Another dangerous call wrote on Nov 14, 2007 6:10 AM:How can the city council legislate homeowner's rights. Homeowners mostly reside in developments with homeowner's associations, which already have teeth to prevent hoards of students living under one roof. What is to say that 2 or 3 students cannot own a home collectively, or even to go so far as to declare that home a church ? Young people are extremely intelligent and we are only asking for trouble by attempting to legislate them. We want the status of being the "educational hub" of north county without any of the problems that are associated with it. The city council is overstepping its bounds again ! Making law that will be tested in court. Guess the city attorney likes to make the big bucks by advising her clients that it is okay. This one is just asking to be challenged !

Conflicts anyone ? wrote on Nov 14, 2007 6:16 AM:What is our city council's message to all of us about Smart Growth ? Maybe the "New Era" bunch don't really think that smart growth is such a great idea, or maybe they want those students to flock to housing that is planned to be built by their friends. If there is ANY conflict of interest in that vote, my guess is that college students will find it. This ordinance is just plain stupid. It is asking for a legal challenge from the very people that are our next generation of council people and planners !

Roby wrote on Nov 14, 2007 6:36 AM:Heck bring that ordinance to Oceanside!!! Oh I forgot we are the home of the DIVERSE. NCT I would like to see a PDF file of the ordinace.

Fed Up in SM wrote on Nov 14, 2007 6:43 AM:Preston would think otherwise, if his sleep was distrupted every night. He is not listening to community residents who are paying taxes. We never had such a severe problem until CSUSM started accepting Freshman and Sophomores. They have no respect for people around them and quite honestly aren't ready to be living on their own. We invite Preston to come to our community at night to witness the pure craziness...he would think otherwise.

I have 3 leases at my house wrote on Nov 14, 2007 7:52 AM:I am not a business, I am a single stay home father trying to put a roof over my sons head without relying on public assistance. This law ignores the reality of the cost of housing in San Diego.

Ask wrote on Nov 14, 2007 8:15 AM:Without more info, they left a HUGE loop hole. The owner rents to 1 person, and that person then rents to two others.

esteban wrote on Nov 14, 2007 9:04 AM:To 3 leases...then you are the type SM residents want regulated.

Good work council... wrote on Nov 14, 2007 9:11 AM:I'm a big supporter of this ordinance. The area around Palomar College is starting to see this phenominon arise with mushroom like regularity. A once quiet street now has honking horns and speeding away cars every weekend night. You could set your watch to the closing of the bars. It MUST be regulated. The rights of existing homeowners should trump the rights of would be property manager/speculators who have zero regard for the sensitivities of the family people trying to live a normal life. Couldn't have strong enough teeth in it in my view.

Right on San Marcos wrote on Nov 14, 2007 9:11 AM:That's what apartments were created for! Cheaper rents and landlords. I live in a single family house in a "single family" neighborhood. Having over 12 adults in a house with a corresponding number of cars creates a nuisance and I am sure lowers housing values. Unfortuantely, we do not have a homeowners association so there is no one to enforce any CC&Rs. The City of SM just doesn't have the manpower to do it. Homeowners generally take better care of their property becausse they have a vested interest in their long term investment. Renters are there for the short term and have no vested interst or long term financial investment other then a security deposit. Big deal if you would rather not take care of the property and be irresponsible, carefree and disrespectful and let's not forget, party hearty! I'm glad to see the Council have some cajones for a change! Way to go! Hopefully this ordiance with "force" (encourage) the university to help improve their lack of housing situation to keep attracting more students. I personally would not want my freshman not living on campus. Living in university sanctioned housing is part of the college experience and promotes and provides more security and education with university controlled rules and regulations. Way to go San Marcos! Thank you!

Hey Mr. Mayor wrote on Nov 14, 2007 10:37 AM:Mayor Jim Desmond said homeowners do not have a right to run a business in an area zoned for single-family living and that three leases for space in one home constitute a commercial enterprise. Then what about day care? Don't the children of our community need help?

