August
2008 | Editorial
This
week the City
of Del Mar is
distributing a
ballot package
by mail to all
Del Mar property
owners and water
customers. On
this ballot are
two important
questions. The
first question
asks for a yes
or no vote to
ratify the City's
clean-water charge
that appeared
on all water bills
beginning in 2004.
The second question
asks for a yes
or no vote to
increase the amount
of the clean water
charge, beginning
July, 2009. We
urge you to vote
YES on both questions
and to return
the completed
ballots by the
September 15 deadline.
Every vote will
count in this
election.
A
vote YES on both
ballot questions
is a vote for
clean water and
a balanced City
budget.
Why
is this mailed
ballot election
necessary? Simply,
the first ballot
question arises
because of uncertainty
over procedural
requirements for
new or increased
fees and charges
under Proposition
218 approved by
California voters
in 1996. The City
of Del Mar followed
the widely held
interpretation
of these procedures
in 2003 with its
first clean-water
charge. But a
2006 decision
by the California
Supreme Court
overruled that
interpretation,
thus necessitating
this mailed ballot
election to ratify
the City's earlier
action.
The
second ballot
question arises
because of increasing
requirements imposed
by the State,
acting under the
federal Clean
Water Act, on
ALL local governments.
Under these new
requirements,
local governments
must take further
steps to reduce
pollution into
our streams, lagoons
and beaches from
storm drain runoff.
The
City has no choice
but to comply
with the State's
unfunded mandate.
But doing so will
substantially
increase the program
costs – by
an estimated $100,000
annually – not
including indirect
overhead costs.
Voting no on this
question will
not mean Del Mar
can avoid these
additional costs – the
money will have
to come from other
thinly stretched
programs and services.
We believe the
proposed 2009
increase in the
clean-water charge
is both reasonable
and necessary.
(The
federal Clean
Water Act, first
approved by Congress
in 1972, has succeeded
in cleaning up
our lakes, rivers
and streams. Initially,
the program required
point source polluters – factories,
businesses and
sewer plants – to
stop discharging
polluting materials
into the nation's
waterways and
to start using “best
practices” to
prevent further
pollution. Additionally
municipal storm
drain systems
carry storm water
and irrigation
runoff containing
major pollutants
from our streets
and homes to our
beaches and lagoons.
In 1987, Congress
mandated local
governments to
begin reducing
storm drain pollution
- but did not
provide financial
assistance.)
The
federal and State
governments contend
it is local government's
responsibility
to clean up its
own (municipal
storm drain) act.
We believe Del
Mar's clean-water
charge is a fair
price to pay for
reducing pollution
runoff from our
streets and homes.
August
2008 | by Art Olson
A
hastily assembled
special meeting
of the Gas Station
Site Steering
Committee on July
24, following
City Council's
deliberations
on the Garden
Del Mar Project's
Specific Plan,
though heated
at times, has
hopefully brought
a more reasoned
perspective to
the efforts to
move the Plan
to a November
vote. The meeting
was precipitated
by the e-mail
withdrawal of
the project by
Bryn Stroyke,
the developer,
who cast blame
on remarks regarding
the Exceptional
Public Benefits
(EPBs) made by
individual members
of the Steering
Committee at the
Council Meeting
on 21 July.
The
purpose of the
special meeting,
according to Council
sub-committee,
Dave Druker and
Richard Ernest,
was to explain
the differences
between the EPBs
they brought before
the Council, and
those recommended
by the Steering
Committee. It
was those differences
that prompted
Deborah Groban,
Brooke Eisenberg-Pike,
and me to make
our remarks at
the council meeting.
Discussion
between the Council
members and the
Committee at the
special meeting
centered on the
EPBs and ideas
that could bring
the Committee
and Council closer
to agreement on
what might be
appropriately
proposed to the
developers.
With
over 30 members
of the community
present there
was no absence
of public input,
and, in my view,
several misconceptions
propagated through
the discussion.
All of the public
comments at the
meeting expressed
strong support
for the project,
but most argued
for formal endorsement
from the Committee.
