Friday, March 28th, 2008 at 2:31 AM
LCV Middle School Property?
I received this email, and was wondering if anyone went to the meeting last night?
Hey Jim,
Love following your blog – have done so for a while and weighed in several times in the past. Do you have any take on the La Costa Valley middle school property issue?
On the one side, there is this letter from the superintendent:
On the other, there is this side of the issue presented by some concerned residents.
To: mail@friendsofnorthcounty.org
Subject: Coming to La Costa Valley Apartment and Low Income Housing???
Could LOW INCOME HOUSING, COMMERCIAL CENTERS, APARTMENTS or INDUSTRIAL PARKS be coming to your La Costa Valley neighborhood?
Find out why the answer could be YES.
Become informed about the vacant property in the heart of La Costa Valley.
Neighborhood meeting:
Wednesday, March 26 at 7:00 pm
Coastline Community Church
2215 Calle Barcelona
Mark your calendar and bring your neighbors!
Become informed about the vacant property in the heart of La Costa Valley.Mark your calendar and bring your neighbors!
Just wondering if you had any contacts, information, or otherwise to give me a better sense of the reality of this issue?
Thanks
Posted on Friday, March 28th, 2008 at 2:31 AM in Uncategorized | 59 Comments » | 
Print
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Somewhat OT: how badly do you think North County schools are going to be hit by shrinking tax revenues?
Clive | March 28th, 2008 at 3:06 amI checked the NC Times and UT this morning looking for stories on this since they covered the last couple meetings these rabble rousers have had.There wasn’t anything this morning, so I think the reporters have figured out there’s no story here.
What the "Friends of North County" don’t realize is the more they mislead people into thinking that property is destined to be used for something undesirable in the community, the more likely it will become a local urban legend. Eventually, the realtors and other communities will pick up on it and then the unofficial truth will be "everybody knows that land is secretly being rezoned for low income housing/industrial park/maximum security prison/etc."
That myth will surely tank the La Costa Valley area’s property values more than the lack of a new middle school not clogging traffic in the area.
Richard Roller | March 28th, 2008 at 4:09 amClive,
I’m hearing quite a bit of rumbling regarding public service cut-backs. Some people I know in the education field are saying that the schools (various districts throughout California) are basically freezing new-hires and the 20:1 class-sizes (from class-size reduction act in the 90s, which limited K-3 to 20 students per class) might well go back to 30:1 or even 40:1.
Then, there are discussions regarding pay and benefit cuts as well as hiring freezes/lay-offs in the police and fire departments, as well as administrative and support positions.
Mostly rumor and conjecture at this point, but where there’s smoke, there’s fire.
—————–
The state is currently in a $16 billion budget shortfall. Last week, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger told reporters, "I have no choice. I by law have to balance the books."
In San Diego County, more than 1,000 teachers have received pink slips, as well as dozens of other employees of school districts countywide.
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/15697180/detail.html
CA renter | March 28th, 2008 at 5:31 amAlso from nbcsandiego:
In the Poway Unified School District, which faces a potential $15.5 million budget cut because of lost state funding, notices started going out Wednesday. Sharon Raffer in the district office said the notices are being hand delivered. Raffer said that teachers who receive pink slips were chosen based on tenure and certification — the less tenure and certifications, the higher the chance of receiving a pink slip.
One of the hardest hit schools in the district is Westview High School where 42 people received the letter. Students there have decided to rally around those teachers.
“Everyone’s encouraged to wear T-Shirts that say, ‘Cut our palm trees, not our teachers,’" said tenth grader Inessa Stysis. “It’s a little joke because Westview has real expensive palm trees. I guess that they spent a lot of money on.”
Jim the Realtor | March 28th, 2008 at 7:18 amI am really surprised about the Poway cuts. I thought the district was flush with cash and couldn’t spend it fast enough. Did they not have half a brain and save some for a rainy day.
Oh wait, Americans don’t save….what was I thinking?
Keith Rettig | March 28th, 2008 at 10:48 amNIMBYism at it’s finest
shadash | March 28th, 2008 at 1:15 pmSchool districts cannot save. They are paygo. Still they were drunken sailors for the last few years exercising their political power in propositions and Sacramento. Pay and benefits are as unsustainable as housing prices.
