John Mullin's Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Idea*

Mina De Oro Gate

It's already started.

John Mullin, who replaced Betty Rexford in the June, 2010 recall election, is a man on a mission and he isn't wasting any time. Mullin is a developer and a developer's best friend. His goal is to grease the skids for developers, so they can do what they want without any governmental body telling them they have to do it this way or that way.

In the agenda for the October 19, 2010 Poway City Council meeting, there is a memorandum initiated by Councilmember Mullin proposing a "streamlining process." Mullin is proposing that city staff be given the authority to approve certain decisions that currently require council approval. Yes, this would speed the approval process for a development project, but it is a really terrible, horrible, no good, very bad* idea for several reasons.

First, many of the Poway city staff are "at will" employees. They can be hired or fired "at will." So, when a project proposed by an influential friend of a council member or city boffo comes up, there can be a lot of pressure on the staff. Are they gonna go with strict compliance to the rules or do they want to keep their job?

Second, these issues can and do cause a lot of neighborhood conflict, ill will and court suits. Not to mention staff turnover. Decisions that are not made through a public process are easily perceived to be (and often are) biased. Council members or other high level city staff will be tempted to throw their weight around to benefit their friends without the public being aware.

You think it doesn't happen?

Have you forgotten the recall stories? Remember that fire truck story? Supposedly, Betty Rexford got her own fire truck while someone else's house burned down. If that was true, (and I didn't see any proof that it was) then the fire department was easily coerced into providing a favor to a councilmember who wasn't even all that powerful. Poway has refused to clear the air about this incident, or to publicly address whether the incident did or did not take place or to discuss what steps to take to prevent something like that from happening in the future.

The trigger for the Rexford recall was a court suit filed by Rexford's neighbors. The neighbors

claimed that Rexford used city staff to harass them and interfere with their building projects.

Rexford claims she didn't. The city settled out-of-court. Several of the planners that were involved in the case are no longer working for the city. Mullin wants to put more pressure on the staff to make decisions without public notice or council oversight. That's a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad* idea.

While I have immense sympathy for the first time remodeler (I've been there) or someone who has great business plans but is totally confounded by the rules and regulations of getting set up in Poway, I have no soft spots in my heart for developers. I am sure that there are some ethical ones, but more often than not, they use every sneaky trick in the book to get around the rules.

Consider our former mayor, who was a developer. He bought a piece of property that was real cheap because it had some environmental constraints on it. It had protected vernal pools on it. Someone from his company managed to get a City of San Diego staff person to give them a grading permit one day and Cafagna destroyed those vernal pools.

In December 1999, owners of a protected vernal pool site off Arjons Drive, north of downtown San Diego in Mira Mesa, bulldozed a significant portion of the parcel, scrapping off native vegetation and filling in fragile pool basins. Destruction of a protected vernal pool site is a violation of state and federal Endangered Species Acts and would ordinarily be a clear signal for prosecution. However, in this situation, the City of San Diego issued a grading permit without first checking their files and completing a proper investigation. In response, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game coauthored a letter informing the city it violated state and federal regulations in addition to San Diego’s own municipal code for issuing permits. The pools were protected in the 1980’s by an agreement approved by the Fish and Wildlife Service with the land’s former owner and that information was communicated during the sale via a signed letter from both real estate brokers involved. Responsible parties claimed ignorance and Michael Cafagna, co-owner of the property, denied any wrongdoing. In late 2002, San Diego County prosecutors quietly dropped the case.

This is the "oopsie" method of getting around the rules. "Oops, did I just grade vernal pools? Oh, sorry, but since they are all wrecked, can I have a building permit?" Cafagna didn't get his building permit that time, but the "oops" trick has been quite successful in Poway.

Whether it is building a garage in the front setback (because it doesn't otherwise fit) and then declaring that someone "mis-measured" and it would be too expensive to rip it down or chopping down heritage trees early one morning on a weekend when code compliance officiers were not available, well, it is all good in Poway. And Mullin wants to make it even better.

In 1993, Bruce Tabb, developer of Old Coach, was ticked off because he thought the Old Coach property was identified as "high quality vegetation" on Sandag maps. With Councilmember Higginson in his office, Tabb called up Poway city planner, Jim Nessel, and "lambasted" him for "not acting in his best interest or appropriately representing him as a property owner in Poway." Tabb even put Higginson on the phone (quasi-judiciality not concerning him here?) to pressure the staff member.

Nessel was POd enough about the experience to write a memo to City Manager Bowersox. A little note at the end also suggested that Tabb had cleared his property 3 times, but staff had only been aware of 2 clearings. Likely he was not permitted for the third clearing.

Higginson and Tabb Harass Staff

Sometimes developers employ sneaky tricks themselves; other times, they hire someone to do it for them. Someone like John Fitch, the former asst city manager, who left that job under not-so-favorable circumstances. After his employment with the city ended, Fitch represented several clients from time-to-time in their bids to get the council to bend the rules in their favor. In 2004, John Fitch represented some property owners living on Eucalyptus Heights Rd and Mina de Oro Rd. who wanted the city to allow them to build a gate across Mina de Oro Rd. They cited security and trash problems as the reason for wanting the gate, although data from the sherif's department did not substantiate that any problem existed.

One of the property owners on Mina de Oro , Menachem Shoval, did not want the gate. He complained that his neighbors had sometimes blocked the road with rocks and debris to prevent him and his guest from reaching his property. Also disputed was whether or not Mina de Oro was a public or private road, even though the city had designated the road as access to the public trail system. On Jan 18, 2005, the council voted on the gate request. Councilmembers Rexford and Boyack voted in favor of the gate, Higginson, Emery and Cafagna were opposed. Fitch was persistent and got the matter brought back before the council on March 22, 2005. This time the gate was unanimously approved.

The Shovals were not happy. They sued and won their case in Superior Court in 2007. In her tentative ruling against the City of Poway, the Judge Lewis ruled that Mina de Oro was a public road and that (bold added for emphasis)

the Court believes the City's approval of the resolution was arbitrary, capricious, and entirely lacking in evidentiary support. Moreover, even if this were a CCP 1094.5, et. seq., writ petition, the Court finds that in the absence of any findings concerning the public nature of the road or the effect of its gating on the public, there is a lack of substantial evidence to support the City's passage of the Resolution.

The city was required to rescind approval of the gate. But first, they considered a work-around of the decree. They considered vacating the road, thereby making it a private road. And the City refused to cite neighbors who were still obstructing the road so that the Shovals could not reach their property.

A little gift from the neighbors blocking access to the Shoval property

The Mina de Oro gate fiasco was not a staff decision, it was approved by the entire council in public session. Imagine what will happen if a staff member is allowed to make such decisions without any public vetting. My next example will do that, and one of the special features is that some of the very same characters that were involved in the Shoval gate case pop up in the Victorian switcheroo.

