Position Details

By Lou Fenton

Greater Detail

• I have studied the "First Amended and Restated Negotiating Agreement" (Item No. 48 on the Wednesday November 1st Oceanside City Council Agenda), and I have concluded that this negotiating agreement with Manchester Resorts should be rejected for the following reasons:

  It will unfairly limit the options of the newly elected city council. As a result, a future vote by a new city council to reject the Manchester Resorts proposal could cost the City of Oceanside up to four hundred thousand dollars.

  The agreement contemplates the vacation and closure of portions of four streets vital for beach and pier access: Mission, The Strand, Pacific, and Pier View.

  The agreement calls for what I think is an unworkable joint control of our public park. Will there be a lawsuit every time the city says yes and the developer says no?

  Finally, there will be no revenue to the city since both the transient occupancy tax (TOT) and the property tax increment will be used to fund the Manchester Resort. Oceanside residents will be required to compensate for the diverted taxes by paying for city services to the Manchester Resort such as police and fire protection.

• Water and sewer utility customers need to be treated fairly. It is time to put an end to the unwritten policy of over-charging residents to compensate for under-charging developers. We should not be forced to subsidize the type of growth that produces ever increasing traffic congestion. In addition, it is time to end the practice of loaning water and sewer funds interest free to the general fund. You would fire your stock broker if he borrowed your stock to collect the dividends for himself! Why should city government get away with the same dishonesty? Water and sewer rates should be fair to persons with fixed incomes.

• Beach- The beach and beach park are a public trust. They should be left in public ownership and under public control. Let us make improvements to our beaches and our parks so that living in Oceanside feels like being on vacation year-round.

• Even the modified Manchester proposal is completely unacceptable for several reasons. First, El Corazón is too valuable to be given to Manchester. Next, Pacific Street must remain open to automobile traffic. Already, downtown Oceanside is becoming a tangled maze of blocked streets. Next, the Manchester Resort would be too tall. It would create a visual barrier separating the beach and pier from the downtown area of the city. It would also encourage additional tall buildings along the oceanfront. Finally, 15 million dollars in public subsidies to Manchester would not be fair to competing businesses nor residents. Just think of how many better ways there are of spending fifteen million dollars. In addition, this is money that would need to be borrowed. Is Oceanside so bad a city that we must pay businesses to do business here? I think not! Let us be fair to our local businesses, and let us be fair to residents.

• Do you remember the Fisherman's Restaurant at the end of the pier? When the public subsidies expired, so did the restaurant. I oppose giving public subsidies to for-profit businesses because they are unfair and they do not work.

• The Pfleger Institute for Environmental Research (PIER) needs to be moved from the crowded harbor to a better location nearer to public transportation and parking. The site for the proposed Manchester Resort should be considered for PIER. A public aquarium would benefit tourism and be educational as well.

• Public Parks- Thirty years after our public park bounded by Brooks, Mission, Barns, and Maxson Streets was converted to a police station and shopping center, residents have yet to see any positive economic benefits! One business after another has failed at that location, and the replacement park built to the east on the shifting ground of a garbage dump has never been as popular as the original park. In addition, the adjacent neighborhoods have degenerated. Trading public parks for economic prosperity has not worked in the past, and there is no reason to think that it will work in the future. Well designed parks are what make a city livable. I will work to increase the number of parks, and I will oppose any attempts to reduce our parks by sale, lease, gift or otherwise.

• Rather than giving away or selling El Corazón (the valuable Crystal Silica mine site donated to Oceanside), I favor making the entire site a public park with Oceanside residents in charge of its design, construction, and operation. This donated property has the potential of becoming our most prized park, perhaps another Central Park. However, according to Ron Raposa, a staff writer for The North County Times Newspaper (October 1, 2000, Page A1), the City of Oceanside has placed a value of only $3.5 million dollars on the 455 acre El Corazón property. In addition, the City Council now plans to give this valuable property to Manchester as part of a $15 million dollar public subsidy. Manchester would then return only 15 acres to Oceanside for ballparks. This is not acceptable. We need more public parks in Oceanside.