Rob Dawg | March 28th, 2008 at 2:22 pmWith baby boomers phasing out, I would think most areas would be seeing a decline in enrollment too.
On the other hand, teachers can’t afford a house, so there may not be that much effect on the real estate market by their layoffs?
Jim the Realtor | March 28th, 2008 at 2:40 pmWhat’s the state doing funding local schools in the first place. I’m new to California, but this just seems odd. Back east schools are funded locally through property taxes. This works pretty well. Although the state does provide some money, it is to fund state sponsored programs that a lot of people wouldn’t be terribly upset with if they got cut b/c of lack of funding.
Having the state fund general operating expenses of schools seems ludicrous. It should not come as a surprise that California finds itself in this predicament.
Chester | March 28th, 2008 at 4:37 pmThe friends of north county are attorneys that have banded together to stir up some extra work.
Yeah, they might cost the HOA a bit in legal fees. And yeah, they might scare away buyers who don’t like to buy into lawsuit-happy neighborhoods, further driving down home prices.
simpletome | March 28th, 2008 at 4:55 pmBut this is a strong community and will survive their NIMBY methods.
What’s the state doing funding local schools in the first place.
In 1978 it was determined that local property taxes going to local schools was racist. At the time California schools k-12 were in the top 5 of the nation. 13 years later California was in the bottom 5. The process rewards failing schools and sends more money to the worst schools and the districts with the least efficiency. Those who could afford took their kids out further lowering support and scores. Education to the lowest common denominator became the rule.
Rob Dawg | March 28th, 2008 at 5:20 pmDo you think it’s appropriate for Carlsbad schools to be funded with 3x more money per student than Chula Vista schools, simply because houses in Carlsbad are 3 times more expensive on average?
That was the situation until 1978.
SD Scientist | March 28th, 2008 at 5:56 pmAnyone who was at the meeting would know none of the comments above regarding LCV and FONC are true. They are not attorneys though one member is. They are not concerned about low income residents but rather the addiotn of potentially 2000 residents in a high density complex in what is already a very crowded situation including an elementary school designed for 500 kids but currently serving over 900!
The school Board hired a law firm to find out how to sell unused school sites last year. Guess how many they own. Exactly ONE! State law also requires that school sites be offered to affordable housing first. Any affordable housing built on this site would have to be very high density to justify the price of the land which is probably about $50M based upon other recent sales in SD (the old Uni site).
From the research conducted by FONC it appears that the San Dieguito School district perpetuated a massive fraud on the folks in this Mello Roos district. They have tons of documentation proving this.
bd | March 28th, 2008 at 6:11 pmbd… your take on this is closer to what I have been hearing as well.
I went to the meeting and it looks like, despite the superintendant’s letter that says thay have no plans to do anything with the property, evidence shows they have already started the process of surplusing the land. The argument was made that by the time the community is aware of their true intentions (for example, when it goes before the city council to be rezoned), it will be too late. The HOA Board has refused to be involved up to this point because they are defining this as a political issue… whereas most residents see this as a community quality of life issue and a economic issue and do see it as something the HOA Board should pursue.
Personally, I would like to a see a special assessment and have the community of 1100 homes buy the property from the district for what they paid for it and keep it as is (roughly $5500 for each home). This doesn’t address the district’s purported malfeasance, but it does solve the issue of what might happen to the property in the future.
LCV Resident | March 28th, 2008 at 6:33 pmThanks Rob Dawg and SD Scientist on the history lesson. It helps to explain why California public education so quickly fell to one of the worst systems in the nation.
Chester | March 28th, 2008 at 6:48 pmNIMBYism at it’s finest
I don’t understand this comment.
If it is OK to pay extra to move into a nice neighborhood, then why is it somehow unacceptable to want to keep your neighborhood that way?
Everyone is free to move into less prosperous neighborhoods, and they will be rewarded by saving money for doing so.
If we are going to say that no neighborhood can be any better than any other neighborhood, let’s say so explicitly so people understand exactly what is being proposed.
daveg | March 28th, 2008 at 6:52 pmAnyone who followed the years of turmoil in Del Mar of over that district’s Shores property knows that a school site can’t just be sold overnight and without any public input. It’s a lengthy process that can take years. Also, I don’t recall during that controversy that the Del Mar district or city ever mentioned turning that property into low income housing (certainly they have less low income property than Carlsbad).
hyperpretension | March 28th, 2008 at 7:03 pmDo you think it’s appropriate for Carlsbad schools to be funded with 3x more money per student than Chula Vista schools,
All I care about is the result, and the result of the reforms in California have been poorer performing schools.