SM21Y/O wrote on Nov 14, 2007 11:12 AM:OK, I am 21 and go to csusm. I understand where both sides are coming from here. There are plenty of my friends including myself that party til early in the morning and most likely make our neighbors furious. During the week I work full time and go to school full time. Which leaves room for studying and maybe one or two nights of fun. I dont have three leases and we still have the ability to piss people off. This will not fix the problem, the fact that you have two colleges is the problem. If you dont let them pack into a house, they will find a way around it garaunteed! It does really fall on the freshman and sophmores because they have parents who pay their way. Hold them accountable for nothing but a C average and the hold no job. So maybe all you people who are complaining should look at yourself and how you raise your own kids. I'm sure yours are at UCSB right now partying off your dime

Bruce wrote on Nov 14, 2007 11:36 AM:Good Job San Marcos! Don't need a bunch of renters turning single family homes into apartment complexes as Right on San Marcos has pointed out. If you can't afford to live here, move on. It's one of the realities of life. I'm all for property owners rights, not property owners abuses! Being a good neighbor includes thinking of others well being, not "look at all the money I can make" at the cost of a fellow neighbors peace of mind and security.

stephen wrote on Nov 14, 2007 12:12 PM:sm21y/o I could have never found a better case study for this problem . let me understand , you had poor parenting and that should allow you to piss your neighbors off . you are correct this will not solve the problem but it is a good first step . also just so i can get my mind around this , it's not the kids fault it's mommy and daddy who are to blame . good luck with that logic .

move! wrote on Nov 14, 2007 12:21 PM:SM is destined to be a college town due to the expansion and two colleges. Any town that has 30,000 students is a college town!! so in 20 years the students will have won anyways, and the only reason the business and real estate markets will survive is because of the students. Current home owners might as well join them, since they wont beat them. You knew moving into the only area you could afford was going to be this way, don't try and change other people's rights because your decision was to sit down and shout about why you dont like where you sat.

goodness wrote on Nov 14, 2007 1:32 PM: hey people, when you buy a house, live in it. sure you may own it, but you can't do with it what you please. what do you think this is? a free country? heck no! we want to limit what you do. and hey you college students, if you can't afford to rent an apartment, don't go to college. don't you see this is how we're trying to control who goes to school and who doesn't? By limiting the housing availability to only those who can actually afford it, we're keeping out those "unwanted ones," the poor ones that are too lazy to afford to go to school AND live off-campus and try to learn how to be independent. i want my peace and quiet! get out of the neighborhood i actually worked hard to get into, since i went to college and pretty much acted just like you current college kids are acting. but you know, with my age, i'm more impatient and close-minded, and i tend to forget where i came from. but seriously, stop being such a nuisance. we don't want your kind here. oh and you know what else people? for those of you making money off these college kids to support your families and paying your own rent, why can't you just get another job? i mean seriously, you may already be working full time and raising kids, but i'm sure you've got another couple of hours in your schedule for another job so you wont have to rent to these darn kids. oh, and if its the rent you can't afford, move out. that's why we people who can afford them like the high rent, because we can keep away from the poor, struggling people like you. man why are people so lazy?

To SM21Y/O wrote on Nov 14, 2007 2:14 PM:Boy, do you have a very large chip on your shoulder! I say, good for you! Got some breaking news to you. I have a child who attends UCSB and who works their butt off, works a couple of jobs and I guarantee you my kid will be way more successful then you ever will be. My child earned their way to get into UCSB and has to work hard to stay in school. Less then 10% of applicants get accepted there. Most of the partiers live in Isla Vista and are NOT full time students. So before you go off, do your homework before you start making inaccuarate and irresponsible comments. Sounds like to me, you are the problem. It's students like you that will keep CSUSM 2nd to the bottom of all Cal State Schools. I say shape up or ship out. We don't need more residents with your attitude!

stephen wrote on Nov 14, 2007 3:21 PM: Hey ''Move'', in twenty years you will be singing a different tune . Here is shock for you , students do not add much to any economy .They tend to drag it down. they are poor people , take a field trip around SDSU and you will see what I mean They do not buy cars , or furniture or houses or much of anything beyond beer. We are only asking them to be good neighbors and nothing more .

