lioneltrains wrote on Sep 10, 2008 11:41 PM:Isn't this just great? Another brilliant idea from the current council and city bureaucracy that goes nowhere. They just don't have a very good record for implementing new city ordinances, do they?

Concerned_Citizen wrote on Sep 11, 2008 12:01 AM:Only Councilmember Waldron made the most sense. She wants a strong parking program that will be implemented similar to what so many other cities in CA already do. People must have a valid drivers license to get a parking permit. I don't understand why that is such a big issue to some councilors.

Correction wrote on Sep 11, 2008 12:18 AM:I was at the city council meeting tonight and Ms. Martinez didn't what you state in this article, she said that the ordinance may be an attempt to enforce immigration at the local level since it was previously mentioned that driver's licenses and DMV registrations would be checked before issuing permits.

No Problem wrote on Sep 11, 2008 1:47 AM:The delay just provides more time to line up signatures for the referendum, and it means there'll have to be a special election called instead of putting it on November's ballot. More taxpayer money wasted.

To David Garrick wrote on Sep 11, 2008 1:56 AM:Why do you always say Rincon Road is one of the boundries? It's Rincon Avenue. Even the UT can get it right. Don't be so sloppy! And I never trust your 'quotes.'

Concerned wrote on Sep 11, 2008 1:57 AM:That majority consists of Sam Abed, Ed Gallo and Marie Waldron. It is funny that Ed and Sam are running for re-election this year. They have promised the 20 percent of the population that they represent that they will be effective against illegal immigration. They are now up against the wall with the realization that any proposal will cost more money then what the city can afford to spend. The only thing they will do is waste the taxpayers money on worthless ordinances.
Please vote out Sam Abed and Ed Gallo.

No Danny P wrote on Sep 11, 2008 2:05 AM:We want to maintain our poorest residents and attract more. That's why we are seen as a sanctuary city. But we also want to be known for our arts, as in the CCAE and 'Gaslamp North.' I think this is what is known as schizophrenia. I know that the mayor supports both. What is her grand plan?

new council needed wrote on Sep 11, 2008 6:37 AM:yesterday the three stoogees proved that they aren't qualify to lead this city. atthis they trying to save face and not to look too stupid; too late!!

I asked and beg wrote on Sep 11, 2008 7:40 AM:Escondido Rich to please have compassion on those of us that must lived with overcrowding everyday. Please for your fellow citizens let us try this idea.

Lance wrote on Sep 11, 2008 8:08 AM:we need a better leader ...not these useless city council's

To Concerned Citizen wrote on Sep 11, 2008 8:29 AM:Your idea regarding having a valid CDL for a permit is warranted but I dont believe Escondido can tell me how many cars I personally can own. So if you live in a bigger house with a big garage and nice long driveway, you can own as many cars as can fit, but if you live in the barrio you can only have 1 car each? Are we still in the United States? If the cars don't have valid tags or are abandoned, then I see no problem in towing them away. If I've got a decent car and truck, a work truck, a teenager who drives and I've only got a one car driveway and my garage couldnt fit a fricking bicycle if it wanted to, why am I being penalized? Because I dont live in a nicer home? Because my neighbors are of questionable citizenship?
Yes, I agree it looks junky when people have cars parked on the lawns but come on, with the economy nowadays you have people who HAVE to have multiple family homes and it's not just limited to those of Latino descent. I personally know a family who lost their home to foreclosure in an exclusive gated community and are now living in their rental tract home and they have 7 cars for 7 adults, because everyone works. They have to park in their backyard just so they can park by their house and only take 2 spots on the street. This is not an illegal family, just a family unit going thru some hard times. And now they'll be penalized too? They all fit nicely with room to spare in their old used to be million dollar home but now that they've had to downsize, they're part of the problem? They cant be the only ones that are going thru this, has the council considered that? Sounds like Daniels came to his senses.

CR wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:05 AM:I commend the efforts, but finish it and get the new law in place. We once had 6 vehicles on one side, and eight on the other, until one house was foreclosed on. It is not anti-illegals, it is a matter of obeying our laws. These are SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, the zoning code spells that out. I personally have seen up to six families in one house. Escondido has become blighted due to the overload of the infrastructure, with reduced property taxes per family unit in those houses with multiple families.

Escondeeter wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:23 AM:Wait'll the public discovers that the Council made unilateral changes in the staff proposal last night, and as a result anybody will be able to park in front of your home until 2am, but you'll have to get out of bed in the middle of the night to move your car once they leave. I predict a pitchfork shortage.