As someone who moved from the east coast I can say that the local funding made the district seem much more responsive and much easier to get involved. The California system feels like a faceless bureaucracy, to me.
And the results speak for themselves. The performance of the schools has gone way down since these reforms were implemented and the conditions of the physical facilities are abysmal, in my opinion, in all but the newest schools.
This is even true for schools in good neighborhoods.
Now, the fact that some huge percentage of the students don’t speak English is certainly a factor, but people don’t seem to want to tackle that subject head-on.
daveg | March 28th, 2008 at 7:03 pmLCV Resident: Thank you for the information. I missed the meeting but am also concerned.
If a bond could be raised by the residents to buy back the property how much more would monthly taxes increase? I’m calculating $30-35 per month. Thats a great deal to gain access to that much open space.
The property was promised to be used for a community purpose: a school. If it wont become a school then it should still remain a community resource, not a subsidy to new residents or a profit center for the school district.
I believe that the Mello Roos fees go to the High School district and thus aren’t an issue for the potential Middle School. Does anyone know the stated purpose for the Mello Roos in LCV?
Tom in LCV | March 28th, 2008 at 7:33 pmDo you think it’s appropriate for Carlsbad schools to be funded with 3x more money per student than Chula Vista schools, simply because houses in Carlsbad are 3 times more expensive on average?
Rob Dawg | March 28th, 2008 at 8:15 pmyes, i can say that with no reservation and absolutely no fear of any claims of racism or classism standing up to the evidence. The very worst thing that could happen to underperforming schools happened. The results are undeniable. And it persists. Why do you think the "good" school districts that managed to survive the gutting command such a high premium today? The Carlsbad schools were not getting three times as much, their mil rates were lower. Districts at the time were free to purse more local funding. Carlsbad schools got more because they self selected for residents willing to pay more. The schools that suddenly got more money were the ones doing the worst. Perverse incentives that yielded predictable results. The place that would have liked to pay more for better were prohibited until things like bonds started showing up. Then the State started prorating for that. Again with predictable results.
By making every school equally bad equality was achieved. The kids who suffered most were the minority children who’s families had decreased incentives to get their kids into a better district.
The property is zoned for a school and LCV residents should not have to purchase the property back. And it damn well should not be rezoned unless there is a direct benefit to the surrounding community. This is why we elect government officials. They should look after their constituents’ best interests. If they want to rezone it for more SFD homes, then the school district and LCV master developer should refund all LCV homeowners the Mella Roos we’ve been paying for the last 7-10 years with interest since having a middle school was used as a selling point for the community. With that said if Mayor Bud and his pals try to rezone this they are going to get plenty of opposition.
Not sure of the political implications but this is not the Carlsbad school district. This is San Dieguito Union HS district, but the property and LCV are in the city of Carlsbad.
Anonymous III | March 28th, 2008 at 11:26 pmHey, we should be sending thanks to the friends of north county group. They got the district to go on record in a very public way.
kudos to FONC | March 28th, 2008 at 11:43 pmI don’t agree with the way they faked up pictures and who knows what else, but so what? they got results. Isn’t that what matters?
Apparently the 25 mil the specific mello roos bond in question raised is entirely spent already. So the money is gone. San Dieguito Union High district includes both the high schools and the middle schools. The bond language specifies a number of things the money can be spent on in the entire district – of which only roughly 6 mil was used to buy the LCV site. The argument is that the school district never intended to build a middle school there… instead, they trumped up a bunch of data studies that showed the need for one so they could justify the bond. In fact, the current numbers now to build a school seem to be more compelling than the data they used to justify it, yet they now argue a school is not justified. So it appears the property was bought for investment purposes. The thing about rezoning is that if that comes before the city council, the city council’s job is not to look at what is best for LCV, it is to look at what is best for Carlsbad. I agree that the FONC did get the district to go on record saying they were not pursuing surplusing and rezoning. But, there is also meeting for which there is proof with city council member Mark Packard where school officials wanted to talk about rezoning. In addition, $50k was spent to hire a firm to educate the district on the process of surplusing property, of which they only have the LCV site. This evidence doesn’t mean it is going to happen… but what is the district going to do with a piece of property that they bought for $6 mil but now might be worth now upwards of $50 mil, especially in light of tight fiscal times ahead.