TO: ToSM21y/o wrote on Nov 14, 2007 3:55 PM:Talk about a chip on the shoulder!! At least SM21 was telling it like it is, from his "partially educated point of view." So, he made a comment about UCSB, big deal. In fact, it is documented as one of the top "partying" campuses. What are you afraid of? the truth. Everyone, including parents know what goes on there (besides studies!) with MOST of the student population. Ok, so your child was successful enough to get a coveted admission to UCSB! Congratulations, you must be so proud!! Im sure CSUSM is a great campus also, and has wonderful professors and instructors, just like UCSB. So lets not degrade other public universities or the students who are trying to better themselves. They all need our support. Dont know where you came up with CSUSM being the 2nd to the bottom??? Based on what? Please site reference for that stat, I would like to see that. Bottom, the Cal State University system and the city of San Marcos need to get together and figure this out. Its obvious there is going to be a need for housing.........

2 city council wrote on Nov 14, 2007 4:12 PM:Ok, so i will go rent a 3 bedroom home for myself and 3 friends, WITH One lease agreement....... cool? Not only are students going to get housing anyway, but the landlords will continue to rent home/condos near colleges.

Call their mommies wrote on Nov 14, 2007 11:53 PM:These infantile college students should be here to learn, not party! Most of them aren't of drinking age anyway so why are they getting away with it? Prosecute them and lock em up! Call their mommies to come and pick them up. If they have to bail their kids out of trouble enough, eventually they will quit paying tuition, take them home until they grow up. This ordinance does not address the problem at all. Law enforcement of exisisting laws, drinking, public nuciance, noise...etc. will.

To: Hey mr. mayor, wrote on Nov 15, 2007 7:48 AM:I gues that our mayor doesn't think that all of the people who operate their businesses from home just do not count ! Maybe the dedicated musician or artist that creates best in their environment. Maybe all of those that operate their Internet businesses. Realtors who take calls at home and have no office. Doctors who are called at home. Professors. The list goes on and on. The way desmond thinks, nobody will have a business, not those who operate from home and certainly not those who operate from their places of business - he is oh so happy to approve Palomar Station (not the light rail station) that will destroy scores of businesses. But that is progress. And that is where he wants the students to live - in the midst of the Industrial Zone, not in homes or apartments.

TO NCT wrote on Nov 15, 2007 8:09 AM:Where is my letter from last night? Someone wanted to know the source of info for rankings. NCT is 1 source printed in Mar. and other source is U.S. News and I listed specifics so my comments were based on publishings and not off the top of my head or my opinion. I can at least back up these inane arguments and comments. Can you at least include the truth?

To Hey Mr. Mayor wrote on Nov 15, 2007 8:26 AM:Believe me, I'm no fan of the mayor. However, I don't know of any complalints or problems associated with homeowners that are musicians or artists working and creating at home or of people running their Internet business or realtors working from home, doctors talking on the phone, professorss, teachers prepping for their classess, etc. unless they have traffic and customers coming and going from their homes on a regular basis. I do know that students renting homes with mommy and daddy's money thinking college is just an inherant right to party, be disrespectful and irresponsible to their neighbors is a problem and does hurt property values! After all, those student renters who behave in such a manner don't care because after all, they aren't in that house for the long term and have no financial interest or investment in the home they are renting except for a security deposit, Big deal when you consider all the other benefits and payoffs it's worth it! I challenge you student renters to prove us homeowner wrong and show us that you are responsible and respectful neighbors!

References wrote on Nov 15, 2007 10:12 AM:In March, NCT published ranking of CSUSM. You can look it up and you will see that I didn't pull those numbers off the top of my head. They were ranked 22 out of 23 in the Cal State system, just ahead of Dominguez Hills. The yr. before they were ranked 21. Their remidiation rate is below system avg. of 83%. US news world report ranks it as a 3rd tier least selective university. If these students want respect, we need to raise the bar as well as their desire to raise the bar themselves and we can stop these inane comments. For the record, UCSB is ranked 44 in top national universities and is most selective. You can also look up the findings for yourself and see just what all that means and to show you that yes, I am comparing apples to apples.