RockSpringsActivist wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:33 AM:To my knowledge there's no law that says it's mandatory you be a citizen to obtain a CA driver's license, so basing the parking law on that premise is just another gunshot in the foot. The city council should be proactive instead of punitive in their planning. Apparently Mr. Daniels is the only one with any common sense.

andy wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:37 AM:how does a restriction on parking in the middle of the night improve the quality of life during the day?

bogie wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:41 AM:Correction @ 12:18 AM:

I applaud you for taking the time to show up at the meeting regardless of your position. I did not know about the drivers license deal, I like that idea. I don't however like the idea of people being able to park directly in front of their home. The streets are public property and should remain as such IMHO.

I have neighbors who get irritated when another neighbor parks in front of their home even if they themselves are not using the space. While it may be a minor annoyance, public land is public land.

Elect Sam and Ed for continued action on our behalf

To To David Garrick wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:49 AM:The Northern Boundary of the ordinance is not even Rincon Avenue, it extends up to Cleveland Avenue in the Northeast corner right up to the county property.

Tom wrote on Sep 11, 2008 10:00 AM:I'm with "activist" Danny Perez: the LAST thing we want is to end up like La Jolla or Rancho Santa Fe. Solid property values, low crime rates, no graffiti, high employment -- who needs THAT?!?!?

Whats the BIG Deal wrote on Sep 11, 2008 10:05 AM:I've lived in cities and owned rentals in cities all over this country which have had and enforced successful parking bans. Why is it so difficult for Escondido to institute one? Try looking at what works in the cities that have them, like Pasadena, CA, they have had a successful parking ordinance for over 20 years. Ironically, in other cities there is no Latino population so the "race" card could not be played, why is it such an issue here? Overnight street parking is a safety issue, not a race issue. I know just as many white, Asian and Black people who have extended families living with them without driveway parking as I do Hispanic families. In other cities, valid license and registration is required to be issued parking permits...

Kimmie wrote on Sep 11, 2008 10:31 AM:What is with the censorship? I submitted the same comments to the San Diego Union at the same time as the North County Times. The San Diego Union published immediately. You didn't. Why?

Let me try again.

Here is a solution that addresses everyone's concerns and all costs are recovered. Simply, cut the pompous posturing, and do what Pasadena does.

In Pasadena, each residence can be eligible to apply for up to two permits per residence.

To qualify for an Annual On-Street Parking Permit the applicant must have more vehicles than the available off-street parking at their residence.

All vehicles must be currently registered to the address on the application.

You apply for a permit by completing and submitting an application in person to the designated clerk in city hall. Applicants need to provide a copy of a valid and current registration for all vehicles parked at their residence. All vehicle registration(s) submitted must match the address as listed on the application.

The information on the application is then verified. Temporary permits are issued for three weeks for use during the investigation.

The actual number of parking spaces at the residence are counted. Garage and driveway are not allowed to be used for storage or any other purpose other than parking your passenger vehicle. There is no need to enter the garage or disturb anyone's privacy, just count from outside, one, or two, or three, etc.

The annual fee for an overnight parking permit is $63 per permit. The permits are valid from January 1st and expire on December 31st of each calendar year. The fee for the permit is prorated quarterly. Temporary parking permits valid for a 30 day period are available at a cost of $21 per permit, per vehicle.

According to the Walker Report 11,493 vehicles were counted parking on streets. If those vehicles were required to pay a $63 annual on-street permit fee, the income would be $724,059. And Pasadena's ordinance has worked for over 50 years.

Council Member Waldron said Pasadena, which is virtually identical to Escondido in population, sells 5,000 annual parking permits. If Escondido does the same all costs are still recovered.

The Big Deal wrote on Sep 11, 2008 11:29 AM:But there IS a significant Latino population here and it sure seems like a thinly veiled attempt to force poor Latinos out of town - just look at the types of comments on this article and others RE this matter.
This package would probably pass if the current Council didn't tip their hand of their true intentions with prior actions to 'improve the quality of life' in Escondido.
If their true interests were to 'improve the quality of life', they would encourage better paying jobs into the area - not make poor business decisions such as almost losing the hospital.
Time for some new smart blood.

An easier way wrote on Sep 11, 2008 11:55 AM:-Ticket people pushing shopping carts off the businesses property. Be sure to check their ID.
-Ticket people blocking the sidewalk with a stroller. Be sure to check ID.
-Ticket people playing loud music. Be sure to check ID.
-Ticket low riding vehicles for unsafe suspension. Be sure to check ID. (Don't forget to check the trunk)
-Deport anyone without valid ID.

