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."

Bidness As Usual

irrigation water in the gutter in Arbolitos

Last (Tuesday) night, I wasted a few hours attending the workshop on the proposed water and sewer rates. There were mostly large-lot folks from north Poway at the meeting and they got what they wanted. The city is going to bail on the 5-tier conservation water rate structure and go with a 2-tier system. Everybody will pay $4.02/unit for their first 199 units in a billing period. The 200th unit on up will cost $5.74/unit. 200 units in one billing cycle is an ENORMOUS amount of water. It is way more water than the Cruse household uses in an entire year. Hardly anyone in Poway uses that much water, so for all practical purposes, we are back to a flat rate for most everyone.

Those of us who use less than 125 units in a billing cycle will see the water consumption part of our bill jump about 20%. The large-lot people who consume between 125-200 units in a billing cycle will see their water consumption bills jump about 10%.

The city will have to spend thousands of dollars to send out mailers (required by Prop 218) and give everyone notice of the changes and an opportunity to fruitlessly protest. Then in October, the council will lock in the new rates with a vote and they will become effective in January, 2011.

Last night's meeting went pretty much as I expected. A consultant presented several water and sewer rate options. Well, really just one sewer rate option and four water rate options. The four water rate options offered a choice between a 5, 3, 2 or no tier(s) structure. The first public speaker was Bruce Tarzy from the GVCA. Tarzy had already had a meeting with staff where he presented his 2-tier plan.  For months now, I have been hearing about how unfair it is that some people pay a different water rate than others, that some pay less than the cost to provide the service and are subsidized by others. So, why a 2-tier plan instead of a uniform unit rate? I'm not totally sure I get this, but from what I was hearing, it goes something like this: Everybody should pay the same rate. Except the people who use more than 200 units. Because they really need to learn to conserve. So, they have to pay more. As a result, the large-lot people are gonna get subsidized by the handful of super-large-lot people. And they seem OK with that. Advantage is relative.

After the people had their say, the council weighed in. Newbie John Mullin seemed to still be fond of a uniform unit rate. Jim Cunningham went next. If Cunningham had to be succinct to save his life, he'd be a goner. You can watch the replay, or if you want, but my analysis is that Cunningham's verbage amounted to: "What Tarzy said." Same with Carl Kruse. Next up was Merrilee Boyack. She wanted Don Higginson to go first, but he insisted that she state her position next. Boyack asked a few questions, but went with the Tarzy plan. Ditto the mayor.

I requested to speak during the public comment period. I wanted to address the sewer rates, or fees, as they are more appropriately called. I pointed out that we were all paying different rates. I even gave some examples of anomalies caused by the crazy tiered sewer fee structure:

1.)   Even when someone uses no water at all, they have to pay a minimum of  $45.00 for not using the sewer.    

2.)   The jumps between tiers are irregular.  A single extra shower or load of wash taken during the winter months could jump a user’s bill from  $304 to $458 per year.  That’s a $154 shower or load of wash or drink of water.

3.)   The person who uses 6 units of water pays the same total amount as the person who uses 12 units of water. How can this be conservation pricing when someone gets twice as much for the same price?  The person who uses 6 units pays twice the rate of the person who uses 12 units.

4.)    In general, the per unit cost for the sewer decreases as sewer use increases.

Well, I found out that the large-lot people and the council's passion for equity applies to water rates, but not to sewer fees, especially sewer fees that are tilted to their advantage.  Mayor Higginson, who interrupted me twice to hurry up with my comments, did not address my concerns. Neither did Boyack or Kruse. I am not sure if I heard correctly, but I think Mullin may have said something about looking into the sewer rates. To his credit, Jim Cunningham asked the staff about the sewer rates; staff told him there wasn't time for it this year, not enough time to get something sent out to the voters and ready for the October vote, it would have to wait.

So, there you have it.  Yep, I took the time to attend the water and sewer rate workshop. I stood up and spoke in front of a roomful of people who were seething with the injustice of unfair rates. I addressed a council that I had pre-sensitized for months with a barrage of emails and copies of my blogs. I'd even met with the staff and was the one who pointed out to them that there was quite a surplus in that sewer fund. And the response? There isn't time to fix the sewer rate structure.

Like I said, I wasted a couple of hours last night.

Leadership

Leadership. I've been hearing that word a lot lately. Which is fitting because we have an election right around the corner. Leadership does matter when we pick our leaders. So, I wanted to take a look at one of the biggest issues- Water Conservation- and see how the candidates (and current councilmembers) are doing on water conservation. Are they just telling us to use less water or are they leading by example? I requested the water use data from all of the current councilmembers and candidates for the last 2 yrs. Candidates were under no requirement to release that information, but EVERY ONE of THEM did. Kudos to the candidates. I used the water use data  to compare water conservation efforts from candidates and current councilmembers. 