When the L family moved into their Old Poway home, most of the windows faced a small, vacant lot. The lot was "substandard" under the city's code and general plan, so it was difficult to build on that lot. The lot was once part of a adjacent parcel that had a small house on it. The owner of the small house still owned both parcels and wanted to build a larger house on her lot. She met resistance at the city and gave up. She sold her lot for $50,000 to a Harry Rogers in 2004. Four months later Harry Rogers sold the parcel to his neighbor Dennis Keena for $200,000. Rogers and Keena both lived on Mina de Oro- they were 2 of the people who asked the city to give them a permit for the gate across the road. John Fitch is going to be in this story too. Fitch represented Keena in his request for a variance so that he could build a house on the substandard lot. He needed a variance because the house he had planned was going to spill over into the front, rear and side yard setbacks. Keena would sell the lot for a cool $300,000 after his buddy John Fitch got the variance.

Mrs L reviewed the city documents for the proposed house. She knew the house was going to be much closer to her house than what the city codes allowed. What she didn't know, was that John Fitch was going to ask the council to give his client a "variance envelope" so that they could come back later and substitute a different house with only staff approval, if the house fit within the "variance envelope" for the first house.

The documents that Mrs. L reviewed at the city showed plans for this house - a 2,172 sq ft house with attached 655 sq ft garage:

Imagine her surprise when they started building this house- a 2,850 sq ft house with attached 566 sq ft garage- next door to her:

The Poway code requires an applicant to return to the council for a 2nd approval if they decide to change the design of a proposed project. John Fitch got around that by requesting and receiving approval for a "variance envelope" with approval by a staff member for changes if the changes fit in the variance envelope. The planned switcheroo took place, and a Poway staff member approved the Victorian instead of the first house. Without any oversight, there was nobody who carefully checked to see if the Victorian did indeed fit into the variance envelope. It didn't. When Mrs L complained, the city issued a stop work order. A new variance was needed before work could resume.

Mrs L, Joe St Lucas from SPRA and I met with city manager Rod Gould and city planner Patti Brindle on the Friday before the new "oops" variance would go before the council for approval. Gould profusely apologized to Mrs L for the many staff mistakes. He reminded me of those CEOs telling folks how sorry they were that their faulty tires killed so many people. It was a good act, but I don't think he was sincere because of what happened next. When we asked Gould what the staff recommendation would be for the new variance, he said he would recommend approval. He didn't want the homebuilder to have to incur a lot of additional costs because of all the mistakes. Then Gould said something which stunned me. He said that there would only be 3 council members at the meeting, and the variance would only need 2 votes for approval. He was wrong. I told him he was wrong and he later confirmed with me that he would indeed need 3 votes. What kind of jerk would admit that his staff made mistakes, lots of mistakes and then not give the aggrieved party a fair hearing? Or a least pretend to give the aggrieved party a fair hearing? This was my first meeting with Gould, and I left that meeting with a really bad impression of what kind of person he was.

During the remainder of our meeting, I argued with planner Patti Brindle over her various interpretations of the city code. For example, the code explicitly states how far a porch can protrude into a setback. Ms Brindle insisted that the porch which wrapped on 3 sides of the Victorian house was a patio cover that was "open on three sides" and not a porch. I am not an architect or city planner, but I know the difference between a porch and a patio cover and I was really peeved to see how vociferously she insisted on her screwy interpretation. Mullin wants the staff to be allowed to approve things like this without anyone else getting a peek at what they are doing.

In the end, Brindle amended the variance request again to cover the porch. And the council dutifully approved the oops variance. The total variances given to the project were 13 ft into the front yard setback, 1.5 ft and 6.75 ft into the side yard setbacks, and a whopping 29 feet into the backyard setback. The Victorian house pictured above was built almost 30 feet closer to Mrs L's house than is allowed by our Poway code.

Letting the staff approve projects like this leads to many intentional and unintentional errors. And a lot of anger and tension between prospective neighbors. The city is also at risk for additional court cases. It is a really terrible, horrible, no good, very bad* idea. No doubt John Mullin's supporters are in favor of it. I got a piece of campaign literature from him the other day. It was no surprise to see that John Fitch and his buddies had endorsed John Mullin, the developer's best friend.

* My apologies to Judith Viorst for stealing part of the title of her book, " Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day."

The Tale of Two Cities

Well, not really TWO cities. Just one city. The one they call "the city in the country". But it is really more like "the city AND the country". Yeah, I'm talking about North Poway and South Poway.

North and South Poway are geographically divided by Twin Peaks. Green Valley runs through North Poway; Poway Valley through South Poway. But the division is more than geographic. North and South Poway are zoned quite differently. North Poway is almost entirely rural residential, save for the Pomerado Rd area by the hospital. South Poway is a mix of everything else. This did not happen by natural design. Before incorporation, both north and south Poway were residential, save for the commercial strip down Poway Rd. After incorporation, North Poway leaders were successful in keeping their end of town a rural residential enclave while foisting unwanted development on South Poway.

The Green Valley Civic Association is the political arm of North Poway. It is really run by only a few people, but at election time, GVCA sends out the word on which candidates  will protect the North Poway lifestyle and folks vote accordingly. Why discard advantage?

I don't expect a group like the GVCA not to look out for themselves. Everyone has the right to look out for themselves. But because of their disproportionate clout, the GVCA has successfully gotten almost every councilmember to ascribe to the GVCA mantra- land in North Poway is for quality of life; land in South Poway is for revenue generation or stuff they have to do because of some mandate or other. For example, whenever LAFCO or Sandag or some other government agency pressures Poway because we don't have enough land zoned for affordable housing, first, the council bitches about "state mandates", then, they make changes to the general plan that increase density in South Poway only. I remember one change was to redefine the RS-7 zone (7 house per acre) to mean "8 houses per acre.

Another change was the Poway Road Specific Plan. This plan is another general plan amendment that decreased setbacks and allowed multiple uses in various zones on Poway Rd., so they could pack in more affordable housing and more commercial entities.  GVCA's Jerry Hargarten was one of several North Powegians  that helped to write the plan, which adversely affects property only in South Poway.

Last year, the council approved a general plan amendment to allow 3-story buildings in Poway, if they were deed restricted for affordable housing. While this change will impact a single affordable housing project  being built  near Pomerado Hospital, on the fringe of North Poway, it does not in any way impact any residential area of North Poway. Likely South Poway will get a bunch of these.

As I said, to the GVCA and the councilmembers they elect, land in North Poway is for quality of life, land in South Poway is for revenue generation and mandate fulfillment. 

There are probably no better tales that exemplify that land use prejudice than the story of a proposed Ralph's shopping center (1985) and the story of Wal-Mart's approval and proposed expansion. 

In 1985,  a shopping center, including a Ralph's grocery store, was proposed for the northeast corner of Stone Canyon and Pomerado Rd. in Poway.  The parcel was zoned residential and would require a general plan amendment (GPA) to rezone it to commercial.  If the council did not approve the GPA, the developer said he would (and eventually he did)  build the shopping center on the west side of the intersection, which was in the city of San Diego. The shopping center was going in on that intersection no matter what decision the council made. However, if the Poway council approved the GPA,  they would be the beneficiary of sales tax revenue from the project. The GVCA was adamantly opposed to the GPA.  Many GVCA members attended the council meeting and spoke against the project. The council denied the GPA.  From the Sept 12, 1985 Union-Tribune (sorry, I can't link to it directly):

The council Tuesday night refused to allow 9.4 acres at the intersection of Pomerado and Stone Canyon roads to be changed from a residential zone for single families (three to four homes per acre) to a commercial zone, even though several neighbors in the vicinity thought this would improve the "blight" of the parcel.