LCV Resident | March 29th, 2008 at 12:14 amUltimately, I think the LCV HOA needs to get involved as the voice of the community. Furthermore, it makes sense that the LCV HOA should try to get the other HOA’s involved who are also paying in to the same bond for the next 30 years. With several HOA’s involved, perhaps the district will be compelled, if they are in fact interested in surplusing the property, in beginning discussions about what might be mutually beneficial for both the district and the community. I wouldn’t mind buying the property, but perhaps a park, sports complex, part district offices and part single family homes, etc could be agreed upon. In any case, adding 2000+ people to the middle of LCV visavis low income apartments, does not seem to be consistent with the community.
To Anonymous III, yes, the middle school was a selling point for the developer and realtors in the area, they were probably also telling their clients to buy now because real estate values never go down.
To Tom in LCV and LCV Resident, who both allude to the things that the Mello-Roos can be spent on, this is what is listed in the school district’s FAQ on the property as stated uses:
All proceeds shall be reserved to finance the acquisition or construction of the School Facilities and other expenses and obligations of the CFD in accordance with the following priorities:
First: To repay School District’s CFD expenses and reimburse Landowner pursuant to the Advancement of Funds Agreements.
Second: To pay for interim school facilities and all costs and expenses related thereto as needed to house students residing within the Property or CFD but not in excess of $700,000 in the aggregate.
Third: To acquire the School Site (La Costa Valley) unless the District determines not to acquire the School Site as provided herein.
Fourth: To purchase, construct, expand, improve and/or rehabilitate:
• Oak Crest Middle School
• Diegueno Middle School
• A new junior high school in south Carlsbad (La Costa Valley)
• San Dieguito High School Academy
• A new high school in south Carlsbad (La Costa Canyon HS)
• Sunset High School
• Adult Education facilities and Continuation High School facilities.
Looks to me like a new middle school wasn’t the only thing they had in mind when they negotiated the deal with the developer. Have they used the Mello-Roos for any purposes not mentioned above?
Richard Roller | March 29th, 2008 at 12:46 amRob Dawg said:
"In 1978 it was determined that local property taxes going to local schools was racist. At the time California schools k-12 were in the top 5 of the nation. 13 years later California was in the bottom 5. The process rewards failing schools and sends more money to the worst schools and the districts with the least efficiency."
——————–
I agree very much with your point — that more money was funneled to poorer schools– but would add that forced busing/integration was **the** downfall of California’s schools.
As a student in LAUSD at the time (1970s), I can assure you that I and every other middle-class student was ripped out of the public school system faster than anything you can imagine when they began this busing debacle. All that was left in L.A. Unified were the poor, forsaken kids of the ultra-left liberals who were trying to make a stand (and ended up taking their kids out, too, after reality smacked them in the face), and the poor, "urban" kids from downtown. My local Jr. High (good neighborhood in the SF Valley) had over 75% of its students bused in from downtown L.A.
Boy, do I have stories…
CA renter | March 29th, 2008 at 1:16 amWhat should the school district do with the site?
1. Give it to the HOA at no cost.
2. Sell it to the HOA for $6 million.
3. Give it to HOA and refund pro-rated mello roos collected.
Care to leave your vote?
Thanks everyone for great contributions – it’s discussions like these that can help cause change.
Jim the Realtor | March 29th, 2008 at 4:17 amyes, i can say that with no reservation and absolutely no fear of any claims of racism or classism standing up to the evidence. The very worst thing that could happen to underperforming schools happened. The results are undeniable.
Even though schools are now funded equally, Carlsbad schools are vastly better than Chula Vista schools. It’s not because Chula Vista schools are underperforming. CV has poorer demographics. It would be wrong and counterproductive to penalize South Bay schools for their poor academic performance by cutting their funding. IMO everyone should get an equal chance whether they have rich white parents or poor black parents.
The results you’re talking about are consequences of desegregation and busing practices (resulting in lower enrollment of wealthy kids in public schools) rather than consequences of lower funding of richest school districts.