Several implied
that our comments
at Monday's Council
meeting were intended
to derail the
project and that
we would be to
blame if the project
does not go forward.
In
fact, the Steering
Committee was
tasked to facilitate
community input
to the Specific
Plan process as
dictated by Measure
B. We were not
formed as a deliberative
body, and were
assured that indeed
it was not our
role as a Committee
to endorse the
final plan. In
the 60 or so meetings
that we conducted,
it is on record
that all of our
discussions leading
to our recommendations
were motivated
to create a Specific
Plan that appeals
to the largest
cross-section
of Del Mar voters.
We operated knowing
that it is the
City Council's
role to negotiate
and decide the
final form of
the Specific Plan,
including the
EPBs. Also on
record is the
Committee's statement
of our rights
to express or
withhold our individual
opinions.
By
meeting's end,
the Committee
and Council liaisons
agreed on revised
EPBs that they
felt would help
put the Garden
back on the path
to a November
vote:
1)
The same $25/month
condo fee designated
for affordable
housing program but
instead of fee's
in perpetuity,
fees for 30 years.
Designated use
of fees reviewed
at year 20.
2)
A percentage of
total revenue
generated from
the sales and
other income from
the property to
the developers
with both the
percentage and
a floor and ceiling
amount negotiated
between the City
Council Subcommittee
and the developers.
The funds from
this EPB would
be designated
for park improvements.
(Click here for New
Curves in the
Garden Path.
)
July
2008 | A Guest Editorial by John
Kerridge
“What
is the Water Authority's
estimate on the
limits to growth
in our region?”
Councilmember
Henry Abarbanel
asked this question
at a recent city
council meeting.
He got no reply,
but his inquiry
cut to the heart
of a fundamental
regional issue,
and it behooves
us to ponder it
further.
First,
we need to recognize
that, with a few
honorable exceptions,
our neighboring
communities have
conspicuously
failed even to
entertain the
idea that growth
might, in fact,
have limits outside
of their control.
For many years,
most communities
in the region
have routinely
approved large-scale
development projects
without questioning
whether the infrastructure
is adequate to
support them.
“Infrastructure” here
means primarily
the availability
of water and power,
but also provision
of appropriate
facilities for
transportation,
education, and
sewage treatment.
In principle,
the latter issues
are resolvable
by taxpayers and
their elected
representatives
having the guts
to make budgetary
decisions that
are unpopular
in the short term
but that will
reap long-term
regional benefits.
But satisfying
our needs for
water and power
will require a
whole different
kind of community
commitment, and
a whole different
degree of tax-payer
angst.
For
both water and
power, the financial
and societal costs
of adequately
increasing supply
are enormous,
verging on prohibitive.
Water supply to
our area is controlled
by climatic and
geographical factors
that do not favor
us. It would be
insane to assume
that sometime
soon they will
change for the
better. The limits
on power supply
are more subtle,
dominated by its
side effects,
ranging from undesirable
to lethal, but
all of them expensive.
These
limits, natural,
technical and
political, are
sufficiently complex
and uncertain
that only a fool
would assume that
by ignoring them
they would disappear.
Unfortunately,
foolish decisions
are not uncommon,
and most of them
have the effect
of increasing
demand without
guaranteeing supply.
This is a sure-fire
formula for disaster.
We
will only avoid
that disaster
if communities
throughout the
region get together
at a grass-roots
level to apply
unremitting pressure
on elected bodies
that otherwise
are only too happy
to dismiss the
concerns of neighboring
jurisdictions.
But they must
be made to face
the fact that
a development
approval in one
jurisdiction can
negatively impact
its neighbors'
infrastructure
as well as its
own.
We
live in an era
of limits. Ignoring
them will not
make them go away,
but may well result
in our departure
from the scene.
John
Kerridge is
Editor Emeritus
of the Sandpiper.
June
2008
|
by
Sam
Borgese
back
to
top
Is
the Del Mar
community really
coalesced around
a unified vision?