The proposal by landowner John Visconsi was one of three separate applications for increasing density reviewed by the council. In each case, however, the council agreed to adhere to what it called the "integrity" of the General Plan, and the need to keep densities down in established residential areas.

A stream of speakers came to the microphone to plead with city officials not to allow commercial development of any kind at Stone Canyon-Pomerado intersection. Residents said they feared that development would bring traffic problems to the area.

William Jensen, a resident of Stone Canyon Road, declared, "We aren't really blighted, you know. We're just country!" which brought chuckles from council members, several of whom live in rural areas around the city.

.

.

.

snip

.

.

.

The council supported the planning staff's finding that such commercial zoning could create "strip commercial" areas along Pomerado Road, and would not be in harmony with nearby rural residential neighborhoods. Planning Director Barry Hogan stated in his report that "the applicants have not demonstrated that a sufficient local demand exists for additional commercial territory, through either a prepared market study or other substantiating evidence."

This was one of several General Plan amendments that the council considered Tuesday, and in each case council members said they opposed "up-zoning" -- or allowing increased development -- in areas that have already been set aside as neighborhoods for single-family dwellings.

ln 1985, the current councilmembers  were Bruce Tarzy, Bob Emery, Linda Oravec, Mary Shepardson and Carl Kruse. Tarzy, Emery and Kruse lived on rural residential land in 1985.  In Nov, 1986, Oravec and Shepardson lost their re-election bids  to Don Higginson and Linda Brannon. (This is the only time an incumbent lost an election in Poway.)

Higginson and Brannon also lived on rural residential estates, although Brannon did not live in Green Valley. Thus, the entire council lived on rural residential estates. Not one councilmember was from South Poway; not one councilmember lived in a higher density area of Poway. Higginson and Brannon were much more "pro-growth" than the original council.  The GVCA feared that might have consequences for them. The GVCA and Emery got a proposition passed in 1988, Prop FF ,which protected rural residential property from being up-zoned. But it did diddly squat for residential property in South Poway. My husband once asked Emery why Prop FF was not written so that it applied to all residential property in Poway. Emery told him that the more developed parts of Poway "could look after themselves."

Right, that's worked out so well.

Bruce Tarzy did not run for re-election in Nov., 1988. Jan Goldsmith (then a Powegian, now a Sandy Eggan) joined the council. Although Goldsmith lived in South Poway, he also lived on acreage zoned rural residential. So this council was also 100%, unanimous, rural-residential dwellers. It was this council (Emery, Goldsmith, Higginson, Brannon, Kruse) that  approved the original Wal-Mart project for South Poway in Nov, 1990.  One of the things that struck me about that approval is that no EIR was done for the original Wal-Mart.  Instead, staff (Penny Riley was the chief planner) prepared a "negative declaration" which is a checklist of possible negative effects (noise, traffic, pollution, drainage problems, etc) and ways to mitigate those effects. For example, traffic problems could be mitigated by street improvements and adding some left turn lanes and traffic lights.  So, the council signed off on the traffic finding

That the generation of traffic will not adversely impact surrounding streets and/or the City's Circulation Element, in that main access will be combined with that of the adjacent center and all parking will be contained within the site.

Yeah, that's worked out so well, too, there's just no adverse traffic impact from Wal-Mart.

To help defray the cost of road improvements, the council agreed to give Wal-Mart almost $1 million. And to make Wal-Mart feel even more loved, the council approved their request  for a 15 ft. monument sign, even though the code only allows an 8 ft. tall sign. Of course, the 8 ft. rule still applied to everyone else, like, ahem...Golden State Gasoline.

Fast forward to 2010. The proposed Wal-Mart expansion may be due for a vote sometime this summer.  The general plan has been amended so many times, we are past the point of pretending we are preserving any sort of rural ambiance down here. None of that "country looking blight" for us. The real question is whether anyone on the the current council even entertains the idea that South Powegians are due any quality of life considerations. Will they buy the spin of Wal-Mart public affairs manager John Mendez who says that traffic is a blessing?

“Traffic does not mean traffic,” he said. “Traffic means commerce. When you ask small-business owners in Poway, all of them are saying that the more traffic the better, because that brings in more people, and that means more commerce, and that means additional sales.”

Of course Mendez also said that shoppers "have overwhelmingly told us they want one-stop shopping". Yeah, well, if they want one-stop shopping, they are really not going to be spreading their shopping dollars all around different spots in town, are they?

In 1985, the entire council capitualated to the GVCA and voted to keep their neighborhoods shopping-center free, even though it meant foregoing needed sales tax revenue. Where does the GVCA stand on expanding Wal-Mart and allowing it to operate 24 hrs a day, 7 days a week in an area that is surrounded on 3 sides by residential apartments? What does the GVCA have to say about that? I looked on GVCA's webpage and did not even see Wal-Mart mentioned.

And what about the councilmembers that live in GVCAville?  Higginson, Kruse and councilmember Jim Cunningham all live in the no-shopping-center area of  North Poway.  I suspect that  Kruse and Higginson, who both approved the original Wal-Mart will support the expansion. In fact, Kruse has indicated he favors it. Cunningham, I'm not sure about.  Will he have quality of life empathy for people beyond his own kind? I don't know.

And what about Rexford and Boyack? Both live in South Poway. Someone asked Boyack whether she supported the Wal-Mart expansion at a candidates forum in 2008. Her response indicated that she supported the Wal-Mart expansion and thought traffic could be mitigated by changing the left turn lane on Poway Rd. I know Boyack is very sensitive about the impact of lights and noise and traffic from the proposed lighting of the sport's field near her home, but she hasn't indicated any concern about lights, noise or traffic affecting those who live near Wal-Mart.

As for Rexford, I haven't got a clue. Rexford usually shows some empathy for other people, but votes with the majority in approving big projects like the waterpark and girl's softball park.  The fact that somebody really wants her off that council before the Wal-Mart vote is kind of interesting though. And the fact that Kevin McNamara, the guy who owns part of the Wal-Mart shopping center, has been giving money and office space to the recallers, is a pretty good indication that he is one of the people who wants Betty out before the vote. It isn't as if McNamara would be in a tizzy about Rexford's supposed ethics violations. Isn't he the guy who chopped down all the trees on his Midland Rd property early one morning on a weekend, when the city workers wouldn't be around to stop him from violating Poway's ordinances?

An anonymous commenter on my last blog wrote:

I hate to burst everyone's bubble but most of us who live here know that this city is run by the Green Valley Civic Association and they run people and have the power to win. Until one can get enough voters to vote else wise, they will always control our city. It is a sad day in Poway.