SD Scientist | March 29th, 2008 at 9:43 amHere is the latest from the Friends of North County group who are trying to get to the bottom of this. Feel free to email them get on the email list to get updates on this issue.
—
Friends
While we are responding as quickly as we can to your emails and questions, we wanted to take this opportunity to share a few points with you and to ask for your help.
Many of you have asked for details about where you can send your donation. Please make your checks payable to Friends of North County. They can be sent to 1042 North El Camino Real P.O. Box 237, Encinitas, CA 92024. Friends of North County is a non-profit organization. We have applied for tax deductible status but we are still awaiting that designation. It may take many months for that to occur (and there are no guarantees that it will). We will let you know if we are granted that designation but urge you NOT to wait for that to occur before you send in your donation.
Several of you have forwarded your thoughts to us since our presentation earlier this week. Your input and comments help us to better understand the community’s perspective and the level of support we can count on as we continue this process. We also request that you share your thoughts with your friends and neighbors as well. For those of you who have not sent us your comments, we ask that you take a few minutes and send us an email with the information noted below. Please send your comments to mail@friendsofnorthcounty.org. To help inform the community, we may post excerpts of your emails on our website (no names, email address, or contact information will be displayed). Please provide us with your thoughts in general about the issues but also include the following:
What you have learned from our recent presentation;
Your thoughts about how the school district has dealt with us;
Why you believe the school district has responded the way they have;
Whether or not you believe the school district (their employees and their elected officials) should be held accountable for their actions; and
Do you believe you were misled by the school district’s seven year promotion and signage campaign advertising the "future middle school."
We are looking to expand our media relationships. If any of you have strong ties to the media, we would appreciate a referral. We are looking for local media contacts, but also for national media contacts focused on investigative reporting (20/20, 60 Minutes, Primetime, etc.). While we have limited our focus to this particular school district, this particular property, and the specific use of taxpayer funds for which we are all paying $800 per year for thirty-five years, known as CFD 94-2 (Mello Roos), we also are aware of similar issues throughout California (and we believe the nation) where school districts are taking advantage of taxpayers. We believe our story has national significance and that promoting what we have learned (and will be learning) will benefit our community, as well as taxpayers and government officials across the country.
Again we restate what we have posted in the past. The school district has all of our contact information. We continue to hope that they will decide to work with us in this matter to reach a solution. Until that happens (or in case it does not) we will not be deterred by the school district’s campaign of misinformation, propaganda, and scare tactics. The history of the district’s actions can’t be changed. They can’t erase it, get rid of it, or avoid it. We have taken the time to learn those facts and are determined to learn more.
Thank you again for your input, support and comments.
Sincerely,
Friends of North County
FONC Supporter | March 29th, 2008 at 3:07 pmWow, "friends of north county" is a very broad term. What other causes – besides being a foe of "the school district" whatever that means – does FONC support?
Or are they only focused on the single school district that their kids probably attend?
I tried to visit their website, but it apparently requires a password.
jb | March 29th, 2008 at 4:52 pm"What should the school district do with the site?
1. Give it to the HOA at no cost.
2. Sell it to the HOA for $6 million.
3. Give it to HOA and refund pro-rated mello roos collected"
A modified (3). All Mello-Roos that was supposed to pay for the new school should be refunded, and future M-R should be reduced to reflect the reduced infrastructure.
As for what should be done with the land, once the M-R payers have received their money back, they should have no more say in the future disposition of the land than anyone else in the school district. Nobody can guarantee the future; population trends and enrollment change, and to continue with plans to build and open a new school if enrollment doesn’t support the need would be fiscally irresponsible. My disdain for M-R as a means of paying for new infrastructure (as opposed to hitting the builder for it and letting it be reflected in the real price of new construction) is probably well established here, but anybody who is downright stupid enough to pay M-R for new infrastructure *that hasn’t even been built yet* is just getting what they deserve when the plans fall through.
GeneK | March 29th, 2008 at 4:55 pmSD Scientist,
Do you have kids in public school? I do. I don’t know specifically about Carlsbad, but the "good" schools in the "rich" districts of La Jolla, Del Mar and Carmel Valley get very, very little state funding BECAUSE they are "good" schools.
So how do they remain "good" schools? The PARENTS at those schools have set up Foundations that raise money to support "extras" – like enough teachers to keep class sizes reasonable. So, in addition to paying very high property taxes for a desirable school district, the parents donate directly to their school to make sure their kids get a decent education. Meanwhile, their tax money goes to Chula Vista. You consider that to be fair??
