the shadow knows wrote on Dec 7, 2007 12:36 AM:Stocks, Dalager, and Bond are wrong. The city is violating the Brown Act.

father time wrote on Dec 7, 2007 4:30 AM:What a waste of time

Jerry wrote on Dec 7, 2007 5:44 AM:Congratulations to Ms. Barth for making her point on principle, but choosing to participate again, if not collaborate with her council peers.

Hal wrote on Dec 7, 2007 8:16 AM:The three councilmen are living in the past and are afraid of change. Pure and simple they do not want open government.

Elefant wrote on Dec 7, 2007 8:24 AM:Only Stocks, Bonds, Dalager, and Houlihan's Prop A and Prop C were a bigger waste of time. Those were also a waste of money.

Greencinitan wrote on Dec 7, 2007 8:26 AM:You go Teresa! You are right on this one. The "boys" don't want accountability and openness. Keep up the good work and keep working to bring daylight into the workings of the Encinitas City Council!

Regular wrote on Dec 7, 2007 9:49 AM:At first I was disappointed that she is ending her boycott. But Teresa Barth did the right thing to take a stand, bring this to the attention of the public. Council is doing it wrong. Stocks says that Closed Sessions are not "regular" because they are not set by statute. They are set by statute, the statutory law in the Brown Act, which is Calif. Govt. Code. I think Teresa wants to be able to participate in the decisions that continue to be made in closed sessions. A year from now, we will be able to make changes, because Stocks and Bond will be gone, at last. Bond isn't running again, and we'll be voting Jerome Stocks out of office: that's the consensus of everyone I know.

What a joke wrote on Dec 7, 2007 10:23 AM:Barth cops out!! If she is right, why doesn't she lead a charge to sue the other councilpersons for violation of the Brown Act? She has ruined that position if she starts attending the illegally noticed meetings.

bonddi wrote on Dec 7, 2007 10:58 AM:Barth cannot be an effective councilmember is she continues to boycott closed sessions -- she has taken the issue as far as she could and gotten the City to admit its policy is to violate the Brown Act -- now it is up to the people. As Stocks said at the meeting "If we have been doing it wrong all this time, someone would have sued us" Well, Stocks you were given the opportunity to do it right without a lawsuit but your arrogance preceeded your better judgment. Now the courts will decide at the expense of all taxpayers. Pathetic.

Let it Go wrote on Dec 7, 2007 11:30 AM:Why are we spending so much council time and staff time on a non-issue. Barth and her gadfly friends are really out of touch with reality if they think anybody cares about meeting notices to the point of sueing. Councilman Stocks and the City Attorney took the time to obtain legal opinion's that prove Barth wrong. End of story. This is what happens when the inexperienced get elected.

No exception for expediency wrote on Dec 7, 2007 11:52 AM:The Brown Act doesn't say closed meetings have to be noticed 72 hours in advance "except where it's more expedient for the council."

Hal wrote on Dec 7, 2007 12:30 PM:To Let it go. There was no staff time expended as the Glen Sabine the "City Attorney" failed to provide a staff report. You should be thankful for the gadflys, if not for them, the three councilmen would run rampant promoting special interest agendas.

Wrong again!!! wrote on Dec 7, 2007 1:42 PM:When will the NCTimes hire a fact checker to follow Adam Kaye around? He's factually wrong so often it's tedious! Rick Shea said that he was on the original city council that set up the rules currently inplace in conjunctioin with the then city attorney, now a superior court judge, and he was pretty sure that guy knew the law. Listen online if you don't believe me. No wonder the paper is losing readers and advertisers, reporting this shoddy loses the paper credibility.

Confused wrote on Dec 7, 2007 2:31 PM:At the beginning of the article Barth claims she's ending the boycott of closed session meetings because she has been proven wrong. Then when she doesn't get her way to form a silly committee she jumps back on the band wagon. Don't you just love these self appointed defenders of the people. They have no idea what people really care about.

CITY WATCHDOG......SAYS...... wrote on Dec 7, 2007 2:32 PM:Democrat or Republican....Councilman Stocks has the traits that make for a GOOOOOOOOD legislator.....MS.BARTH makes me wonder....is she in over her head? I'm disappointed in MS.BARTH!!......

Please wrote on Dec 7, 2007 2:53 PM:NCT will not allow posts that talk about the special interests that Jerome answers to. I wonder why? Does NCT support development at the cost of the public?