I have to agree with Anonymous. The GVCA has pretty much ruled this city and they have the power (and the money) to run their candidates. Although their candidates don't always win, the GVCA manages to exert enough clout over a majority of the council to preserve their quality of life. A big share of the burden to fulfill mandates and produce revenue falls on South Poway, at the expense of quality of life in our neighborhoods. I am not willing to cede that that is the way it will always be. What I am looking for in a council candidate is someone who is truly sensitive to quality of life issues in South Poway as well as North Poway. There have been a few such candidates in the past, but they generally get rather low marks from the GVCA and have had little chance of winning. 


With all the noise out there from the recall about Betty getting her "own firetruck", you'd think the main issue facing voters was whether a single person got more than her share of advantage in this city. The issue of a whole end of town getting almost no advantage at all gets lost in the screaming.


And, uh, a note to candidates: Don't run around claiming to be a "uniter, not a divider". We all know how well that turned out, too!


UPDATE: I just checked  here  and found out that Carl Kruse lives on a RS-4 (4 houses to the acre) lot near Stoneridge Golf Course. So, he doesn't live on rural residential land, although he is pretty well surrounded by it, and I think there is zero chance anyone would get to build a corner grocery store near  his lot, much less an affordable housing project or a super Wal-Mart.

Endorsements and the Rexford Recall

The Rexford recall gang has a full page ad in this week's  Poway News Chieftain.  The ad says, "Add your name to the list of thousands of Poway residents and business owners including Sharon Cafagna, Mayor Don Higginson, Councilmember Merrilee Boyack, Sue Herndon, Chic Hume, Nazem Agha, Steve Vaus, Howard Lomas, Bill Racicot and others who support the Recall of Rexford and the election of a replacement."

My first thought when I saw this ad was,  "Who is paying for this?" My second thought was who in the samhill is .....well, let's just say I wasn't familiar with at least one of those names. But google is my friend and now I know who they are.

The recall group has  opened an office on Poway Rd and is sending out paid signature-gatherers.

It's crunch time. They have about 3 weeks to go and I don't think they have enough signatures yet.

The signatures are due Feb 10th, but in order for them to be counted and certified for the June election, they need to get them in around the end of January. A financial report is also due at the end of January, but it will only include expenditures through Dec 31st, so we may not know who is paying for the ad, the little office the group has opened on Poway Rd or the paid signature-gatherers until the next reporting period.

In the last few weeks, councilmember Merrilee Boyack has come out of the closet and exposed her rather significant role in the recall. Around Christmas, she sent out an email telling folks that she had set up a Kool-Aid booth a recall table in front of her house. And, if people couldn't make it to her house to sign, she'd send her son over to their house to get their signature. Could he be one of the paid signature-gatherers? Not that that would be illegal, or anything. But it would be interesting to know.

During the public comment portion of last Tuesday's city council meeting, Vaus and Boyack performed a little one-two punch on Rexford although Rexford had already wisely left the room before Vaus spoke.

During the public comment period, Steve Vaus, the leader of a movement seeking to have the 69-year-old councilwoman recalled from office, said the evidence is overwhelming that she demanded a firetruck be stationed near her home during the fire even as other Poway homes burned.Rexford has adamantly denied the claims in the past.“I recently got a call from someone you spoke to shortly after that 2003 fire,” Vaus said. “And way back then, you told the truth. You told that person you asked for a firetruck and got it — in fact, they said you took great pride in having a truck at your house. Do you remember that conversation?”

Like well choreographed kabuki theatre, Boyack then spoke her lines.

“I was the person that spoke to Mr. Vaus about that. Within a week of the Cedar fire, I was having a conversation with Betty and she personally told me that she had gotten a firetruck to protect her home and her neighborhood. I’ve been surprised that she has denied it. That makes no sense to me because she told me she had done that. … I know that to be fact.”

Rexford's husband then went berserk and called everyone a liar. Mayor Higginson (who recently revealed that he enjoys the the recallers livening up boring city council meetings) was obliged to tell Paul Rexford to sit down and STFU or he would have him kicked out.

I suspect the recallers are trying to poke a stick in Betty's eye and provoke a response so they can get a little attention in the press.  Maybe smoke out a few recalcitrant folks to sign their recall petition.

So, exactly where do I stand on the recall?

I did not support Rexford for re-election in 2006. I would love to see someone else on the council. Not just anyone, mind you, but someone who reaches out to the whole community, not just to one or two people or special interest groups.  The recall is also the best opportunity to get a fresh new face on the council. That is something I think Poway desperately needs. Despite my hope to see Rexford (and pretty much everyone else on the council) replaced, I will not join in the recall.

It's not because I'm opposed to recalls. I'm not. In fact, my husband and some of my friends were involved in a recall of Cafagna and Higginson some years back. The primary issues of that recall were a proposed amphitheatre in the industrial park and higher flood insurance premiums for the Pomerado Rd residents.  When those two issues were hot, the signatures poured in. When the council axed the amphitheatre and solved the insurance problem, tempers cooled and the recall drive fizzled.

The Rexford recall is a whole different animal from that recall. In my opinion, the Rexford recall seems particularly vicious and personal. I was appalled when the recallers served Rexford with the recall papers in the home of her dying son, who was in hospice care.  That just crossed the line of human decency.  Steve Vaus also asked folks who supported the recall to send email messages to Betty while she was at her son's side. Really, couldn't it have waited a week or two?  Or was the intent to try to upset her at a very vulnerable time in the hope that she would hysterically resign and pave the way for the council to appoint a replacement?

Betty Rexford is serving her 16th year as a councilmember. When she ran for re-election in 2006 she was endorsed by a whole bunch of people and newspapers. The Poway News Chieftain endorsed her in 1998, 2002, 2006. Now they have asked her to resign.  Likewise the SDUT and North County Times endorsed her in 2006 (and other years) but have now asked her to resign. Did those newspaper endorsers not know Rexford very well when they endorsed her? How fickle to ask someone who really hasn't changed at all to step aside so an appointment can replace them after they told the voters to vote for this person 3 yrs ago. I think they need to check the quality control criteria in their endorsement departments.

Merrilee Boyack also endorsed Betty Rexford in 2006. Now Boyack says she had a conversation with Betty Rexford after the 2003 Cedar Fire and Betty bragged to her that she got a personal firetruck. She claims that Betty abused her position as a councilmember. And yet, Boyack asked the voters to re-elect Rexford in 2006, 3 yrs after the purported phone conversation. If Boyack thought Rexford had abused her position on the council, why did she ask the voters to re-elect her? That's not ethical.

Why has Boyack waited 6 yrs to make the conversation about the firetruck public? Was it something she never would have revealed, if, say, Betty had voted to make Boyack mayor instead of voting for Higginson to replace Cafagna? One wonders.

My personal opinion is that all those people (and newspaper editors) who successfully convinced the Poway voters to re-elect Rexford in 2006 should just learn to live with the consequences and be a little more careful with your endorsements in the future.

And speaking of endorsements, what's up with endorsing someone before everyone has had a chance to throw their hat in the ring? I mean, if you haven't seen all the candidates, and you are endorsing, then it pretty much looks like you are really shilling for that candidate because you have them on a leash and they are YOUR candidate, YOUR proxy, YOUR lapdog, YOUR protege. Whatever you want to call it, it is a signal to everybody that you expect to have power and sway over that candidate's decisions.