I think the data clearly demonstrates that throwing money at an underperforming school does NOTHING to improve performance. Many, many studies show that parent involvement is the key to a quality education. Not money. The current system does not work.
just me | March 29th, 2008 at 5:15 pmGood questions, Jim the Realtor
What should the school district do with the site?
1. Give it to the HOA at no cost.
2. Sell it to the HOA for $6 million.
3. Give it to HOA and refund pro-rated mello roos collected.
If you do start a poll, another important question is what should happen to the property if somehow the HOA got control of it.
This should be asked by LCV homeowners and also the 30 or so homes in Rancho Ponderosa in Encinitas that border the property.
1. Return it to its former use as a recreation area/open space
2. Affordable housing
3. Office park
4. Church or churches
5. Single-family homes
6. Mixed-use
There may be other ideas, too.
Maybe before that question, ask LCV homeowners if they want to be property developers.
Another LCV Resident | March 29th, 2008 at 7:21 pm7. World HQ for Klinge Realty?
Jim the Realtor | March 29th, 2008 at 7:30 pmDawg Park.
Rob Dawg | March 29th, 2008 at 8:25 pmIMO everyone should get an equal chance whether they have rich white parents or poor black parents.
Your rational that the sytem is better is based on circular logic, flat funding is better becuase everyone gets the same amount of funds – a tautology.
You don’t even try to claim that the funding system provides a better education, for anyone.
The question is, does it provde a better school system for ANYONE. I see nothing to suggest that it does.
By all metrics the systems has gotten worse – test scores, graduation rates, etc.
What is the dropout rate in CA – 67%? What is it in LA – 50%? Link
We are going to compete real well with that…
daveg | March 29th, 2008 at 8:41 pmPut a drive through Starbucks there. There is not one within 1/8 of a mile from there.
Seriously though, at this point, I don’t think anyone would mind if they just put another 100 homes there that matched the feel and style of the community. There is already a church next to the vacant land, so that is not an option.
Observer | March 29th, 2008 at 9:10 pmAnd in the current market, it will only be a matter of time before the new homes and the existing ones in the area all become "affordable housing."
GeneK | March 29th, 2008 at 9:22 pmdaveg,
While I know that throwing increasing amounts of money at "poor kids" does nothing to improve their academic performance, there IS an amount (depends on demographics, basic costs, etc.) that is required to fund the basic needs for all schools/students.
IMHO, all students should have access to clean, safe schools, qualified teachers, up-to-date books, *some* computers (maybe one per class), and a reasonable student-to-teacher ratio.
Things like swimming pools, fancy baseball/football fields, tennis courts, etc. are NOT necessary, and extra money should not be spent on these things as they can be provided through parks & recreation. They can also stop wasting money on special in-services and programs which tend to be passing fads (and expensive ones, at that).
CA renter | March 29th, 2008 at 9:54 pmKeep waiting for that, GeneK. Even back at 1999 prices, LCV was hardly affordable. We are back at 2003 prices now, which is roughly 25% down from the peak. If you are predicting another 25% that would put us roughly back to 1999 prices. That would mean the average LCV home would be between 450k-600k. What "affordable housing" criteria does that meet for you? None in my book. Are you predicting prices for homes in LCV between 150k-250k? If so, please let us know so that we can stop reading your posts and advise you to go commiserate with the ultra bears (who are dillusional) over on the piggington.com website…. c’mon.
Single Digit | March 29th, 2008 at 10:05 pmMy definition of "affordable" is nowhere near that of the housing activists. In order to meet mine, you’d need to have completed a college education and spent some 5-10 years establishing a good credit rating and socking away money for a decent downpayment. Someone renting an apartment but driving a $40k car would probably never make it.
If I’m sticking my neck out and trying to predict where the bottom will be, I’d say somewhere around 2002 levels, solidly before the beginning of subprime mortages. I wasn’t tracking SD home prices then, so I don’t know what that translates to in terms of average home price.
GeneK | March 29th, 2008 at 10:14 pmFor an edjumacator, she sure writes like a retard.
