and the flooding problem in Leucadia is fixed. Now if you will excuse me, this little guy is trying to wiggle away."