Last month, Carl Kruse, flanked by Bruce Tarzy and Merrilee Boyack,  announced he was going to run for re-election in 2010.

Kruse was appointed to the City Council in May to fill the remaining 18 months of Councilman Don Higginson’s term. Higginson had been appointed mayor that month to fill the vacancy created by the death of Mayor Mickey Cafagna in April.

At the time, Kruse said he intended only to serve for 18 months, but just weeks later, he said he wasn’t sure what he would do. Yesterday, during a news conference in front of city hall, Kruse said things have changed in the city and he viewed next year’s election as being pivotal to Poway’s long-term future.

My guess is that "what's changed" is that Bruce Tarzy is a little unsure that some known or unknown candidate, that he doesn't own, might get elected in 2010. So, just to be safe, he convinced Kruse to run despite the fact that Kruse's "not running" was a big factor in his appointment. 

Boyack also endorsed Kruse and Sabrina Butler (who was expected to announce her candidacy). But, lo and behold, things changed and Butler has stated that she isn't running and will not accept an appointment to the council.  In a very strange twist of logic, Merrilee also announced that she will not endorse Higginson if he runs. 

Boyack said she would not support Higginson's bid for re-election because he had said he would not run again after being appointed to mayor, and she wants to hold him to his word.

OK, let me get this straight. Carl Kruse is appointed to the council, based partly on his assertion that he will not run for re-election. Kruse changes his mind and runs for re-election.  Boyack endorses him. She doesn't "hold him to his word" because "things changed." But before Higginson can pull the same trick, Boyack announces that she will not endorse him if he does, because she wants to "hold him to his word." But Carl doesn't have to be held to his word because....because...because...why?  This is one I really, really don't get. If you do, please post a comment and help me out here.

I'm not endorsing anyone for 2010...yet. I'm not "not endorsing" yet either. I'm going to wait until all of the candidates have announced and revealed at least a little bit about themselves and their philosophies. I'm really ready for some new faces on the council and I hope all the people who take the time and effort to run, get a fair chance to introduce themselves to the voters before the power elite throw their weight around by endorsing. I would also advise the voters to ignore the endorsements of those who change their minds a few years later and want us to throw out the person they told us to elect. Enough! Bring on the candidates and let us make up our own minds. 

Are You Listening?

There were lots of goings on last week in the ol’ Poway corral.

First off, Rod Gould unexpectedly resigned. He is going to be leaving Poway in January to take the city manager ‘s job in Santa Monica. Gould has been Poway city manager for 4 yrs.  That's not very long by Poway standards (Jim Bowersox served for 24 yrs), but probably only a few years shy of the average city manager’s tenure. Gotta wonder just how much of Gould’s decision was a desire to get away from the rancor and contentiousness of Poway and how much was a desire to do something in a bigger city and get paid a lot more for it. Gould is a consummate professional. We will probably never know.

Betty Rexford was elated at the news about Gould’s leaving. Apparently she and Gould didn’t get along too well. I think there may have been some words between them about this city not being big enough for both of them. She’s still standing, so I guess that’s a win for her.
Last week, Rexford launched her website, therealbettyrexford.com. It is Rexford’s effort to get her side of the story out. As you might expect, the Poway Posse aka the recall-rexford folks responded to the rollout of her website by rolling up their recall tent. Not. You can read their responses here, but I suggest you avoid it, unless you have a perculiar nostalgia for your junior high years.

Last week was also the performance of Steve Vaus’ Carols by Candlelight. That’s his annual “for charity” gig. But since Vaus’ production company is a for profit company, we won’t know how much of the donated money and ticket revenue from Carols by Candlelight went to coddle the artists and line Vaus’ pockets and how much of it actually went to charity.  The recall stampede has been pretty quiet lately. I am not sure if that is because Vaus has been otherwise occupied or if they just ran out of steam.  Vaus hasn’t sent out a tweet since Nov 10.  No new republican leaders have stepped forward this week demanding that Rexford resign right this very minute.

Vaus’ claim that other houses burned to the ground during the Cedar Fire because a fire crew  was diverted to “babysit” Rexford’s house has been getting a lot of pushback.  I must say, the “facts” about the fire presented on the realbettyrexford site here, here, here  and here are pretty compelling. The documents on Vaus' site don’t back up his claims, they just show that a fire truck was sent to Rexford’s neighborhood to mop up after the fire. No document that Vaus provided shows that Rexford called and made any demands to send a firetruck. No document shows that any other house burned down due to a truck being sent to the Creek Rd neighborhood to quell spot fires.  Although not backing down or apologizing for what sure seems like a freakin’ distortion of events, Vaus (and his friend, Jack) are quick to point out that the issue of Rexford costing us a lot of money remains.

Do whatever you can to hide the real issue. Betty Rexford is unfit to serve and her repeatedly poor ethical choices have cost the city almost 1/2 a MILLION dollars. Does this not even bother you Gerold and Chris? You would rather put up with someone who is clearly unfit to serve rather than let anyone replace her?

So, maybe another house didn't "burn" as a direct result of her having trucks babysit her home, but does that make it any less salacious that she was able to have her own personal fire brigade stationed at her property and available to her beck and call?

Yes, it does bother me that the court case cost the city almost $500,000. I don’t agree with the recallers that Betty, and only Betty, was the problem that led to the court case. Nor do I agree that removing her from office just before her term expires and replacing her with an appointee is gonna fix things. But, consider the mathematics of the settlement. There are about 50,000 people in Poway. This case cost us about $10 ea. Or about $25 per household. Since January, I have been bitching about something that is costing me and many other Powegians about $50 per bi-monthly billing cycle. That is about $300/yr and it has been going on for years and will continue to go on until the council takes some action on it. I’m talking about my sewer consumption rates also known as “a variable commodity charge”. I’ve blogged about it here, here, here, and especially here. I’ve also complained about the fixed fees but that is another whole blog. Right now I am paying $72.23 for using 13 units of sewer water.(even when I only use 10 units). That is over $6/unit. Customers who use over 51 units are paying less than $2.29/unit. It isn’t fair, it isn’t just, it doesn’t comply with the best management practices of cities that have joined together to promote less consumption. Why should those who dump less water into the sewer system be paying a higher rate?


Tonight, the council will take another look at the water rate increses that went into effect this summer. The GVCA (Green Valley Civic Assoc) has complained that the rates aren’t fair and that some people will be paying more than it costs the city to provide the water.  Well, hello, isn’t that what I have been saying about the sewer rates for almost a year now? Can anybody hear me?  At least with the water rates, everyone is paying the exact same rate for the same amount of water purchased. Not so with our sewer rates. Those who buy more pay less. So how is it that GVCA got the council to bring back the water rates, but my complaints about the unjust and unfair sewer rates have been completely ignored?

