Escondodo wrote on Mar 6, 2008 3:13 AM:Reasons why Escondido's image is tarnished depends largely upon which side of the border your sympathies lie. Citizens tend to site our growing image as a sanctuary city and non-citizens and their promoters see it as mecca and want to hang on for dear life.

Vista wrote on Mar 6, 2008 5:49 AM:Come on Escondido, you're a leader in the county but you have to keep on track. Make this regulation city wide, don't allow a problem to be 'pushed' around your city and don't forget special interest group are just looking for any opening. Biggest point of all is I hope your not having trouble treating everyone fairly(?). Hopefully other cities are watching!

C'mon Lori Holt Pfeiler wrote on Mar 6, 2008 6:29 AM:Don't be like the Rebulicans and Democrats who are so afraid of offending someone they can't even deal with a very serious problem, illegal immigration. Now here in little Escondido, we have a parking issue, do you think you could possibly get off the middle of the fence and make a decision?

Can one of Escondido's wrote on Mar 6, 2008 6:37 AM:Coucil Members or Mayor tell us people of Escondido how much is the City losing each year to illegal immigration? PHOENIX (AP) - A new study concludes that law enforcement and criminal prosecutions linked to illegal immigration is costing Arizona border counties millions of dollars a year.
The study says the battle over illegal immigration is also diverting money from parks, libraries and other law-enforcement efforts. University of Arizona and San Diego State University researchers say in the four border counties in Arizona, costs increased 39% to $26.6 million in fiscal 2006.
The study was commissioned by the U.S.-Mexico Border Counties Coalition, a non-profit group of border-county officials.

Marie-Ann wrote on Mar 6, 2008 6:40 AM:DO NOT REELECT LORI HOLT! Her day is past!

City Wide Please! wrote on Mar 6, 2008 6:45 AM:If this ordinance is not citywide it will be struck down as being racially motivated through a lawsuit. Thousands of towns across the US have this very same ordinance and it's working well. Our Mayor wants this to be a great town but is not willing to do what it takes to make it that way! Hopefully soon someone else will be at the helm. It's badly needed.

Robert24 wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:20 AM:I don't think that Escondido's image is tarnished at all; we've just been overrun by illegal aliens and now we need to fix that. Just because nobody wants to step on anybody else's toes, it appears that the few that do stand up for what the law states are "bad people". I tend to think that if the laws that are currently active would just be implemented, like immigration laws and code enforcement, etc., and people abided by those laws, then we wouldn't need any new laws, and nobody would be "tarnishing" the city's image. Stay the course Escondido! Let's clean this city back up!

Cali Gal wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:55 AM:I say make it city wide, or there will be many lawsuits to follow. Do all or none! Our Mayor needs to grow a spine and make a decision. Isn't that why she was elected into her position??

stupid wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:59 AM:I say we do none of it because it's too expensive to implement during a down economy when the city is facing very real budget deficits. Now is not the time for this, nor will it ever achieve the results they want it to. To solve this type of problem requires attacking it at the root cause - which means narrowing the disparity between incomes and cost of living. The problem is economic related, not race related. there's a huge difference that many people just don't understand.

Kimmie wrote on Mar 6, 2008 8:20 AM:The ordinance needs to be city-wide or it will be challenged as being unfairly administered. And just targeting certain neighborhoods will simply push the problem into the unregulated neighborhoods bringing problems to where there are none. Permits to park in front of your residence only is also a must. Also I agree with Gallo, Abed and Waldron make all circulation streets no parking anytime.

Concerned-1 wrote on Mar 6, 2008 8:23 AM:I find it interesting that only "Latino" families are cited as crowding into single family homes. Isn't this sort of a racist statement?

TO THE THREE STOOGES!!!! wrote on Mar 6, 2008 8:35 AM:Abed said yesterday that he's ashamed because somebody from other city call us bluecollared town; I'm sorry that Mr. Abed doesn't like our hard workers and that his dreams are to turn Escondido into Rancho Santa Fe. the community is proud that is build with middle class and hard work people. if Abed feel ashamed of us ,what is he doing here? he cares only for the whealty and for the people that buys his overpriced gasoline!!