To Kimmie wrote on Sep 11, 2008 12:24 PM:Speak for yourself. That doesn't address "my" concerns just yours. I don't need more bureacracy and government interference in my life. and I don't need the city council to tell me what to do with my garage that I worked for and paid for. I don't want to pay to park on a street that I already paid for with my taxes, especially since there is no problem with parking availability on my street.

To To Concerned Citizen wrote on Sep 11, 2008 12:54 PM:You should not post if you don't know the facts. Every house would be allowed to park two cars at a minimum. If you only have one garage, you WOULD NOT BE PENALIZED. That is what the exemptions were for.
Why is it that every other city that does overnight parking bans requires a valid drivers license that proves the person drives and actually lives at the residence in question but Escondido needs to break new ground and let anyone buy them without regard to if they actually own the vehicle or live in the house? You have to show ID at Von's to pay with a check, what is different about this?

To TO KIMMIE wrote on Sep 11, 2008 12:57 PM:If "there is no problem with parking availability on my street" as you say, then this ordinance WILL NOT AFFECT YOU. According to Abed you get two free permits in the mail. So what's the problem?

CONCERN wrote on Sep 11, 2008 1:00 PM:to all the comments of applauding the bill to ban parking. i have to wonder and ask myself. How many of you actually are in need of parking out in the street? Probably non of you because if you did have to park out in the street you would not agree with the bill. Over population is the cause of lots of cars okay.. Not illegals or latinos... So dont try to take our right to own and park. I know some or most are conscious about peoples property. I dont care if someone else uses my parking on the street. if I am not using why do I care? Grow up people. there are bigger issues out there worth our time and concern. Parking is not going to solve hunger.. parking is not going to help the homeless, it will make more homeless if people cant park where they live. So... yeah no bill in Escondido.. Stop wasting tax money on no point issues.

To to kimmie wrote on Sep 11, 2008 1:06 PM:You must be that loud lady who showed pictures of her garage full of junk to the council and bragged about parking her vehicle in the street. What an attitude, no problem on your street says you, hurray for me, too bad about everybody else.

FTM wrote on Sep 11, 2008 1:08 PM:Bottom line: There are health code restrictions that make it illegal to over occupy a residence. have you never seen the sign in an auditorium that states "MAXIMUM OCCUPANCY" ???

Do you think that does not apply to residential units???

Overcrowding people into homes is WRONG and should nt be allowed. I don't care what you say about the cars - but the real point here is OVERCROWDING IN THE HOUSES - not on the streets.

The root of the problem is overcrowding in residential units. Thate is where the efforts should go, but Escondido can't seem to enforce occupancy rules because ACLU and "rights" groups are threatening a lawsuit??

It is a very important fight. If a city can't enforce the same occupancy rules that are enforced all over the rest of North County by cities and HO Associations we are all in danger of having slumlords move onto our blocks - even in rich places like Del Mar.

All North County should pay attention to this.

to kimmie wrote on Sep 11, 2008 1:15 PM:Hmm yeah look why am I going to pay for permits like in Pasadena. if I wanted to have a stucture like pasadena I would move there. i live in escondido. I love my freedom, and right to do as i want and own what i want without the local government telling me I cant. So this law or bill will just limit my rights, and I dont know about you but i really like my rights. i live in the US not in a Cuba. if you like government that rations what you have, then move to Cuba. That goes to all who freely give up their freedom. I wont!!!!!

to FTM wrote on Sep 11, 2008 1:26 PM:Sorry if you dont have the neccesity of living with others because you cant afford to rent your own house. You are lucky to have the means too have your own place. Dont chastise those who cant afford to live without the help of others who need a place to stay. I still cant believe some peoples attitudes are those of a stone. Not even our suffering economy breaks those people. Its called karma FTM.. What goes around comes around.

To To Kimmie wrote on Sep 11, 2008 1:44 PM:Sorry Kimmie I'm a dude not a loud lady and my garage is immaculate, it just happens to store my recreational vehicles. As far as your comment "hurray for me, too bad about everybody else", let's reverse that, you have a problem but you favor an ordinance that impacts people who don't have a problem i:e "I have a problem so you should suffer too". I think you're the one who has an attitude.

Also To To Kimmie wrote on Sep 11, 2008 1:52 PM:Don't know if you're the same person but in regards to the second comment about being given two permits and "what's the problem": Government interferance in my life is the problem. I don't need or want to deal with City Hall to ask them for the "priviledge" of parking in the street. That's my problem.