Not a single councilmember has stepped forward to bring back the unfair sewer rates and put it on the agenda. In fact, Merrilee Boyack is the only council member to even respond to my many emails. Ms Boyack said maybe the council will look at it in a couple of years. A couple of years, eh? In a couple of years, that $300 extra that water-wise Powegians are paying each year is going to start adding up. It makes the Rexford settlement look like chump change.

Betty Rexford has also spoken in favor of rehearing the GVCA call to roll back the water rates to a flat rate. My request to rehear the sewer rates? She has done nothing.  Here is the issue where I am in total agreement with the recall folks. Betty Rexford has not been doing a good job of representing all of us.  But I’m not looking to replace Rexford with an appointee chosen by the council. I want the voters to replace her with someone who will listen to everyone in this community, not just the GVCA.

As for Higginson, Kruse and Cunningham, I haven’t heard a peep out of them about the unfair sewer rates either. They all live in north Poway and are pretty much tethered to the GVCA, but, uh, don’t you guys represent all of us? The unfair sewer rates  are not a north v south issue. The people who are getting ripped off are the ones who don’t use a lot of water in the winter months.  They are paying up to 10 times the sewer rate of the people who are putting a lot of water down the drain.

To be fair, most of my complaints were sent to the council before Carl Kruse was appointed.  So, here is your chance Carl. At tonight’s meeting, I am hoping you will ask to bring back the sewer rates and change them so that everybody pays the same rate for their sewer use. Not the same fee-  the same rate-  for each unit of water put into the sewer pipes.  Are you listening, Carl?  


Is anybody listening?

Betty Wasn't The First

Last Tuesday's City Council meeting was one for the record book.

It was the first time the Poway Council used teleconferencing during a council meeting. Both Betty Rexford and Merrilee Boyack were physically absent but connected via a telephone hookup.

It was also the first time that a council member was asked to resign by the rest of the council. At the end of the regular meeting, the council met in a closed session to discuss a lawsuit against the city by some of Betty Rexford's neighbors who claimed that she inappropriately directed the planning department to make their lives miserable. After the session, Mayor Don Higginson announced a settlement. The city the people of Poway would pay the Rexford's neighbors $360,000 and the entire council asked Mrs. Rexford to resign.

“The recent decision of the court in this case has demonstrated that settlement is necessary to protect the city from greater exposure to damages and significant future legal costs if the case goes to trial,” Higginson read from a statement on behalf of the council.

“Further, it is clearly inappropriate for any City Council member to interfere in the city's administrative functions, such as the development projects that were the subject of this case. It is apparent to the City Council that the public trust has been irrevocably damaged, and that even the appearance that the council member acted in her self-interest is unacceptable.

“Therefore, it is with great sadness that we ask council member Rexford to consider stepping down from her position on the Poway City Council.”

While the city settled with the plaintiffs, Rexford and her husband were also personally named in the suit. Apparently, that part of the suit has also been settled.

Daral Mazzarella, the attorney fof the plaintiffs, said his clients settled that part for $40,000. Mazzarella also said that while his clients had sought the resignation of Rexford, he had been under the impression that her fellow councilmembers would not seek it.

“I was surprised to see that,” Mazzarella said of the resignation request, which he termed “appropriate.”

Rexford contends that she did nothing wrong; that she had the right as a private citizen to complain to city staff about her neighbors. And she does. But Rexford also had something the average citizen didn't have. Clout. When she pestered the staff, they listened. And acted. Way more than they would for the average Poway resident. Maybe that is because the poor blokes are "hired and fired at will" and pretty much have to sell their souls to be a Poway planner in the first place. Anyway, the judge in the case ruled that there was plenty enough evidence to go forward with a trial. Once the case was going to trial, the city decided to cut their losses and settle.

On Saturday, a SDUT editorial also called for Rexford to quit. The editorial repeated the words from Mayor Higginson's statement:

it is “clearly inappropriate for any City Council member to interfere in the city's administrative functions ... It is apparent to the City Council that the public trust has been irrevocably damaged, and that even the appearance that the council member acted in her self-interest is unacceptable.”

"....clearly inappropriate for any City Council member to interfere in the city's administrative function." They need to print that up and glue it all over the walls in the council members' offices. I mean, in another decision on that very same night that the council issued this statement, the council agreed to give a permit to a guy who built a baseball diamond on his private lot. He had previously been turned down for a permit for a larger project. Afterwards, Mickey Cafagna had supposedly told the homeowner to go ahead and build the smaller project without a permit. I wish I had $10 for every time I heard that Mickey gave someone "permission" to do something the Poway code doesn't allow.

Higginson is no stranger to directing the staff to do stuff for a friend either. In 1993, Bruce Tabb (developer of Old Coach Golf Estates) called up Jim Nessel, a senior Poway planner and "lambasted" him because his property was not identified on SANDAG maps as "disturbed". Somehow, the property had been graded (more times than it had permits for) and SANDAG was unaware of the results. Nessel was so upset with being harangued by Bruce Tabb that he wrote a memo and put it in the city files. In that letter, Nessel notes:

Mr Tabb could not recall exactly what SANDAG map he looked at, and I told him it may have been a historic vegetation map of the region and suggested that all map data layers prepare for the habitat evaluation model be reviewed. During the phone conversation, Mayor Higginson got on the line in Mr. Tabb's office and encouraged me to help Mr. Tabb with his problem. (emphasis added)

Higginson and Tabb Harass Staff

Remember Jay Goldby, former city council member (and more recently manager of a nudist enclave)? Goldby owned a print shop in Poway. As a council member, he steered business to his shop. The city used a $90,000 transportation grant to buy a bus, paint it to look cute and route it around town from shopping area to shopping area. The City approved a program whereby the Chamber of Commerce was allowed to solicit advertisers to put signs in the back windows of the bus. The paperwork for the signs directed all customers to have the work done at Jay's sign shop. Nifty, eh?

Jay also got embroiled in a deal involving directional signs for the car dealers. The City agreed (and Jay voted for it) to pay for the posts and the property and the dealers were to pay for their individual slats. The car dealers had already had some of the work done at Jay's shop, before the other council members reprimanded him for "the appearance of impropriety". Goldby then agreed to have some other company make the signs. It should be noted that the Chamber never got anyone to buy any advertising space on the bus, so technically Goldby did not accrue a benefit from having voted for the project. It should also be noted that it was a rare event when the bus had a passenger. And those directional car signs with the dealers names on them? The city had to remove them 'cause they were illegal.

We can go back even further, to the very beginning of our fair city, to find more "appearances of impropriety". In the early 1980s, four landowners in the northern part of Poway attempted to subdivide their property. The city wanted them to build improvements, including paved roads, as a condition of the split. The landowners balked and complained that the improvements to the properties were unnecessary and would benefit council member Bob Emery and City Attorney Jean Harris. Bob owned 6 nearby acres just outside the city limits. Harris owned acreage on Eagle's Crest Rd, which he had subdivided without having to build the same improvements that were required of the landowners.