Great wrote on Mar 6, 2008 8:41 AM:Once again Lori (I can't make a decision)has passed on casting a vote. Come on Lori. You are paid and elected to run the city...not run away from your responsibility. Do us a favor....move!

it's not their money wrote on Mar 6, 2008 8:45 AM:we lost so much tax dollars last time with the rental ban ordinance,how much will loose now?? only on ACLU legal fees , the city had to pay $240,000.00; I wonder how much we really lost?
legal consultans (the lawyers that the city hired to help to defend the ban)
law enforcement (100's of extra officers to keep everybody safe)
equipment (x ray machines and metal detectors for city hall)
city salaries ( people dedicated to write the ordinance and support staff)
studies( they just paid $49,000.00 to a ageny to count cars on the city, I wonder how mauch they paid to get their bogus information)
and more...
let's find out and see what the council members are doing with our tax dollars.

racista idea wrote on Mar 6, 2008 9:18 AM:I have an idea, how about just put the law in affect where ever you have mexicans living? is that what they are really trying to do anyways?

Franko wrote on Mar 6, 2008 9:29 AM:This ordinance should be city wide. If not, not only will the city be accused of discriminating against certain neighborhoods but the parking problems will only move to unregulated areas. As for the Major, does she support anything??

Wrong Issue wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:03 AM:It's not a parking problem...it's a single family house being occupied by 5 familes. With those five familes come 7 cars / trucks / suvs. If there was a ban on more than one family living in a SINGLE FAMILY HOME (DUH)the problem would be resolved. End of story.

Karl wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:07 AM:To "Concerned-1
[-] wrote on Mar 6, 2008 8:23 AM:" My attention span is short today. Where did you pick up the "latinos only" deal?

Karl wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:10 AM:To "TO THE THREE STOOGES!!!!
[-] wrote on Mar 6, 2008 8:35 AM:" Where, when and who did Sam make that statement to?

Karl wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:14 AM:To "racista idea
[-] wrote on Mar 6, 2008 9:18 AM:" You're the one that brought racist into this blog. Do you live next door to a house with multiple families and lots of vehicles?

To it' not the money wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:17 AM:Yes, let's put another 9 million dollars into the Mexican neighborhood that seems to be doing nothing to raise the standards of that neighborhood. The more people the more slum area it will become. Let's start enforcing our laws that these people ignore.
They are looking for a better life at our expense. We are to kind of a nation and it's turning us into a third world country.

Kimmie wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:51 AM:After the city staff person who presented the Walker study stated that the study was simply a snapshot in time Councilmembers Sam Abed and Dick Daniels relied on that snapshot to opine "it would be foolish to require bothersome parking permits in areas where there are no parking problems." That begs the question, what is it that Abed and Daniels find bothersome about hanging a permit from your mirror even if there is not a parking problem where you are parked if by doing so you remove the possible claim of unequal enforcement from actual parking abusers? Just asking.

Escondeeter wrote on Mar 6, 2008 11:08 AM:This is the third meeting in a year now where the staff has tried to get the Council to make a decision on what kind of ordinance it wants so that the staff can start in a single direction instead of continuing to study all possible permutations. Once again, the Council talked all around the issue and couldn't reach agreement on anything. As a result, the staff is in much the same position of the crew of a ship whose captain ordered 'full speed ahead in all directions', i.e. they're well into the cruise and haven't lost sight of the dock yet. Look for another meeting in a couple of months during which nothing much more will be decided.

The most likely outcome for this proposal at the moment is that it'll get studied to death. The projected costs are rapidly mounting, and the city's ability to pay them is shrinking. Notwithstanding the plan to use fines to pay the costs, the initial costs have to be paid up front from the general fund. And, by the way, if the ordinance is city-wide, the fines will be paid primarily by those who aren't causing the problem and visitors who fall into the trap. "Welcome to Escondido, here's your parking ticket", what a motto for our tourist bureau!