First, a word about the data. Everybody is not on the same billing cycle. Some people get their bills in Jan/Mar/May/July/Sept/Nov and others get them in Feb/April/June/August/Oct/Dec. For purposes of comparing data, I aligned Jan bills with Feb bills, and Mar bills with April bills, etc. Also note that the data is for the billing date. The  billing date  will indicate the water use in the 2 previous months. For example, a March billing date will indicate how much water was used in the previous January and February.

There were also  2 instances where the customer had more than one reading in a billing cycle (probably indicating a new meter was installed) and one huge anomaly (probably indicating a water pipe break). Dave Grosch had 2 meter readings for Jan, 2010. I added the readings together. I did the same for Carl Kruse who had 2 readings in Jun/July 2009. Betty Rexford, who has the lowest water use among the group had a 129 unit reading in Aug 2009. No other reading was more than 11 units, so I substituted 11 units for the August 2009 reading. 

First, I wanted to compare the total water use during the period from Feb/Mar 2008 until Mar/April 2010.

Here are the results (click on each graph to make it larger):

The biggest water consumers during this period were Steve Vaus, Jim Cunningham and Don Higginson. Which is kind of interesting. Because they all live in the same neighborhood.  I'm not saying they would vote the same way on everything. But how weird would it be to have the council majority be 3 people who live about a block from each other and are big water users to boot?  Would we all feel represented under such a scenario?

The next biggest water user is Grosch (who used less than half the water Vaus used), followed by Boyack, Mullin, Collins and Babich.  At the bottom of the pack were Kruse, Cross, Willoughby, and Radcliff, all of whom live on smaller acreage than the other councilmembers and candidates. The smallest water user is Rexford, who, I believe, has a well.

Because some of the councilmembers and candidates live on larger parcels than others, I decided to compare winter water use. During the 2010 winter, folks should have been able to turn off their outside irrigation for an entire 2 month period. Especially if they were leading by example.  Ahem....

The following graph shows the number of units billed  in Feb. or Mar for each of the last 3 winters, 2008, 2009, and 2010. The data from 2010 is in yellow. 

The largest winter water user, by far, is Steve Vaus. His total use during Dec/Jan for the last 3 years is almost 300 units. And he used 65% more water during this period in 2010 than he did during this period in 2009.  Jim Cunningham is the next largest wintertime water user; he used just a little over half of what Vaus used. With the exception of Vaus, almost everyone cut their wintertime use in 2010 or kept it pretty close to what they used in 2009. 

With the city promoting turning off irrigation this winter, I would have expected to see the 2010 data (in yellow) be fairly close for everyone, despite their lot size.  But it isn't.  Boyack's use is the lowest- just 3 units. Collins is next lowest at 4, followed by Willoughby, Rexford and Grosch, who are all in single digit use. Way to lead by example!

Mullin, Kruse, Radcliff and Cross used under 15 units. Higginson clocked in at 19 (less than half what he used the previous winter), Babich came in at 20, followed by Cunningham at 33, and in the very last spot, Vaus with 91 units.  91 units is way out there!

The next thing I wanted to look at was whether the candidates and councilmembers had cut back their use since the previous year. So I compared the total number of water unit used during the last 12 months to the 12 months before that.

The following information is useful in comparing and analyzing the data:

Vaus, Higginson and Babich all have lots between 32,000-37,000 s.f.

Cunningham, Rexford and Mullin have lots in the 22,000- 27,00 s.f range. 

Boyack's lot is about 14,500 s.f

Radcliff, Wiilloughby and Cross have lots between 6,600-7500 s.f.

The size of Grosch, Collins and Kruse's lot is unavailable on the Poway or Sandag's GIS site or zillow. 

Grosch lives in Rancho Arbolitos in a lot zoned PC-2. Collins lives in North Poway on a lot zoned RS-2 and Kruse also lives in North Poway on a lot zoned RS-4.

Once again, some people have been conserving for years and their recent use might not show much improvement. But look at that graph! Everybody, except Radcliff,  cut their water use in the past year. I'm going to give Radcliff a pass on this because his water use was, and still is, pretty low.  

The graph shows that, in general, people who have larger lots use more water. No surprise there. But there is still a lot of spread between the larger water consumers. Vaus, Higginson and Babich have lots that are relatively close in size, yet Vaus uses way more water than Higginson and more than twice as much water as Babich. So, there is still lots of room for improvement and leadership. And probably pool covers. 

Note: All of the candidates do not have the same philosophy when it comes to how the city should structure water rates and promote conservation. Please visit each candidate's website to learn more about their view on water conservation and water rates:

Dave Grosch 

Chuck Cross 

Roger Willoughby (could not find a website for Willoughby)

Howard Collins

Pete Babich

David Radcliff

Steve Vaus 

John Mullin

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.

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.