Do we share
a vivid description
of a desired
outcome of our
efforts in creating
and governing
our City? Are
all of our efforts
being expended
towards the
same mental
picture of how
we see our community's
role in our
village, and
in the world?
Certainly
I can testify
that many of us,
as residents,
become emotionally
charged when we
believe our individual
visions of Del
Mar are threatened.
There is no shortage
of stories and
differences of
opinion on many
public-governance
issues. However,
are we emotionally
charged with the
substance of a
vision or the
details of its
objectives?
In
fact, I do believe,
Del Mar has a
vision -- a vision
that was crafted
with words and
action by its
founders. However,
I also believe
this vision has
blurred and lost
its clarity in
the years since
incorporation
and creation of
the Community
Plan.
Certainly
the original vision
has been confronted
by rapid growth
in the surrounding
area. Where once
Del Mar stood
as a small village
surrounded by
ocean to the west,
a small town to
the north and
vast open space
to the east and
south, it now
appears that only
Torrey Pines State
Reserve protects
Del Mar from becoming
just one in a
continuous series
of communities
from the Mexican
border to Camp
Pendleton and
from the ocean
to Scripps Ranch.
Perhaps
it is time to
reconnect with
our beginning,
to renew our vision
and to bring that
vision to reality.
Perhaps we should
dare to build
upon our founders'
vision with a
renewed vision
of something even
better -- a vision
that will inspire,
and stimulate
our creativity
about how we participate
together as a
community, as
a regional neighbor
and in the world
in general.
If
we set aside our
fears as did the
founders of Del
Mar nearly 50
years ago, then
perhaps we can
honor them and
ourselves by coalescing
around a renewed
vision -- one
that stands as
an example to
ourselves and
other communities
of the extraordinary
results that evolve
from a clarity
of vision, firmly
set objectives
and continuity
of action.
Let's
explore this possibility
together over
a series of articles
as we trace our
founding vision
to the challenges
that vision faces
today.
June
2008 | a
guest
editorial
by Richard
Earnest
back
to top
It
is that time of
year again for
the city as we
take up the task
of examining budget
proposals and
deciding how Del
Mar will deliver
services and capital
improvements to
the residents
over the next
two years.
We
will be doing
this in a very
different environment
than the last
several. The economic
environment is
much more tenuous.
The state budget
has a massive
potential deficit
and the appetite
to tap local governments
to alleviate their
problems. The
projects and ideas
related to improving
the quality of
life in Del Mar
are impressive,
costly and growing.
In addition, unfunded
mandates from
Sacramento such
as the Clean Water
requirements are
growing and place
additional demand
on general fund
capacity. It is
within this set
of conditions
that your city
council and staff
must prioritize
as never before.
With your input,
I am certain that
we will successfully
grapple with these
challenges but
hard choices will
have to be made.
Thanks to a lively,
engaged and intelligent
community, we
all have our favorite
project or cause.
Not everyone will
get their way.
Projects will
move up and down
the priority chain
depending on what
is best for the
community as a
whole. Some things
will have to be
delayed. Some
may be cancelled
outright in favor
of more critical
needs. I am sure
that not everyone
will be happy
with the outcome.
New
sources of revenue
are going to be
explored as well
as additional
ways to get more
out of each dollar
we collect. We
are open to any
suggestion or
idea as to how
to do things better.
However, we can't
have it all. At
least we can't
have it all right
now. Del Mar is
in better shape
fiscally than
many of our sister
cities in the
region. On the
other hand we
have some unique
fiscal demands
on our resources,
such as our beaches,
that don't exist
elsewhere.
I
think that this
council is committed
to protecting
the quality of
life in Del Mar
for the long term,
in spite of the
challenges we
face. This will
require different
thinking and new
ways of problem
solving than we
are familiar with.
It won't be comfortable
for some but change
is seldom comfortable.
We have a choice:
We can manage
the changes going
on around us and
how they affect
our quality of
life or we can
be managed by
them. Ignoring
them is not an
option.
Richard
Earnest is a
city council
member.