There were court suits, grand jury investigations and an indictment. Bob skated. Harris had gotten a former city attorney to say it was OK for Bob to vote on the issue. But in a strange turn of events, the county planning department determined that Jean Harris's lot subdivision was illegal. The D.A. also did a criminal investigation. Harris signed a plea agreement and got 3 yrs probation. He might have gotten worse, but the D.A. made some mistake when they raided his office and so the plea agreement was the best they could get. Harris also resigned his city attorney position in Poway. Two years after the plea deal, Harris hadn't made his court-ordered restitution and the judge threatened to revoke his probation. I have no idea where he landed after that. Perhaps he is sunbathing in the buff up on his property.

There are a couple of reasons why Poway council members might be more prone to conflicts of interest. First of all, they do not have any ethics ordinances or an ethics commission like the City of San Diego does. Poway is a general law city and does have to abide by state laws. But state laws do not require council members to keep a calendar or log of who they meet with or what their activities are. What goes on behind closed doors stays behind the closed doors. Most of the decisions in Poway are made behind closed doors.

Another problem is that the council members are the planning commission and redevelopment agency, too. They wear all 3 hats at once. Their is no counter-balancing authority to appeal to. By the time a project goes before the council for approval, and the public finally has an opportunity to see and comment on it, it is too late. Likely, several of the council members have been personally involved with shaping the project. They may have even introduced the developer and project themselves and met with the developers or their representatives several times. The council members have likely discussed things with staff. Or maybe called staff on someone's behalf.

Even workshops and neighborhood meetings are more like infomercials than a forum where the community gets to give real input. Remember the town center meetings? People said they wanted something with a lot of open space and a rural feel. In their report afterwards, the staff as much as said, "We listened to you and we came up with some 4- story retail and residential buildings. But don't worry, we heard you, we're gonna have some vines growing on the 3-story parking garage that will give it a lovely rustic flair." I can hardly blame the staff. They do what they are told. Or they can be fired. So, some council member's buddy comes up with a great development project and the staff has to stuff it down our throats even if they know the community does not want it.

I'm at odds about Betty's resignation. On the one hand, it is clear she crossed an ethical line. It seems as if she doesn't even realize it. That is scary in itself. Betty has been very ineffectual in the last several years, as she has focused on subdividing her own property and getting concessions from developers that could benefit her property. Also, she seems to be increasingly unable to understand the complexity of council issues and relies on one or two individuals to help her make decisions.

On the other hand, I don't want another council appointment. That process sucks. A council appointment is like a gateway drug. Without term limits, incumbency seems to bestow near-lifetime status in Poway. Too many times in this community, a mere handful of people have controlled our fate. If Betty does resign, we should have a say, a vote, for her successor.

What's Up With All the Love for John Fitch?

h/t to HeardAroundPoway

Politicians often say the darnedest things. 

Like how they don't want to have a special election to fill a vacant council seat because they are so concerned about the financial condition of the city.

Right. 

A special election to fill the empty Poway council seat would  cost something like $250,000. Just a little more than the new directional signs around town. Just a little more than the upgraded sound system  planned for the Performing Arts Center. And a whole lot less than the millions of dollars they paid for a new city hall, when the old one wasn't that old. Heck, a special election would have cost half as much as the extra funding the city had to throw in to remodel an apartment house on Oak Knoll Rd. Apparently, democracy is not priceless.

At their special council meeting last week, the remaining four council members could not come to a consensus on who will be their our new councilperson. Don and Betty want John Fitch. Merrilee and Jim do not. So the council will meet again next Tuesday to have another look at the final four: Carl Kruse, John Fitch, Sabrina Butler and Dr Alexandra Page.  In the meantime, if you are a Poway citizen who feels like you ought to have a say about the matter, don't bother phoning or sending an email to Don. He has had it up to his eyeballs with having to read drivel from the masses.

That sparked an angry retort from Boyack.

“I could not disagree more,” Boyack said. “It’s our job to listen to the public ... I say, ‘Bring it on.’”

As I said, politicians say the darnedest things.

But what's up with all the love for John Fitch?

John Fitch was once the assistant city manager in Poway. Fitch was hired in 1981 as director of administrative services and promoted to assistant city manager in 1983. And although Poway City Manager Jim Bowersox is the one who hired John Fitch, and the two had previously worked together in La Mesa City Hall, there were strains in their working relationship. In 1996, things weren't going so well. Bowersox interviewed for and was offered a job as city manager of El Cajon. To keep him in Poway, the council had to agree to Bowersox's plan to reorganize the city manager's office and eliminate John Fitch's job. 

Fitch's options were to return to his previous position as director of administrative services, or to accept a new position that was created: Assistant City Manager-Economic Development.  It was probably a good economic move for the city because Fitch's salary could be paid out of the redevelopment pot of money instead of the general fund. And Fitch would be located in a different building. Hopefully, the physical separation would ease the tensions. 

Before Fitch accepted the new position, his attorney prepared an employment agreement.

One section described what would happen if he was fired or if he resigned.

The agreement became effective June 1, 1996.  Many people on Fitch Watch expected him to resign around Thanksgiving, but in December, the council did a strange thing. They modified the agreement so John would still get 18 months salary if he resigned within the next 90 days. This was a pretty big clue that everyone knew he was gonna be out the door by Feb 26.  John Fitch resigned on Feb 26, 1997, the last day he could resign and still get the maximum benefit. Fitch claimed he was "harassed" by city manager Jim Bowersox. Fitch was unhappy with the comments Bowersox wrote in his performance review. One of the comments said "You need to decide if you want to handle the economic development program and be a team player." (Poway News Chieftain, 3/6/97 pA14) In an interview with the Chieftain(PNC, 3/6/97 pA14) 

Bowersox said he had scheduled numerous team-building seminars over the years for his staff with a consultant, primarily to help Fitch get along with other department heads, who, at the time,reported to Fitch.

So, Fitch maybe isn't a "team player" and he has problems working with the staff. Is that the type of person who should be appointed to the vacant council seat?

While Fitch was feeling kicked around by Bowersox, he did a little kicking himself. In Oct 1996, Fitch, as rodeo chairman (he wore several hats) and pageant director Darci Sheldon, sent a letter to the reigning rodeo queen, telling her she could not represent Poway at future events and  asking her to return the "crown, chaps, clothing and other items" she had won in the pageant. (quote is from Dec 24, 1996 SDUT, p B3)

The two-page letter accused her of a series of "incidents of insubordination, gossip and personal attacks" on pageant officials, specifically Sheldon. In addition, she was accused of harassing the rodeo's junior queen and making derogatory comments about a fellow beauty queen, Miss Coors, at the 24th annual rodeo in October.

The rodeo queen was upset, felt humiliated and hired an attorney. She sued. The issue buzzed about in the newspapers for weeks.  So, it wasn't just staff that John had trouble with, it was 19- year-old rodeo queens, too.

Fitch had, and still has, a lot of ties with "the rodeo" and "horsey people" in Poway. When Creekside (our first town center) shopping center opened, John hyped it as a "western seaport village". He envisioned horse-drawn carriages carrying shoppers between Creekside and Old Poway Park.  Yep, politicians say the darnedest things. From time to time, there were other Western Village-theme park projects floating around. None of them ever came to fruition, but I'm sure John would still do one if he had the chance.