As far as litigation goes, the only approach that would guarantee problems would be one based on the census race map for the city. The study provides ample cover for a targeted approach as long as it sticks to the area where the problems are which is, by the way, not where some proponents of the ordinance think it is.

Beyond racial targeting, the only kind of indefensibility is the political indefensibility of harrassing the eighty percent of the city that isn't part of the problem for the sake of dealing with the other twenty percent. Sam Abed, who apparently doesn't have a political death wish, has figured that out. His colleague is still working it through.

Chubton wrote on Mar 6, 2008 11:15 AM:Maybe the Council should spend their time attracting and retaining high income paying jobs.

Karl wrote on Mar 6, 2008 11:37 AM:Very good point Kimmie

Let's see if I understand wrote on Mar 6, 2008 12:37 PM:I'm a white, middle to upper middle class male with a wife and 3 kids. I drive a BMW, my wife a Lexus. My kids are teenagers, so the oldest has a VW, the middle has a Toyota, and my youngest, a boy, has a small pick up and a "project car" - some kind of dune buggy or something. We have a 3 car garage, but its so full of stuff that a car won't fit in it. So you guessed it - all cars are on the street. So, am I part of the problem? Do I have to have those pesky permits? Do I only get 2? I'm confused.

Observer wrote on Mar 6, 2008 12:49 PM:To Three Stoogees: I was watching the Council meeting last night. Abed did not make the Blue colour statement. Karl is right.!!Get your fact together.

fedup wrote on Mar 6, 2008 1:38 PM:so whats the problem? ya'll need a permit to park in frot of your apartment in Coronado!

I should of been wrote on Mar 6, 2008 1:46 PM:Mayor. What we will do is have all of the excess cars park at the transit center public parking at night and take the breeze home. This way it will help pay for the Sprinters cost in keeping it running.

To 'Let's See' wrote on Mar 6, 2008 5:02 PM:Yep. Start cleaning out that garage.

EscoWatchDog wrote on Mar 6, 2008 6:12 PM:Streets are for cars! Let cars park on the street just as the streets were intended and created for the use of cars. We live in Southern California, unless you are rich and have your own private, gated long driveway all to your selfish self, then deal with the reality that cars park on the street (as they should) and people walk on the street as they should.

I can't wait to vote the Trio out of office. Go Lori!!!

Karl wrote on Mar 6, 2008 6:20 PM:Yes "Let's see if I understand
[-] wrote on Mar 6, 2008 12:37 PM:" You are the problem and the answer. Get all the vehicles onto your property and not on the street. Problem solved.

Stewart wrote on Mar 6, 2008 8:01 PM:Waldron and Gallo are right on!!!! It must be a citywide approach to make it effective and not confusing to people. What is wrong with Abed and Daniels????? If Pfeiler would take a stand we would have a decision! She is no leader. It is time for Waldron to take the helm.

TO ESCONDEETER wrote on Mar 6, 2008 8:46 PM:Abed's remark about affecting 80% of the people not living in a problem area is half-baked. If there is no problem in those areas, then there is no inconvenience to anyone either.
The simpler the approach the better - no guessing and easier to enforce - CITYWIDE!

bryan wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:10 PM:I am for anything that will help clean up this town. why dont we start by closing down the escondido swap meet.

Escondodo wrote on Mar 7, 2008 4:21 AM:This blight and safety issue of excess vehicles is spreading throughout the city. The piecemeal approach is just postponing the inevitable.

dave from oceanside wrote on Mar 7, 2008 5:28 AM:Make the law apply city wide, clean up the city and recall Mayor Lori Holt Pfeiler. The cost for the recall election would be worth it in the long run.

racist idea wrote on Mar 7, 2008 6:12 AM:to "Let's see if I understand" No becuase you are white, its okay that you park your 5 cars on the street and your junker( sorry I ment PROJECT CAR) is okay on the drive way.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. wrote on Mar 7, 2008 8:00 AM:This ordinance needs to be city wide. That way, the Danny Perez's can't cry racism. "Let's see" will be forced to clean the junk out of his 3 car garage and park there. Once again, the ONLY people protesting these kinds of ordinances are the offenders, themselves.