W.C. Varones | March 29th, 2008 at 10:20 pmIf the FONC wants to get national or even local media attention, it needs to clean up its act a little.
simpletome | March 30th, 2008 at 8:59 pmIn their emails they say we will not be deterred by the school district’s campaign of misinformation, propaganda, and scare tactics .
The most recent emails had a lot of misinformation and even a fabricated photo. Sure, those type of scare tactics will fill meeting halls. But, in the end, it just makes it less likely the media will take FONC seriously.
Maybe try some youtube footage of angry homeowners?
I went to that FONC meeting. It was a 2 1/2 hour ego trip. And now he wants to go on 20/20, 60 Minutes, and Primetime, too? I’m not giving him any of *my* money.
LCV homeowner | March 31st, 2008 at 12:24 amHey LCV homeowner, it looks like FONC wants more than a few nickels from the offering plate. They have at least one of their members on the HOA board and you know what can mean – direct dipping into HOA funds, spending HOA time and money on this FONC crusade, and who knows what else.
Another LCV resident | March 31st, 2008 at 2:10 pmThe next HOA meeting is April 14.
Yes, Another LCV Resident, you’re right. At the FONC meeting they boasted that they had managed to get one of their members on the HOA board. But I don’t recall that he even mentioned this issue or his FONC affiliation during the election. Is that democracy in action? I think they call that a stealth candidate.
LCV homeowner | March 31st, 2008 at 6:01 pmLCV homeowner…. yes, Buccia did mention his thoughts that the HOA should get involved in this issue in the ballot – he was very clear about it in the description of his qualifications and why he was running. At least in our case, we cast both of our household votes for him because of this. Our HOA dues are very low and I wouldn’t mind them increasing if it meant the district would deal with a consistent voice to resolve this issue. Your thoughts?
Single Digit | March 31st, 2008 at 8:05 pmRichard Roller: Thanks for the info. LCV homeowners are going to have a very difficult time getting the Mello Roos returned + interest. A legal contest against Mello Roos would be a huge deal because lots governments aren’t following through with the promises of Mello Roos.
How about the huge vacant lot below Encinitas Ranch? Is that a Mello Roos funded "future school site" also?
I’m not saying that a homeowner of LCV doesn’t have a right to demand Mello Roos to be returned. The verbiage of the agreement misleads the taxpayers, especially Priority 4.
A legal challenge could commence between the taxpayers and the district and a settlement to buy the property for $6 million might be a result or some Mello Roos could be returned and used to fund the purchase of the site. The school district can’t ethically give away a $50million property away without a fight.
As a resident of LCV, I would like to use the area for open space/recreation. It doesn’t have to be high maintenance, just some grass and trails with no dog restrictions like Stagecouch. No need for more homes, there are already plenty of houses for sale, just ask Jim.
Tom in LCV | March 31st, 2008 at 11:16 pmTOM in LCV-you’re right on on two points
Challenging mello-roos isn’t only a LCV issue.
Right now isn’t the time for 100 new high-end LCV homes. Although we might need to start now if it’s going to happen in the next 5 years.
However, while I like the idea of having the area be open space/recreation, the way it was before didn’t work. There were a lot of kids (and adults) with noisy off-road vehicles and also irresponsible dog owners not cleaning up their messes. So it was becoming quite a pit.
Someone would need to be responsible to maintain the area and liable if something happened to anyone there.
Another LCV resident | April 1st, 2008 at 12:20 amMaybe just put a park maintenance assessment on the approximately 50 homes that border that property since they have such a nice, quiet view bonus? I bet $500 per month per unit would be a good start. (only half-kidding, as others have suggested that)
Hello, single digit. My thoughts?
We don’t need more consistency. The FONC guy already just says the same things over and over again.
What we need is more reasonableness. Is there any guarantee that if FONC-ites take over the HOA they will suddenly become reasonable in their rhetoric and their expectations? Or will they be just one-issue administrators giving short shrift to the more mundane work that the HOA really needs to do?
Our Mello-Roos money supports projects that directly benefit our children every day. Declining elementary school enrollment (look at other elementary schools in the district, not just ECC!) just means we don’t need a new middle school, not that our Mello-Roos money hasn’t benefited the LCV community.
LCV homeowner | April 1st, 2008 at 3:18 pmHello, Tom in LCV.
Yes, I’ve heard, too, that the big vacant space below Encinitas Ranch was dedicated to a future elementary school when that development was built. But apparently that school isn’t needed there, either.