Whatever his dreams were, the reality was that John Fitch worked on shopping centers and affordable housing projects when he was asst. city manager. In order to build  Creekside shopping center, our first "town center", the city  had to clear out an old trailer park on Poway Rd.  The city had a new project built, Haley's Ranch Estates (HRE), as a place to relocate the former trailer park residents and also to meet the affordable housing requirements from redevelopment. The Poway Redevelopment Agency (PRA) signed an Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) with  Poway Land, Inc (PLI),  the developer on the project. The plan was that PLI would develop the site and have the manufactured homes built (with financial assistance from Poway) and then the PRA would buy the whole thing back. PLI was owned by one or both of the Kuebler brothers, Richard and Allan.

The original OPA was signed in June, 1989 and amended in 1991. This was the time period when John Fitch was assistant city manager and it is John Fitch who initiated the staff reports for the agenda items regarding the OPA with PLI. In other words, this project was his baby. 

The project was built, but when it came time for the Poway Redevelopment Agency to buy it back, PLI claimed what seemed like excessive amount of costs, many of which were "nearly impossible to verify" according to the Poway Redevelopement Services Department Notes, March 30, 1994.  The matter ended up in court. Poway lost and had to pay out $5.7 million (case # 701895) to the Kuebler's.  Another court case and appeals erupted over the attorney's fees. Poway had to pay out more than a million dollars on that one. Ouch! 

As asst. city manager, John Fitch complained about the Kuebler brothers and their shoddy record keeping. But after he resigned, Fitch may have begun consulting for one or both of the Kueblers. One of the Kueblers bought a prime parcel in the south Poway Industrial Park that John had his eye on for a long time. In fact, John  had the redevelopment agency work on designing a golf course/resort for the parcel while he was still working for the city.

photo and caption from North County Times, Jan 28, 1996, B-2

In January 1996, about 6 months before the city manager's office re-organization,  John Fitch and Betty Rexford unveiled one of their favorite projects: a golf course/resort to be located the southeastern edge of the city. Actually, they were planning on 2 golf courses, one would be on the south side of Scripps Poway Pkwy (SPP) and the other one would be on the north side of SPP near the Garden Road residential area. As a happy little coincidence, Fitch had a tunnel built under SPP to facilitate the  golf carts wild critters getting from one side to the other. In Feb 1996, the city hired a consultant to draw up plans for the resort and golf course (cost: $5,200). The project was called Standing Chimney Resort. 

I've noticed another thing about politicians. Besides saying the darnedest things, politicians  seem to forget a lot of stuff. Like the 7 yr drought we had in the late 80s and early 90s. Where was all the water supposed to come from for these golf courses?  

I am not sure if the golf course project is dead. The land was owned by the Pallas family for generations.  When the Industrial Park was being built, Freida Pallas hired a consultant and tried to get approval to develop her land, but she was unsuccessful.  She finally gave up and sold her land to one of the Kuebler brothers. Yep, those same Kueblers. The brothers also own other tracts of land south of Garden Road School. From what I hear, John Fitch has been doin' some consulting for the Keublers. When the owner of the parcel adjacent to the Keubler's parcel requested a zoning change, it was John Fitch who met with Merrilee Boyack and Betty Rexford to encourage them to vote for the change. The two sites, (Slough and the one owned by Keubler) were to be developed in tandem. This parcel owned by Kuebler (formerly the Pallas property) is the last big parcel in the Industrial Park. At one time Palomar College was looking at it as a possible location for a satellite campus, but the city really doesn't want the campus there (or maybe anywhere in Poway.)

If John Fitch were to be appointed as a city council member, his consulting work could create a lot of conflicts of interest. Would John Fitch be looking out for the best interest of the people of Poway or would he be using his position to get things moving for his client(s)?

I don't keep close tabs on John Fitch. I do not know how many projects he has been involved in that required city approval. There are 2 cases that I am familiar with. One was an approval for a gate on Mina de Oro.  Fitch represented a group of homeowners who lived on Mina De Oro and wanted city approval to install an electronic gate.  The intent of the gate may have been to block access for Manny Shoval, who also owns land on Mina de Oro and has some dreams for developing his land in a way that his neighbors are not too happy with.   After the gate went up on what Shoval contended was a public road, he  sued the city and the other owners.  Manny won his court case and 2 yrs after the gate went up, the courts demanded that it be removed. 

I've always wondered why the city granted approval for that gate in the first place. Shoval had documents which indicated that the road was a public road. Did the city do it just to put Shoval into extensive and costly litigation? Do we want to get the city tangled up in more litigation and neighbor squabbles? Why put John Fitch on the council?

Two of the people (Harry Rogers and Dennis Keena) who lived on Mina de Oro and John Fitch were involved in another city caper. The Juarez family owned 2 adjacents lots in the old Poway area. There was a small house on one of the lots. The Juarez's wanted to build a larger house but they were deterred by the city requesting that they do expensive engineering studies. They eventually sold the vacant lot to Harry Rogers in Sept., 2004 for $50,000.  Four months later Harry sold the lot to his neighbor Dennis Keena for $200,000 (4 times what he paid for it).  A year later, Keena wanted to build a house on the small lot, but the lot was so small he needed a variance to fit a house on the lot.  Represented by John Fitch, Keena submitted plans for a 2-story 2,172 sq ft ranch style  home and asked the city for a  variance  "to permit the garage and residence to encroach into the front, rear and side yard setbacks." The next door neighbor reviewed the plans Keena submitted.  But on the night of the variance hearing before the council, unbeknown to the neighbor, Keena showed the council plans for a different house, a 2,850 sq ft Victorian house that had a much larger profile than the ranch house. Represented by John Fitch, Keena asked the council to approve a "variance envelope" and an agreement that he could build the first house, the Victorian or another house without coming back to the council for approval, as long as the house fit within the variance envelope. This was an exception to the Poway code, which  says that if a project is later redesigned, then the applicant has to come back before the council for a new approval.  Unfortunately, the neighbor had never seen the plans for the Victorian house and was unaware of what the city had approved until it was being built.  But even then, the project was out of compliance. Construction was stopped until the council could meet and give another variance.  In the end, the council reduced the front setback from the required 40 ft to 27 ft, the side setbacks from 20 ft to 18.5 and 13.25 ft and the back setback from the  50 ft to only 21 ft.  In other words, the council gave permission to  Keena to build a house almost 30 ft closer to the neighbor's house than allowed under the code. Keena had bought the lot for $200,00 in Jan 2005. After obtaining the variance and permission to build the Victorian house, Keena sold the lot in Feb 2006, to Sean and Kendall Valenzuela for a cool $330,000.  He also sold the Valenzuela's one hell of a disgruntled neighbor. 

As Betty Rexford said, John Fitch knows the ropes. Yes he does. Maybe all too well. But I don't think we need a John Fitch as our next councilman, especially right now. We don't need more lawsuits, disgruntled residents, or insider deals. We need  council members who know that the staff's job is to serve the people of Poway; they're not your personal concierge.  May the person who is appointed be someone who is committed to serving their community first, before their own special interests.