Robert24 wrote on Mar 7, 2008 8:08 AM:"racist idea"; No, "Let's see if I understand" is trying to impress us with the fact that he probably has 2 leased, over priced cars that he uses to try and impress people with, and lives in a typical cookie cutter, reach out and touch your neighbors house neighborhood. Boy, I wish I was him! I guess when you buy in these types of developments (so that you can impress your friends) you get the driveway that is barely long enough to fit your car(s), and then when you pack your garage full of junk you have to use up the whole street to park. Too funny!

anotherview wrote on Mar 7, 2008 10:34 AM:The band-aid of parking restrictions on city streets targets only one of the negative impacts from the presence of illegal aliens, but not the cause of these impacts. Toward moderating these impacts, the politicians could agree on a first principle: Illegal aliens have no right to live and work in America. Then, the politicians could take advantage of existing federal law allowing local law enforcement to cooperate with federal authorities to identify and detain illegal aliens for their due deportation. In time, with this joint program operating, the number of illegal aliens in the city would drop (and so would the number of criminal aliens). The city would end its de facto status as a sanctuary city for illegal aliens. The various negative impacts that accompany illegal aliens would ease. The quality of city life would improve. America can get along fine without illegal aliens, and would prosper all the more.

TO THE THREE STOOGES!!!! wrote on Mar 7, 2008 11:04 AM:Abed said that he's ashamed because somebody from other city called us bluecollared town; I'm sorry that Mr. Abed doesn't like our hard workers and that his dreams are to turn Escondido into Rancho Santa Fe. the community is proud that is build with middle class and hard working people. if Abed feels ashamed of us ,what is he doing here? he cares only for the whealty and for the people that buys his overpriced gasoline!!

Pablo wrote on Mar 7, 2008 12:37 PM:To Stewart. In response to your question, "What is wrong with Abed and Daniels?????" Nothing. A compromise needs to be offered. If Waldron makes the motion and Gallo seconds it, leading to a recorded vote, I believe Waldron, Gallo, Abed and Daniels would agree and vote for an ordinance that was city-wide (Ed), provided two parking permits per house (Sam) to park on the street in front of your residence (Dick), and banned parking anytime on roads designated as traffic circulation streets in the city's General Plan (Marie). They all could support that ordinance and that is all that is needed. Just make the motion, have the vote and if something needs to be changed at a later date do it then.

Lisa wrote on Mar 7, 2008 11:26 PM:Sick of this CRAP!!! I live in Escondido - in an area that has not been identified as having a parking issue. But, I tell you what - I am more than pissed that I may be inconvenienced for a problem that is not of my doing! You proponents can call me all the names you want - I could care less. I am sure I have followed this proposed ordinance alot more closely than the majority of you propopents. Additionally, for those people that do not live in Escondido, but feel the constant need to "direct" our city council - why don't you all concentrate on your own cities - I'm sure you have issues there. The bottom line is that the City cannot afford to pay for the ordinance - for one thing they would need to hire more staff to enforce the ordinance - AND the City currently has a HIRING FREEZE! Does that alone not kill this COSTLY ordinance? I KNOW that the new ACT (Appearance & Code-compliance Team) has been dealing with alot of issues that have contributed to the blight of cars in SOME areas of town. I think the money that is being allocated for the ACT program makes the most sense and we are getting the results we need - we are cleaning up the City (The city has done a good job with that program!) Dear City of Escondido - please keep up the good work with the ACT program and shelve this parking ordinance. Use the ACT team to deal with the problems in the PARTS of the city that DO have a problem with CODE VIOLATIONS! Additionally, the street sweeping ordinance has also forced residents to be more responsible with their vehicles. ACT is working - as well as the Street Sweeping ordinance. The parking study shows that the problem wasn't as big as the council "majority" intitially stated! This proposed parking ordinance is a Lose-Lose situation - I could write a novel about what a loser it is!