CLEANUP CITY HALL..... wrote on Dec 7, 2007 2:54 PM:Why is MS BARTH so negative...she is spreading lots of SLEASY.....ms.Barth is headache....MS. BARTH if you have some thing take it to the state FPPC....... WHY ARE YOU SO PARTISAN?

Too Funny wrote on Dec 7, 2007 2:54 PM:City Watchdogs comments are classic. I could imagine something so far from the truth. Run for legisator Mr. Stocks. Lets see how far you get!

Support for Good Gov wrote on Dec 7, 2007 4:55 PM:Stocks has all my support and respect. Barth is in over her head and does not understand what good government is. She reminds me of Esther Sanchez.

City Gadfly wrote on Dec 7, 2007 5:40 PM:Jerome has all the charactistics to be a baaaaaaaaaaad legislator. He is disingenuous and mendacious. He has never met a sleazy developer he didn't like. Let's not forget that he got caught for not reporting political contributions. How much more didn't he report?

Encinitas resident wrote on Dec 7, 2007 8:04 PM:I agree... how can you say Jerome Stocks would be a good legislator? thats like saying Duke Cunningham was a good congressman. Honesty and transparency are good traits for representatives. Mr. Stocks would be a bad Legislator. The only good point is he would be out of Encinitas. I bet he'd move to Carlsbad. In fact, I think he represents Carlsbad anyway. He is no good for Encinitas.

Stocks a legislator? wrote on Dec 7, 2007 8:46 PM:If you admire what the Bush administration has done to undermine all the constitutional rights of the citizens and then some, yes, Stocks would be a good legislator. What we have in Encinitas is the rule of 3 -- the 3 stooges aka the Jim, Dan and Jerry Show. These men agree before hand how to vote and when is the last time you saw them not vote in block? Dan never even bothers to read the materials provided for agenda items and simply votes to approve staff recommendations, same as Jim and Jerry. Ergo - we have non-elected staff making City policy and decisions which are rubber-stamped. This is pathetic. Barth has made a stand -- she believes in the oath of office that she will uphold the California Constitution no matter what. That takes courage. As far as I am concerned, the 3 stooges committed political suicide by voting against considering 72 hour notice for closed sessions. Anyone who supports this vote is either uneducated regarding the Brown Act or lacks the ability to appreciate the profound ramifications of a City policy that thumbs its nose at the Constitutional rights of citizens. I thought the Bush administration was bad -- but the boys are giving them a run for the money.

Sue wrote on Dec 7, 2007 9:26 PM:If they are wrong then just sue them! You won't because you know they are right and you and Ms. Grandstanding no-nothing are wrong. She's a flaming Donna Frye Wanna be...

Personally wrote on Dec 7, 2007 10:59 PM:I like and trust Donna frye much more the Duke Cunningham. So if Teresa is Donna and Jerome is Duke- You have your answer.

Barth backs down wrote on Dec 7, 2007 11:25 PM:Barth played her hand, was wrong and had to back down. Otherwise, if she was right she would have taken this to the end. If she didn't then she is no better than any other politician who grandstands for attention. I think Barth is beginning to show a pattern of grandstanding for headlines and strategic vote ducking (fire stations, union contracts, etc.). She needs to calm down and get to the peoples business. Otherwise, she will paralyze the City Council's ability to function. In the end what she did was run for cover from a bad move.

Old school encinitas wrote on Dec 8, 2007 8:24 AM:I support her for not voting on raises for the unions or the Fire Department Mcmansions that will cost us residents $15,000,000 Plus- or $1,000 for each family of four. I don't want to pay $1,000 so the fire deparment boys can have a sweet pad while they wait for their next call.

City Gadfly wrote on Dec 8, 2007 12:16 PM:Barth didn't back down. She only recognized the reality that the 3 men have a majority. This issue is far from over. I predict that with a change on the coucil next year, there will be a change in city notification policy. After all in the city of La Mesa, where Glenn Sabine is also city attorney, 72 hour notice is routinely given for closed door session. This fact gives a clue about who is really driving the present policy.

Paul wrote on Dec 8, 2007 2:11 PM:Barth is doing what we elected her for. She does her research and believes in going through the process. All you people who criticize her have NO IDEA how much work it takes to be a Councilperson. Simply the fact that this agenda item was addressed at 11pm is disgusting and the city clerk and city manager should be ashamed of themselves. So many people have jobs and children. How can they be involved when this kind of disrespect to the public is allowed to continue?

observer wrote on Dec 8, 2007 4:01 PM:Only robber barons are against open government.