FYI-The Tree Policy put together by the Environmental Commission is being presented to the Encinitas City Council on March 11th.
March 18th the Urban Forest Management Policy (prepared by the Environmental Commission) will be presented to Council for consideration.
*note-can someone confirm the details of this, why two different dates for basically the same topic?
Public invited to this? thanks for posting...
ReplyDeleteI want Fred's question answered.
ReplyDeleteWho gave the final order to cut down all the trees instead of trim the healthy trees?
Who made to the call to plant the bad specimen choice with the spacing and locations so poorly chosen?
Was is John "the chainsaw-woops!" Frenken? or was it Chris "I don't know whats going on" Hazeltine?
The City needs to trim its deadwood fast to save its healthy canopy.
Get read for some whining of a misrun City.
ReplyDeleteYou will be hearing that the City has no money for planting or maintaining trees.
You will hear that the City doesn't have enough employees to maintain the status quo.
You will hear all kinds of lies to cover up the truths.
The truths-
1. The City is in serious Debt due to the criminal action of the City Council approving huge pension increases for themselves and all City Employees over the past 5 years.
2.The only way to save our City from financial ruin is to reduce employee costs to something the City can afford while still having money to better our community. Simply put- Cut Employees and save money for community projects.
3. The City Council needs to address the ridiculous pension increases that the criminals adopted over the last 5 years. They need to be reversed. They were unfair to the public to begin and ushered in under stealth plans by the unions and union supporting and paid off politicians.
It would be great if these questions were addressed by council at their next City Council meeting. These are the BIGGEST ISSUES FACING OUR CITY.
This is Jim Bond's response.
ReplyDeleteDear Lorri,
My overall understanding of the episode is quite simply that Parks and Recreation had been maintaining/trimming these trees per written agreement since the park’s inception in 1993 and felt no need to call in the council, have a public review, etc. for something as straight forward as this was. For the second part of your question, P&R did forward the Planning Commission minutes and associated Resolution to the Media on February 2.
I hope this helps.
Warm Regards,
Jim
that sounds like bs mr. bond.
ReplyDeletethat sort of response works on the ignorant only.
P&R were clueless of a written agreement that is why they said it was an ORAL agreement.
Pensions are a function of salaries. Increase salaries and pensions will increase. In June 2002 the city adopted new salary classifications. The NCT headline was City giving workers $1 million pay raise.
ReplyDeleteThe NCT quote from Jim Bond "Either we had a hell of a lot of inflation, or the first study was totally bogus, or this one is," Bond said. "People shouldn't move that much."
Downward adjustments must also be made to the current city salaries.
Good point about Parks and Rec. being clueless. However, it turns out that there is a written agreement makd in 1990. It is the Planning Commission Resolution PC 90-46. It approves a major use permit. It is case # 90134MUP/EIA. I wonder why the media was not told about this? ANy ideas folks?
ReplyDeleteexcuse me Dr. Lorri,
ReplyDeleteWhat EXACTLY does that agreement say?
I am afraid it is too long to post. Go to the City's website and dowload it to read for yourself. It's all there. I gave you the dates and the Resolution # as well as the case number. Shouldn't be too hard.
ReplyDeleteI will say one thing about the document. Under Under Landscaping: #3 it says and I quote:
ReplyDelete"All required plantings and irrigtion facilities shall be in place --------The part that is implrtant is the following
" All landscaping shall be maintained in a manner that will not deprecate adjacent property values and otherwise adversely affect adjecent properties."
Remember folks, we do not have view orginances in the City and a decrease in Property Value is not an argument either. So, the City seems to want it both ways.
"
What was the cost to replace the tree at the roundabout at Santa Fe? Did the tree replacement really cost $13,353.75? The Parks and Rec is playing high flying finance if they paid that much to replace the roundabout tree. Your tax dollars at work for the parks and rec department.
ReplyDeleteBig raise, pension for county records czar
ReplyDeleteAppointee has never been elected to office
By Craig Gustafson (Contact) Union-Tribune Staff Writer
2:00 a.m. March 7, 2009
PROFILE
Dave Butler
Occupation: County assessor-recorder-clerk
Age: 58
Residence: Chula Vista
Family: Wife, Suellen; two adult children, Michelle and Matthew
Education: Bachelor's degree in social sciences, University of California Riverside
The San Diego County Board of Supervisors did more than give a 35-year employee a promotion when appointing Dave Butler as the county records czar.
The appointment on Tuesday also increased his annual salary by $30,000, to $190,570, and virtually guaranteed that he will have an annual retirement benefit topping $190,000 when he steps down.
All Butler has to do is finish the final two years left on predecessor Greg Smith's four-year term as assessor-recorder-clerk, a position elected countywide.
The pension benefit would induce envy in taxpayers who have suffered heavy losses in their 401(k)s, but the formula was approved by county supervisors in 2002, when no one anticipated an economic downturn of the magnitude seen over the past year.
Richard Rider of San Diego Tax Fighters said the county supervisors should have appointed an expert from outside the county payroll to avoid paying a massive benefit for someone who has not won an election. Or, Rider said, they could have asked Butler to voluntarily waive the increase until he wins an election.
Instead, Rider said, they essentially gave Butler a $30,000 yearly bonus for life, which he called “a wonderful perk to an insider.”
As the office's second-in-command, Butler had an annual salary of $159,973. He likely would have received a similar sum as his annual retirement benefit without the promotion.
Butler, 58, a Democrat from Chula Vista, was chosen from among four applicants. All but one was a county employee.
For his part, Butler said he understands how critics such as Rider and taxpayers feel about such benefits. He pointed out there have been several years during his steady rise through the ranks where no raises were given.
Like many other employees, Butler said he chose to work for the county for less money than he could have received in the private sector because he wanted the stability and benefits.
Butler said he has been fortunate to continue being promoted and now has the top job and the benefits that go with it.
“I don't apologize to anyone for that,” he said. “I've dedicated 35 years of my life to the county.”
Butler will oversee a staff of 460 employees and a $59 million budget. He said the county saves money by having one person in charge of the assessor, recorder and clerk duties. Several counties in the state have separate officials for each, typically with six-figure salaries, he said.
The argument could also be made that Butler is actually working for free, as some of his colleagues have pointed out. With his lengthy service, he will soon earn just as much whether he retires or goes on working.
“It's not about the money,” Butler told the board Tuesday. “It's about the situation and whether you think you can do good. If it was about the money, I could have retired before now. But I enjoy what I'm doing.”
http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/mar/07/1m7butler23159-big-raise-pension-county-records-cz/
Hey Dave-
ReplyDeleteYou took a job at the county, because you couldn't cut it in the private sector. Admit it.
Pig ticks. That what they are.
March 11th is Parks and Rec presenting a report to City Council on the details etc. of the Orpheus Park tree chopping.
ReplyDeleteMarch 18th is presentation to Council of the Environmental Commission's proposed urban tree policy.