To To To Concerned Citizen wrote on Sep 11, 2008 2:43 PM:You're right, I dont know the facts, I just read what the NC Times reports...

So, because I live in a barrio area, I'm gonna have to pay to park because I own more than two vehicles and my garage size is fit for a moped.

Great, so say it's passed and everyone's paid for their extra 'exception' permits. Tell me how this solved any parking problems? Does the council really think that will make all those undesireable overcrowders to just pull up stakes and leave? Do they really think people will sell off their cars because they cant afford to pay to park? On top of that, how many extra 'meter maids' are we going to have the city hire to enforce this 'great idea'?
Daniels just earned my vote back. The others can go pound sand.

bugs wrote on Sep 11, 2008 2:44 PM:Don't understand this grave concern by Abed and staff about unspecified special circumstances. What exactly are special circumstances? The Pasadena plan and, as Waldron pointed out, many other city plans simply require an application and verification that a resident utilizes their off street parking facilities, garage,driveway,and parking spaces before they are allowed to purchase on street parking permits for one or two more passenger vehicles registered to the applicant's address to park in front of the permittee's residence. Nobody, neither Abed nor staff, explained, and I can't understand why, it becomes the city's responsibility to provide one or more free parking spaces for someone who obviously, if there really is any of these people whose needs are beyond the typical formula, has made the conscious choice to own more vehicles than their property accommodates. The ordinance should simply say if you have more vehicles than you can fit on your property or can legally park on the street with a permit, in front of your residence, you, not the city are responsible for finding off street space for the additional vehicles. Apparently none of the other cities with similar regulations have had this mysterious, only in Escondido but we can't tell you what or where, special circumstance. Mr. Epps and Mr. Phillips get paid a lot of money for sitting around saying no, no, no, not us, you have to tell us but this is what we think you said. Mr. Abed, why don't you explain your quandary to them and us? Then instruct them to earn their big bucks, pick up the phone, speak to their contemporaries in the cities with these ordinances, give the cryptic staff-only password, get their super secret answers, and use this privileged information to allay your wildest fears. Ludicrous.

Bill wrote on Sep 11, 2008 3:22 PM:You can own as many cars as you want. You can't park them all on public streets. If you need to, sell one and rent a storage place!

See how easy that was big bucks?

Bill wrote on Sep 11, 2008 3:32 PM:Kimmie, this paper doesn't believe in the first amendment...unless it's them speaking!!

Clueless Lisa wrote on Sep 11, 2008 4:05 PM:Because my dad and husband were in the military, I have the right to be dead wrong on the issues if I want to!!

bugs wrote on Sep 11, 2008 4:25 PM:Reference my 2:44, I inadvertently lumped Pasadena in with the cities that restrict permit parking to in front of the permittee's residence. Pasadena, as the City Attorney pointed out at the meeting, actually allows the permit holder to park anywhere in the city. I apologize for the mistake. Still, either method would work because they all require a typical formula: full utilization of existing off street parking to qualify, an application, verification, permit fee.

Cotton Ballz wrote on Sep 11, 2008 4:35 PM:hey I didnt finish my comment!!

To Kimmie wrote on Sep 11, 2008 4:40 PM:Hello? Did you forget?

Pasadena has their very own entirely seperate Parking District Department in City Hall.

...and how did you say that the "City" (I mean the TAXPAYERS) will pay for these start up costs??

I know...you propose that the city cut a bunch of programs...just so you can get your way.

Your solution: Spend approx. $300,000 for a parking ordinance that Pasadena and Menlo Park and Cerritos and San Gabriel DID NOT IMPLEMENT AS A TOOL TO CURB OVERCROWDING.

I mean in your world of tunnel-vision you think spending $300,000 on a preposterously planned parking ordinance VS. say...hiring SOME MORE COPS OR FIREFIGHTERS!! No wonder you are a big fan of Abed & Gallo....common sense and good leadership escape you all!

Wake up and take a deep breath of REALITY!! This ordinance guarantees nothing OTHER than your car won't get a ticket if it displays a permit (between the hours of 2am-5am). Brilliant! All that for a mere few hundred thousand!

P.S. Who gives a crap about other cities!! This is Escondido - create something that is relevant to Escondido! To CONSTANTLY compare Escondido to Pasadena is like comparing hamburger to filet mignon. But, "some" people just don't get it - you are obviously one of "them". Peace Out!