LCV Homeowner | April 1st, 2008 at 3:23 pmLCV Homeowner: When I say consistency… I mean a consistent voice that represents the entire LCV community (instead of the FONC on the one side and those folks who do not support the FONC’s viewpoint on the other). Isn’t it the responsibility of the HOA to represent the entire LCV community? I don’t disagree that if enrollment does not justify a new school then a new school should not be built. On the other hand, I do think that there are many roads the school district could take from here when thinking about what to do with the property. Working with the LCV HOA (since the property sits right in the middle of LCV), as the consistent single voice representing the voice of the entire community, to help reach consensus about a use that would benefit both the district and the community, seems like a no-brainer to me. I am really trying to understand why you disagree… isn’t that reasonable? Your further thoughts?
Single Digit | April 1st, 2008 at 4:31 pmThanks.
Another LCV resident: I wasn’t around when the property was a pit, sounds horrible. It would have to be maintained with some use restrictions.
I used to live in a dumpy complex called Park Place in Cardiff. It had a huge ravine with trails, grassy areas, and some natural/wild parts. Only dog owners from Park Place could use the park and taking walks around the park was the best part of living there.
The landscaping staff of LCV does a great job, I’m sure the area could be a real benefit to the community. LCV has a lot of open space that is natural but not much that is usable by people other than tot lots and come-on, tot lots are lame.
Tom in LCV | April 1st, 2008 at 5:13 pmAn april fools post about this topic. What a jokster,
Tom in LCV | April 4th, 2008 at 10:06 pmlink
Hello, Single Digit: The HOA as "a consistent single voice representing the voice of the entire community" would be great, but that wouldn’t be a FONC-driven HOA. FONC certainly doesn’t speak for me, or for a lot of other LCV residents. I don’t like FONC’s tactics and I don’t believe they are being honest about their real objectives.
Tom in LCV: That April 1 article is hilarious! At least someone has kept their sense of humor about this issue. And there are some other good comments in the rest of that blog, too. The writer raises some good questions about FONC and their methods.
LCV Homeowner | April 13th, 2008 at 6:50 amIt looks like things are heating up in La Costa Valley. The group got one of their members onto the board, and has already snuck in a special HOA board meeting. It will be Tuesday, May 6th, meaning homeowners will only get one or two day’s advance notice.
Another LCV Homeowner | May 1st, 2008 at 11:50 pmWhat is wrong with the Board hearing from the community it serves how it wants it to proceed? Holding a special meeting for this purpose makes perfect sense to me and does seem sneaky. I will be attending and encouraging all of my neighbors to do so as well.
Yet Another LCV Homeowner | May 3rd, 2008 at 2:29 amI agree with you completely, neighbor. The Board should hear from the community it serves. That’s why they should give enough advance notice so all concerned homeowners can attend.
Another LCV Resident | May 6th, 2008 at 4:43 amMany neighbors still haven’t been notified so will miss their chance to have their say. They also won’t hear what the board has to say about its authority limitations and capabilities regarding the School District property.
So then why don’t people show up and say they want another special meeting as well where all of the community can receive proper notice and attend? This doesn’t seem like that big of a deal nor does it seem like the board is being sneaky. It seems like a first step – that is, actually initiating a discussion at the Board level on an issue that the entire community is talking about. In addition, it seems logical that the Board would want to do some type of poll of the entire community to see how it wants its Board to be involved or not. Just because you say the Board currently has "authority limitations and capabilities" does not mean that if poll results show the community wants the Board to get involved that those "authority limitations and capabilities" (which by the way are subject to lots of interpretations) can not be changed. People seem to forget that the Board is supposed to represent the views of the community. At this point there is no way to know what those views are and what percentage of the community holds them or not.
Yo’s 2 cents.
Yo | May 6th, 2008 at 7:26 pmHey, YO, you’re right! The HOA should represent the view of the community.
View Pacific | May 8th, 2008 at 1:54 pmThere’s something fishy going on.
The newsletter only arrived today – AFTER the meeting. The thing about the special meeting is buried inside.
Now I check on google and ask around and it looks like the board is not who we elected and there’s suddenly a new board president.
Guess the new group wanted to pack the room with their own people. They probably didn’t want to hear any home owners that might disagree.
This fish is starting to stink.