May 2008 | by Sam Borgese
back
to top
I
can't resist
commenting about
the many anxious
voices responding
to the assumed
collapsing financial
condition of
Del Mar and
the “call to arms” to
save the village
business area
with new zoning,
parking ordinance
and the general
rush to develop.
So, I (and I
suggest every
resident do
the same) read
the recently
published Revitalization
Plan for the
City of Del
Mar by The Community
Land Use and
Economics Group.
The study is rich with fresh facts about who lives in and visits Del Mar, how the residents and visitors feel about Del Mar and what they would like to see or not see Del Mar present to them. The richness of the facts is compelling. Del Mar is truly the gem that we protect with a passion. This gem often generates boisterous and contentious argument over how it should be cared for and protected.
Yet as I read the CLUE report, I found the most compelling statements to be quotes lifted from already established City development guidance documents:
1976:
Community Plan
- “… Del Mar's business community should better serve local needs for goods and services and become a pedestrian-oriented compact center”; “…automobile traffic should not pose a hazard to life, should not intrude on the tranquility of the community life, nor should it interfere with walkers and bicycle riders”.
1982:
Del Mar 2000
- “…The Del Mar 2000 program…represents a significant step forward into another area of environmental opportunity. This opportunity lies in the largely untapped potential of the Del Mar Commercial district and how it can be developed to create a functional and symbolic center for the entire community”; “ … to create an intimately scaled urban experience around an active, vital, and pedestrian oriented downtown”.
The
CLUE report
does have lots
of “voids” and “sales leakage” data.
It is also comforting
to read that
not much has
changed over
the 35 years
since I became
a resident.
People still
come to Del
Mar to walk
on the beach
and dine in
the village
restaurants;
village residents
still want a
pharmacy and
a hardware store;
and, only a
handful of people
own most of
the commercial
property.
The best sections of the Clue report are the recommended solutions for existing Del Mar businesses to think outside their own store-front box and the sections that list examples of unique businesses such as the custom musical-instrument shop, the quill pen shop that ships quills to the US Congress, the do-it-yourself dog wash or the restaurant that also houses a bookstore.
While we wring our hands over what to do next, I suggest we get busy doing what we know already needs to be done. Encourage residents and others to invest themselves and their resources to create the virtue of the village -- the honest expression of who we are as Del Mar residents and what we want people to experience when they visit. Done responsibly, the rest will follow suit. This virtue is in our village DNA, just read the Community Plan or Del Mar 2000.
April 2008
back
to top
Our generation's open space challenge is in a crunch time, but acquisition of the five-acre Shores school site for a community park is more than half way to its $8.5 million goal. Donors to date total 186 and ten pledges, many of these from the Winston School community. Now the entire community needs to join in.
Consider some math to decide what level of giving is appropriate. If one's net worth, all your assets minus your debts, is $1 million, a one-half percent contribution is $5,000; a net worth of $5 million is a $25,000 donation.
The open-space acquisitions of the past, Crest and Anderson Canyons, Seagrove and Powerhouse Parks, define our community and contribute to the values of our houses. The Shores site will surely have the same payoff.
There are over 2,000 households in Del Mar. If only 100 gave $20,000 each, we will be halfway home; another 200 at $10,000 each, we will hit the goal.
Consider
how much we
spend for cars,
maybe as little
as $20-25 thousand
for a 3-5 year
investment.
The Shores park
is a lifetime,
generation-jumping
investment.
Consider the
value of this
gift to three
and more generations
of friends and
relatives – it's
way more than
an automobile.
Dig
deep. We can
do it, Del Mar. more>>
March 2008
back
to top
Our
community lost
an extraordinary
leader when
Jerry Finnell
left us. Much
has been said
about Jerry's
rich biography
and there is
even more to
learn from Jerry
and Kathy's
model of civic
patriotism.
When they retired
to Del Mar they
hit the ground
running with
civic involvement.
They chose Del
Mar because
they loved it
and made a commitment
to work to preserve
the qualities
that attracted
them. No committee,
no volunteer
activity, no
organizing work
was beneath
them. They dug
in, worked tirelessly
with good humor,
and did not
seek out the
limelight—no
big heads for
them. Ironically,
it was those
self-effacing
qualities that
attracted others
to their leadership
capabilities
and ultimately
to leadership
roles, including
Jerry's mayoral
election.