Poor Kimmie wrote on Sep 11, 2008 4:42 PM:Poor Kimmie. Her nose is so high in the air...

yet, she is too poor to move to Rancho Santa Fe or La Jolla or Poway.

Virginia wrote on Sep 11, 2008 4:46 PM:Stop kicking around Lisa.SHE took the time to research and write a 22 page report for the council & citizens.For FREE.What have YOU done? It is a much better report than the city staff put out.Okay,I know it's not hard to do better work than the city staff.
If every neighborhood had a Lisa we'd all be much better off for it.
When a report gives you all the honest facts so you can make an informed decision you thank the person and use it as a tool.This council ,especially Waldron,Gallo & Abed are so ignorant they are disgusting. Last nights council meeting they showed us all who they really are.So when someone shows you who they really are,believe it.
VOTE these ignorant racists OUT.

Reality Check wrote on Sep 11, 2008 5:23 PM:There were supporters last night who complained about code enforcement not enforcing the current codes and even responding to them.

So...these supporters think ANOTHER code will help?

How does that help? Another code that can't or won't be enforced. How does that help?

FTM wrote on Sep 11, 2008 7:29 PM:To "can't afford to rent your own house".

You situation is not uncommon. In fact back during the depression is was VERY VERY common for lot's of people to take in "boarders". 'Room and Board'. Mrs. Freemans oarding House in Ramona was taking in lot's during the depression. Many families saved thier homes doing this during the depression. I have actually rented out a room in my house when I was a lot younger (and poorer).

There are LAWS though as to HOW MANY boarders you can take in. You can only take in what is safe for the square footage and number of facilities you have. IT'S THE LAW, and it's also the ANSWER to the root problem you are experiencing in Escondido. The occupancy laws MUST be enforced! There is a REASON for them.

Hey loud lady wrote on Sep 11, 2008 7:51 PM:What a short memory. At a recent presentation by staff they reported that Pasadena's parking ordinance brought in $7.5 million per year. That pays for a lot of cops, firemen, and code compliance officers. Can you count that high?

Just the Facts wrote on Sep 11, 2008 8:03 PM:FTM, you are severely misinformed:

"health codes" don't apply to owner-occupied single family dwellings.

Hence, there are no "occupancy" limits that a City can enforce. And Homeowner Associaition rules are totally irrelevant.

So - just HOE would you attack the problem of over-capacity houses in Escondido?

Abed, Gallo, and Waldron have a correct approach.

jerrylen wrote on Sep 11, 2008 8:04 PM:Was there EVER a more incompetent council. They spend 1 million yr on grafitti removal, 14 million on a hotel, 2.5 million yr on Arts Ctr, over 500k on Illegal Rental Ord. & now will spend another 500k on a parking ord. THEIR consultants said THERE IS NO PARKING PROBLEM. The Escondido Chamber of Citizens produced a report PROVING over 20 of staff recommendations were illegal or unnecessary. Staff wouldn't admit they accepted over 20 changes ECOC recommended. This must be some kind of great group. Let's join them or at least applaud their volunteer efforts. November '08 REQUIRES we get some qualified people on the council & put these goats out to pasture.

Recondito wrote on Sep 11, 2008 8:32 PM:I'm just an outside observer but it seems to me that this whole parking question as posed in Escondido has a partially hidden agenda and is a product of murky ideology, which probably explains why in practice it's turning out to be a major headache. This is actually rather comic, because the measure is encountering opposition not just from immigrants' rights people but from ordinary citizens who are good, consistent libertarian conservatives and don't see why a city should get so heavily involved in such a heavy and costly regulatory scheme. Thus leaving the OTHER conservatives -- those who want to make the city more repressive because they're obsessed by "overcrowding" -- a bit isolated this time round. Allow me a chuckle. If there are indeed a few cases of streets being too chock-full of cars perhaps those could be resolved by negotiation among neighbors with city mediation rather than by some sort of blanket regulation with threat of fines, towing and other Kafkaesque nonsense. No les parece (don'tcha think so), people?).

Hanna wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:07 PM:The Mayor and member of this city council continue to prove they are complete failures in running this city. I don't care if you feel this is a way to reduce the ILLEGAL population. This is a quality of life issue. When I purchased my home it was in a very nice pocket of homes a short 10 years ago. Needless to say it has changed. Our Mayor has to go she can't lead a girlscout troup. One way or another this should not have taken 18 months. Look around Mayor and council your jobs may not be there very long. We need leadership that can move this city forward. Privatize the Center for the Arts let a promoter who know how to promote.. promote and share in the rewards.

