Carter wrote on Oct 24, 2008 9:24 PM:Now that isn't very bright.Prop O is as follows and from the Sample ballot & Voter Information Pamphlet:
"Prop O
Shall an ordinance be adopted amending the San Marcos General Plan to require voter approval of certain general plan amendments modifying or changing land us categories or designations."
What could be more simple - we modify the San Marcos General Plan to accommodate a balanced growth. Any Developer, city official, city employee, or citizen of San Marcos, has only to stay within the guidelines of the plan and they can build as they want, after getting a permit.
The success of a City Plan is in how will it is written. It seems that all the city officials coming out against Prop O is planning on adopting an Ordinance amending the current city plan that they have written poorly.
If the amended General Plan is done right It should be many, many years before it has to be amended again. However, if a developer, or anybody for that matter, requests a permit to build in the city, something that is not allowed by the City Plan, such as requiring a zoning change, and the city officials believe that it will be of benefit to San Marcos, then it will necessitate a change to the city plan, and will have to be approved by a vote by the citizens of San Marcos.
Some people against Prop O have put up $90,000.00 to stop Prop O. They are developers, realtors, city officials, and people that do not want citizens of San Marcos to have oversight of the growth of San Marcos. These special interest groups want to build as they see fit without San Marcos citizen having a say as to what they are doing to our city. The most of us are not smooth talking, silver tongued, public speaker but we can be heard loud and clear through our votes.
VOTE YES ON PROP O!

Dont be Mislead wrote on Oct 24, 2008 10:12 PM:If the city is continued to be allowed to build more residential and commercial properties, what they call "smart growth" without amending the general plan and without voter approval, ultimately will lead to a drain of resources and funding. There will be more residents and businesses to protect, becoming a vicious cycle. How is that smart growth? The long term effects must be considered and be a priority over short term and shorted sighted goals and desires. Supporters of No on O want you to think that it is for the greater good of the community. What voting No on O means, more lining of the pockets of those who are urging you to vote no. Citizens, don't give away your power and rights. Look at the big picture and the long term future and VOTE YES ON O!

Watcher wrote on Oct 24, 2008 10:52 PM:As a resident of Escondido, I have watched over the last 10 years nearly every piece of raw land available get development. Prop S has not stopped development neither will Prop O. Prop O protects the citizens and their neighborhoods.

Explain this o'unbiased opponents of Prop O: If Prop S has hurt Escondido's business development, then why has our city council rezoned General Commercial Property in the Downtown BUSINESS District to Planned Development with NO Commercial Component. Why??? Why would the city rezone commercial property to residential when there are thousands of homes and condos and apartments all within blocks of downtown? Why? I'll tell you why! Because the council only cares about the revenue generated by NEW development (they don't care about the infrastructure to support the development)...they only care about the property tax revenues!

If the opponents have a good reason for this rezoning then the people of Escondido would sure like to know what it is!

VOTE YES ON PROP O - it is for the people!! Your city is almost built out - stop while you are ahead!

VOTE YES ON PROP O

and VOTE YES ON PROP N

Power to the People...put the developers and their developer loving councilmen and "city leaders" (used loosely) in their place...the place that serves the citizens!!!

David wrote on Oct 25, 2008 8:03 AM:Let's see. The mayor and city council only agreed to update the general plan AFTER the proposition was submitted with enough signatures. And the update is finally being done after years of requests from citizens.

As Carter states, the proposition only requires public approval when the general plan is to be amended for new projects. If the project falls into the existing zoning there is no public approval required.

Voting no on O will keep the status quo and enable the council to put high density housing or large retail centers in the middle of residential areas (remember Walmart?).

At least with proposition O, the community will know what to expect. Vote yes!

SM Voter wrote on Oct 25, 2008 9:54 AM:The City Council first discussed updating the General Plan immediately after Mayor Jim Desmond took office, and instructed city staff to explore the costs, etc. of doing so.

A General Plan "done right" could never have anticipated an opportunity like CSUSM, nor could it anticipate future events on the order of the financial calamity we are now facing. It also cannot effectively anticipate or control the effects of decisions made outside the city, such as other cities development of business parks that drive vehicle traffic through our residential neighborhoods.

The argument that, if a project that amends the General Plan is good enough, it will be approved by the voters is specious and misleading. The fact is no developer will submit to the (very expensive) several years worth of negotiations and planning the system already requires only to have to mount a political campaign before a project's certainty is guaranteed. That means many potentially quality developments will simply never be proposed.

I do remember WalMart, and the fact that the system worked and the plan was defeated. Keeping the "status quo" in the past would have meant the new Cal State campus would have been in Carlsbad and Santa Fe Hills, Discovery Hills, Grand Plaza, and others would never have been built. I was around to see all of it happen, and glad for it.

Don wrote on Oct 25, 2008 10:02 AM:I am voting Yes on Prop. O.

Bring back the citizen power to San Marcos and stop reckless growth.

We, the People, are just as smart, if not smarter, than the San Marcos City Council believes we are. We know a bad exemption better than they do, for starters.

Don

SM voter wrote on Oct 25, 2008 11:06 AM:Why are all of these UNIONS concerned about San Marcos? How many firefighters and sherriff actually live in San Marcos? Unions should stay out of these local races....The firefighter in San Marcos actually endorse who they want to control the budget? (just looking out for themselves) It is sad to have so much outside money influence our "local" election.

Resident wrote on Oct 25, 2008 2:03 PM:Too funny when employee unions support big development. This town is messed up. Vote yes for O.

Simon says wrote on Oct 25, 2008 2:37 PM:I have just received another mailer against San Marcos Prop O. In the Mailer Escondido is used as a recent failure of their General City Plan. Of course, if you have a very poor plan it will hamper growth and require more work in correcting the errors.
The idea is to have people in office who are experienced and able to put together a plan that will work tomorrow and on into the future. It takes planners with foresight who will implement care and provision for the future.
Everything I have read, in mailers and such, by our current batch of city officials, indicates that they will be writing an ordinance amending the current General Plan that will encompass no further than tomorrow.
Another thing, if you are looking for advice about anything, do not go to someone that has failed, ask the advice of someone who is successful at making a city General Plan that it is up and running strong.
It seems that Developers in the area, with the backing of San Marcos city officials, want the freedom to run amuck, building as they see fit, with no regard to good planning,and no consideration to the wishes of the citizens of San Marcos.
VOTE YES ON PROP 0!

NO ON O wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:59 AM:Do any of you people realize that every time you need voter approval for a new project, you have to hold a special election for it? Do you know how much those are? They run about $250K!!! And where do you think that money will come from? Taxpayers like you and I! Vote NO on O people!!!

To NO on O wrote on Oct 28, 2008 6:48 AM:You should read the initiative before you make such foolish statements.

All special elections are paid for by the developer.

The point of the initiative in to follow the General Plan. If done so, there would never have to be an election at all. Escondido hasn't had an election in 8 years of the 10 years its been in effect. Poway has had 2 in 20 years. Solana Beach 1 in 10 years. Del Mar has their 2nd on the ballot for the Nov. election. The exagerations the opponents make are bogus. If they simply follow the General Plan, no one has to pay for any election at all!!

There is a copy of the initiative on the campaign website of ProtectSanMarcos...

Here's what it says under the implementation section: EXACTLY AS WRTITEN:

9. The City Council shall set any election required by this initiative to the next regularly scheduled general election at no cost to the proponent of the land use change, or set a special election, the cost which must be borne by the proponent of the land use change, with advance payment to the City.

Get informed. Vote YES on Prop O