In
our view, Jerry's
most enduring
legacy to us
all will be
this model of
civic activism.
Del Mar has
achieved its
distinctive
reputation,
not because
of its natural
resources, but
because of its
human resources—hundreds
of citizens
who have worked
to protect those
natural resources
and a quality
of life that
is very rare
in today's world.
Jerry was in
the top tier
of our community's
human resources.
February 2008
back
to top
The Shores campaign is an opportunity for all of us to come together as a community to add to our wonderful legacy of generation-bridging assets. Previous generations of Del Marians have proven to be far-sighted and generous in preserving community assets. We now enjoy our parks, library, lagoon, canyons, and open space because they seized opportunities to shape the future. Del Mar's reputation as a desirable place to live is built upon our fine balance of man-made and natural resources.
Adding five acres of recreation, education, and open space to our inventory will be a powerful message about our core values to our children and grandchildren. Our vision is that every single household will communicate its good-will involvement in this community-building endeavor. Contributions at all levels will be valued equally. This is our generation's opportunity to shape Del Mar's future. Time is short. Please add your voice to all of your neighbors with a generous contribution this month.
December 2007
back
to top
Del
Mar can count
itself lucky
to have escaped,
twice within
four years,
the ravages
of burning canyons
and homes. Next
time (there
will be a next
time) we may
not be so lucky.
That's why Del Mar needs a determined and continuing effort to reduce wildfire threat to lives and property. Such an effort must also balance the needs of fire safety with preserving Del Mar's unique and irreplaceable natural beauty. With prudent and determined management, that balance can be achieved.
Responding to citizen demands, the City Council appointed a committee of Dave Druker and Richard Earnest to study issues and submit recommendations. But the Council's initial focus seems fixed on establishing a fire-safety abatement district and asking voters to approve an assessment on the June ballot.
Perhaps additional revenues are needed to support our fire department; that issue clearly deserves attention. But there are existing tools at hand the City can begin using now to reduce wildfire risks and improve urban forest management, without waiting for an election.
Although it could use an update, the Municipal Code already provides ample authority under State law for inspection and removal of fire hazards on private property. Building on the Fire Department's current practice of conducting inspections at the owner's request, this ordinance can be used to begin a regular cycle of inspections that, given the availability of personnel, would cover the entire City every few years. Areas of highest risk should be covered first. Such a program should be included among the Fire Department's ongoing responsibilities, with progress monitored as part of the annual budget review. The City should provide residents with clear descriptions of common fire hazards and the means for removing them, along with an explanation of the inspection program.
An ongoing fire-inspection program is only part of a well-balanced effort to reduce risks from wildfire. Another important element is the Urban Forest Management and Fire Safety Strategic Plan approved by the City Council in 1999. The Plan includes important recommendations for achieving carefully balanced goals of maintaining our existing tree forest in a safe and healthy condition and improving fire safety in our canyons and public open spaces.
Only two of the Plan's recommendations have been implemented by the City. The water system along the edge of Crest Canyon has been upgraded to provide greater fire suppression capability, and the City undertook reduction of unsafe fuel loads in Crest Canyon with FEMA assistance. The City Council should conduct public workshops at an early date to educate the public and promote the Plan, review recommendations, set priorities and organize further action. All residents are encouraged to review the plan available in the Library and online at the City's website. ( City of Del Mar Home Page; Popular Sections; City Planning Documents, scroll to bottom.)
For these programs to be successful they must be given high priority by the City Council. Those delegated the authority to carry them out must be accountable. The efforts must be on-going, not sporadic or seasonal. The greatest hurdle to overcome is not the lack of funds, nor the means and ability to implement these programs, but finding the political will and developing the community consensus needed to sustain these programs long after the lessons from this recent experience fade from memory.
back to top
© 2007-08 Del Mar Community Alliance, Inc. All rights reserved. |