Wake Up wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:16 PM:Wake Up Abed, Gallo & Waldron supporters. Just because they are Republicans doesn't make them the best choice for Escondido.

O.K. Let's say for a moment (in lieu of any factual data) that we have excessive over-crowding. Let's say that for the sake of this point:

Why is Escondido trying to implement a Parking Ordinance? While, other cities like San Diego and San Marcos have implemented "mini dorm" ordinances to address to many residents in one home.

SD & SM didn't seem to have a problem adopting those ordinances. Maybe because SD & SM did not have the likes of Abed, Gallo & Waldron...these three have put Escondido on the national map of intolerance - the map of least friendly cities to live - the city people choose to leave!!

So...if there is excessive over-crowding...then why are these three trying to penalize those innocent of over-crowding (by using their new "tool" of a parking restriction)?

Not too bright! No doubt!

Why a parking restriction vs. a mini-dorm ordinance?

Anybody?

Delay wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:19 PM:Delay - Schmelay.

In other words: this ordinance lacks the substance necessary in order to be effective.

Drop it, already.

Oh yeah. That's right. Gallo's motto is to: keep kicking things, until there is no more movement.

Kick away!!! Or you could try banging your head into a brick wall.

problem wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:38 PM:French's question to me.. Since we have such a problem with too many people living in some of the homes and the state is who controls that.. Why dont we ask the state do do their job? After all dont we pay state taxes too?

Another comment to FTM wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:40 PM:It's amazing how many people think the rules pertaining to public gathering places applies to private homes. The state government doesn't allow cities to legislate the number of people living in a private residence. A home is not the same as a meeting room. No agency can tell a family how many children they can have living in the home, or if grandma and grandpa can live with them, or prevent a deadbeat brother in law, from living there, etc. Most of the homes that are overcrowded with members of their extended families not strangers. I don't think any Republican or Democrat would really want government to be so intrusive in their lives. If there was such a simple solution to this problem ever city would use it. But there isn't a simple solution.

Gallo says wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:50 PM:Gallo says:

Escondido First.

That's right. Escondido was first -

...the first city in SD County to try to implement a rental ban ordinance and failed miserably and tarnished the reputation of Escondido.

...the first city, in San Diego County, to slam the door shut on the homeless (on the coldest night of the year, no less).

...the first city, in San Diego County that is completely willing to implement a parking ordinance that will penalize HONEST LEGAL RESIDENTS/CITIZENS so they may run some illegals out of town. (Because we all know that Escondido is the ONLY city in SD County that has illegals. DUH.)

...the first city that was willing to cut the school crossing guards because the safety of the children is not the responsiblity of the city.

...ahh, yes...Escondido is the first...the first city I have longed to move from...thanks to Gallo (& Abed).

hey wrote on Sep 11, 2008 11:26 PM:where did the write up go on french?

tonight wrote on Sep 11, 2008 11:34 PM:People of esoondido, please describe the following:

Abed:
Olga:
French:
Gallo:
Barron:

To Reality Check wrote on Sep 12, 2008 3:48 AM:Ain't it the truth? Anyone who has dealt with Escondido's code enforcement dep't knows that we have big problems. Clean up code and we might not need to reinvent the wheel. Yeah, I know, sigh, it won't happen. It would just be too easy to enforce current codes. WE CANNOT HAVE THAT! No LOL. I'm out of laughs.

To tonight wrote on Sep 12, 2008 7:29 AM:People of esoondido, please describe the following:

Abed: Winner
Olga: Loser
French: Undecided (Illegal Aliens?)
Gallo: Winner
Barron: Undecided (Illegal Aliens?)

Anything else?

More of the Same wrote on Sep 12, 2008 8:03 AM:People constantly complain about Escondido but when the City Council tries to do something to make the town better, then everyone complains about that. Yes, the majority of the street parking problems are a result of multiple families living in one house.It's also the reason for our overcrowed schools and hospital. A property is assessed taxes as a unit. When 10 children and 6 adults live in a house they pay the same amount as a house that has 3 children and 2 adults. These property taxes are what support in part our schools and services. I guess a number of people posting here don't mind having their taxes constantly raised to pay for this overcrowding. I do and thank the council for trying to do something about it.