To References wrote on Nov 15, 2007 6:25 PM:Did you graduate from a Cal State school? Check your spelling---this is the correct spelling for "remediation." Most universities, no matter what their ranking have some students living off campus, therefore a potential problem for their neighbors. Just like CSUSM. Just think of those Frat/ sorority house that are off-campus......BTW, check "US News, 2008 Ultimate College Guide" page 449. UCSB acceptance rate: 53%, NOT "less than 10%, as you stated on 11/14 at 2:14pm. For fall 06, UCSB had 39,858 applicants, of which 21,284 were ACCEPTED (53%) with 4,099 (10%)students enrolling. Maybe that's where you came up with the 10%. Yes, your child was prepared or will do well in college. Congrats!! Now lets support those at our local universities, and not degrade the students who are trying to get an education, no matter where they go to school.

Hey, to sm21y/o wrote on Nov 15, 2007 6:31 PM:Are you angry? your one of "those" parents. "and I guarantee you my kid will be more successful then(than!) you will ever be". ENOUGH SAID. Go USC!!!! I'm already more successful than you...... HA Go CSUSM Cougars!!!!!!!!

SM DEPUTY wrote on Nov 16, 2007 7:49 AM:Just call the cops anytime they have a party. You don't have to use 415PC and place them under citizen arrest...instead, use the SM Muni code for excessive noise. You don't have to sign for that one. If the noise is unreasonable (ie: loud stereo, talking at 2AM) then the deputy can write the occupants of the house a cite for noise. They'll have to pay a fine...and you know what fines do to poor coolege ...!

John wrote on Nov 26, 2007 11:59 AM:I have a rental home just next to mine in a very nice upscale community. The owner of this home has moved on and is now renting to 5 CSSM students. Our community welcomed the youngsters with open arms but let me say that it has not been a very good experience. We have had daily issues with illegal parking. The sidewalks are continually blocked so to cause the neighbors that use them, to divert into the street. In addition the students and their visitors partially block access into the driveways of their neighbors. The affects of this are dangerous, forcing pedestrians onto the street and the risk of homeowners backing out of their garages and possibly hitting an illegally parked car. I have discussed this with the students yet they continue to break the law in this manner. Myself and the others neighbors continually pick up trash that has been left by these students and there visitors. This is also against the littering laws as well as to bring down the appearance and values of the homes in our community. The loud noise of partiers in the front and back of the home at all hours of the night have been very disturbing to this neighborhood of families. The larger problem is the continuing problem with underage drinking and partying resulting in repeated calls to the SM sheriffs department and visits that have resulted in very angry police officers. Just this last holiday weekend the SM Sheriffs were called and when they arrived they found a person passed out in the yard and 70 + partiers inside and outside the home. I was awake the whole night and had a complete view of the proceedings from my home. Just as the officers arrived, the kids were jumping the fence onto my property and onto the property of the church just behind our homes to get away form being identified as part of the group the officers were interested in. I have to tell you that I have a pool in my back yard and I was very concerned that one of these kids would not see the pool in the dark and fall in as they were trying to get away from the Sheriff’s. You can imagine the kind of trouble this would cause if I were have to save a kid from drowning, not to mention the issues with my home owners insurance if this were to occur. Keep in mind that the officers were called twice that night and the second time the officers banged on the door the students and their visitors choose not to answer the door and turned out the lights. The officers were very angry about this. When the students finally opened the door the officers took charge of the situation and the students and their visitors were instructed to empty the contents of a Keg and alcohol bottles into the yard. In addition the officers confiscated multiple containers of what appeared to be hard liquor. The officers instructed the students that the next time they had to be called out to this address they would inform CSSM of it and that reprimands would appear on there college transcripts. These issues should be addressed in our local publications as these types of behaviors and events are part of the San Marcos community experience. I will be starting up a Neighborhood Watch program for our community so I can formalize our trouble complaints with the SM Sheriffs Dept and CSSM.