Kimmie wrote on Sep 12, 2008 10:33 AM:Abed insists Escondido must get paid adequately for the services it provides. But not parking permits. He stubbornly conditioned his support of an ordinance on mailing out the 50,000 free permits staff says would compromise the goals.
Daniels was for it before he was against it, not supporting a city-wide plan, saying people must park in front of their homes even if they don't have legal parking space due to a hydrant or restricted frontage.
Pfeiler condones multiple families living in a single family home, taking up everybody else's street frontage.
Gallo and Waldron, both want to adopt a plan similar to Pasadena's.
A city-wide ordinance that provides each residence can be eligible to apply for up to two permits.
To qualify for an Annual On-Street Parking Permit the applicant must have more vehicles than the available off-street parking at their residence.
All vehicles must be currently registered to the address on the application.
The application is submitted in person. Applicants must provide a copy of a valid and current registration for all vehicles parked at their residence. All vehicle registration(s) submitted must match the address listed on the application.
The information is then verified. Temporary permits are issued for use during the investigation.
The actual number of parking spaces at the residence are counted. Garage and driveway are not allowed to be used for storage or any other purpose other than parking your passenger vehicle.
The annual fee for an overnight parking permit is $63 per permit.
Due to lack of leadership, residents continue watching helplessly as their home values deteriorate, their quality of life is ruined, and their kids attend failing schools. All because Abed remains obstinate and no meaningful ordinance passes. Maybe the way to resolve the problem is by gathering enough signatures from registered city voters to qualify for a ballot measure in 2010. When Pfeiler and Daniels are both up for re-election.

Mini dorms wrote on Sep 12, 2008 10:59 AM:For what, the university of esconghetto?

To Kimmie wrote on Sep 12, 2008 11:36 AM:"Kimmie
[-] wrote on Sep 11, 2008 10:31 AM:What is with the censorship? I submitted the same comments to the San Diego Union at the same time as the North County Times. The San Diego Union published immediately. You didn't. Why?"

Kimmie, you have to understand that the NCT only publishes what "IT" wants published. It does not publish all comments as the UT does. UT won't publish any swearing etc. which is good. Ive' been using the North County of the UT since I realized the bias that the NCT has. It's really too bad that a news paper would be that way, but as you can read from other posters they too are tired of the way the NCT's runs it's paper. I've heard that it's really effecting the circulation numbers also.

To Kimmie wrote on Sep 12, 2008 12:03 PM:It is all too rational and logical, so the illegal immigration activists will insist it is targeting their illegal's.
I say so what.

Abed Gallo splitting hairs wrote on Sep 12, 2008 5:05 PM:IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT NCT POSTED A RETRACTION REGARDING THE "LATINO" COMMENT.

The FACTS are:

The troika (suffering from constant brain cramps) stupidly pursued a rental ban in October 2006, in part due to the results of the Mission Park study. Abed believed/believes there were/are 35,000 illegal ALIENS in Escondido - that's of course after he "extrapolated" the numbers from a study from Vista. The troika pursued the rental ban - no matter the numerous warnings about the illegal nature of it.

In December 2006 - the council/city retreated from their position when they were getting their bottoms sued off in the federal court!! At the time, the council stated that to continue to fight for the ordinance would be a waste of time and taxpayer money, when "other tools" could be utilized to address overcrowding.

In Jan 2007, the council drafted their "Action Plan". In the action plan, one of the goals of the ACT team was to address overcrowding and implementing a residential parking restriction ordinance.

In March 2007, Waldron announced the parking ordinance proposal "to address overcrowding" and we all KNOW that the three brain cramping council members all contributed the over-crowding to ILLEGAL ALIENS (not immigrants but aliens).

So...Gallo and Abed can try to split hairs all they want. We, the people, know the truth!!

The truth is: Gallo, Abed and Waldron are trying to adopt this parking ordinance as a tool to combat over-crowding (mostly caused by illegal immigrants - in the minds of the troika).

So...are we suppose to believe that the troika are going after another type of "over-crowder". Has the city suddenly become inundated with South African illegal immigrants. No. No. No. Troika. WE ARE NOT STUPID. Just because you are not saying it's the same group you are going after...we know it is.

You opened your mouths and stuck your big feet in them.

These words alone, prove it: "We tried the rental ban, but that didn't work," said Gallo. "Now we're trying the parking ordinance, and that will work."

Can't get past those words. You tried the rental ban (to get rid of illegals) and now you are trying the parking ordinance (to what...get rid of cars?...and that's why you're giving away permits and making available exemptions and allowing front yard parking - duh, duh, duh).

Tsk. Tsk. Tsk. No integrity = no re-election!!! A lie is a lie is a lie is a lie. Naughty. Naughty.


P.S. Pasadena is not generating $7.5 million a year in parking fees. That's an exaggeration!!!

tired of wrote on Sep 12, 2008 10:17 PM:this council thinking the voters are all stupid.I no longer say I am from Escondido.I've heard to many say ohhh home of the racists.
Waldron,Gallo,Abed you brought this ugliness on we the voters have but one thing to do to begin to redeem our town.Vote these vile minds out of office.
My vote Nov 2008 will not be for
a pig with lipstick on,he is still a pig.

TO Abed Gallo splitting hairs wrote on Sep 12, 2008 10:20 PM:ummmm...hello they only have three hairs beween them!

rsxguy wrote on Sep 13, 2008 3:04 AM:personally i hate this illegal alien argument there illegal they couldnt be bothered going through the process of becoming NOT ILLEGAL and our gov is saying oh well theres no way to deport the millions of illegals we know about...i wonder in this year of our lord 2008 we cant complete a task that we were able to complete with not one but 3 diffrent ethnic groups back in the 1940s? i say open the camps back up sweep the businesses fine the business into the ground gather the info on these people go to there homes/hives(as ive seen one house that has 30 people living in it in oceanside) gather them all up and lets either get them registered as citizens with "probation officers" while there detained in the camps apply fines, taxes and such so they pay into our system like good citizens do get them resettled and the the ones who dont want to become citizens or try to ditch out on there obligation if/when we catch them again we dont deport...we hold in the labor camps as criminals untill they pay off fines/penalties then we deport them, im sick of the kid gloves when there are groups like el raza and the like running around......as for parking i paid for my house i should be able to paint it polka dot if i want to and if i want to park my hoopty on my lawn then i should be allowed to its my grass/suspension im destroying

DID YOU KNOW wrote on Sep 13, 2008 10:33 PM:it was Mayor Lori Pfeiler who endorsed and enthusiastically campaigned for the election of Abed, Gallo, and Waldron, saying that she needed these people to help her move Escondido forward. The politics of this Mayor has forever tarnished the reputation of the City of Escondido. Place blame where blame belongs.

Yes We Knew wrote on Sep 14, 2008 10:07 AM:yes, we knew that Pfeiler put her name next to Abed & Gallo in 2004.

Thankfully, she has not made that mistake again! Her name is absent from Gallo & Abed's endorsement list.

Obviously, Mayor Pfeiler has realized her mistake and chooses not to repeat it.

We can take that as a sign that Mayor Pfeiler does not think the council is as cohesive as Abed & Gallo think it is. Then again, we know that Abed and Gallo tend to say "whatever pops into their heads".

Thankful for the small gesture...Mayor Pfeiler letting the county know that she does not endorse Abed & Gallo.

Frida wrote on Sep 14, 2008 11:44 PM:Wow, that city council meeting had at least 90% of those folks who attended in opposition to the parking ordinance. Still, the three stooges don't get it. They don't care what the people of Escondido really want. Vote em' all out!

Frida wrote on Sep 14, 2008 11:44 PM:Wow, that city council meeting had at least 90% of those folks who attended in opposition to the parking ordinance. Still, the three stooges don't get it. They don't care what the people of Escondido really want. Vote em' all out! Except the mayor, she can stay.

THE BLOG EDITORS wrote on Sep 15, 2008 5:33 PM:obviously have a political agenda because they routinely censor negative comments submitted about the real culprit in this City -- MAYOR LORI HOLT PFEILER. The editors freely print criticisms about Abed, Gallo and Waldron, but they refuse to allow the public to see the big picture, i.e., the Mayor's incompetence, poor judgment, her bad decisions and lack of leadership, all of which have contributed to the disfunctional atmosphere that exists in City government today.

Not buying it wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:31 AM:Not buying that BS.

Mayor Pfeiler is the most sensible out of all of them.

Did she waste time & money with the Rental Ban fiasco? No. But, people (like you) say: If she ain't fer the ban, then she must be fer illegals. And that is just silly!

Has she wasted staff's time for the last 18 months, trying to cater to the likes of people (like you)? No. But, people like you say: If she ain't fer the parking ordinance, then she must be fer overcrowding. And that too is silly!

The day you hear Mayor Pfeiler speak the words: I am fer illegals...well, then maybe you would have a leg to stand on.

The day you hear Mayor Pfeiler speak the words: I don't care about those who have legitimate PARKING issues. Then maybe you would have two sticks to rub together.

Until then...you are just trying to smear Pfeiler and detract the attention from WALDRON & GALLO & ABED & WALDRON & GALLO & ABED & WALDRON & GALLO & ABED & ...well, you get the point!

Where did you say the $350,000 was coming from??