• We need linear parks along the San Luis Rey River, Loma Alta Creek, and Buena Vista Creek. The American River Parkway in Sacramento is an example of what we could create in Oceanside. Remember, the most valuable property in any city is adjacent to parks and open space. Our beach and ocean are our most valuable open spaces. In addition, parks would partially preserve Oceanside's remaining rural atmosphere. These parks would be paid for using existing revenues, donations, and grants.

• Bicycle Paths- We need a system of parkways and bicycle paths throughout the city. We can start by extending the existing bicycle path along the San Luis Rey River levee west to Pacific Street and by increasing the number of access points.

• Equestrian trails should should be included in a system of parks and parkways. Now is the time to act.

• Skateboard Parks are needed to provide a safe and exciting alternative to the streets. Let's build the kind of skateboard park that kids want. Users should be in charge of designing our skateboard parks. Also, one skateboard park is not enough. Each neighborhood that wants one should have one.

• Surfing Reef- I think that a surfing reef could be designed and built south of the pier to enhance the break of the waves while at the same time protecting our beach from erosion.

• Night lighting near the pier would make more waves available to surfers. Why not have 24 hour surfing?

• Many operators of Jet-skis have managed to annoy others with their conduct. Something will need to be done about this problem. Perhaps, we need an offshore jet-ski park and speed restrictions in the harbor approaches.

• I favor building the City Sports Center at a safer location away from the Oceanside airport. I would not place children's lives at risk. I am old enough to remember what was then our nation's worst air-ground catastrophe. It occurred in 1972 at Sacramento's Executive Airport when a jet crashed on take off into the Farrell's Ice Cream Parlor at the end of the runway. Twenty-two people died, 12 of them children, and 25 people were injured. Eight years earlier, the airport manager had warned against building a shopping center so close to the airport runway, only to be ignored by city officials.

• Palm Trees- At a time when Las Vegas resort owners spent 15 million dollars of their own money planting 1,500 palms in the median of Las Vegas Boulevard to create a tropical resort theme, our City Council wasted public money purchasing and then destroying a magnificent grove of stately Canary Island Date Palms just to produce a parking lot for the benefit of a developer. These palms with their gracefully arching fronds are currently the most desirable, the most expensive, and the hardest to obtain according to Las Vegas landscape architects. Let us elect individuals who will treasure our valuable trees.

• Strand Access- Long time residents will remember that it was once possible to drive the full length of The Strand in both directions. The present system of illegal closure and one-way access unfairly reduces the usefulness of The Strand as a means of beach access. The Strand is not a private driveway. Rather, it is a public street which should remain open. (Individuals with noisy boom boxes can be ticketed.) I would like to see the southern portion of the Strand repaved with colorful designs incorporated into the concrete.

• Pier- I favor expanding and extending our fishing pier to include an observation tower and seats for watching boat races. The pier expansion should be done so that new fish habitat is created.

• Sewage- I do not like the idea of swimming in sewage, and I doubt that many other people do either. For the sake of tourism and our own peace of mind, I think that it is time to explore lower cost alternatives to our present ocean sewer outfall. I favor improving our present sewage treatment facilities by adding low cost biological treatments to eliminate all remaining hazards, and then using the reclaimed water in parks and green-belts.

• Parking Tickets- Let's not discourage tourism and downtown shopping with parking fees and parking tickets. I favor reducing pay lots and parking meters.

• Billboards are Urban Blight- A back room deal by the present City Council to issue permits for 5 new giant billboards in Oceanside was a betrayal of trust. (Four have been built along Highway 78, and the fifth one was built at the corner of Monterey and Coast Highway near the harbor) How can Oceanside possibly become a resort community with billboard blight? We deserve better from our civic leaders! It is time for us to establish "Scenic Oceanside" and fight back. (See the last item on this page)

• City Attorney- We need an independent city attorney who understands that it is his duty to review ordinances in light of recent court decisions and recommend revisions prior to the City being sued. Note: Oceanside's sign ordinance was recently declared unconstitutional as the result of a law suit.

• "City Hall and Library, Erected and Dedicated 1934 No Bond Issue" is the proud statement of a former City Council. Designed by the noted architect Irving Gill and built in the 1930s, the old City Hall was financed without bonds! Visit the building and examine the brass plaque near the entrance. I would like to see Oceanside return to the pay-as-you-go method of financing civic projects. No more bond issues with their expensive interest payments.

• Brown Act- Although closed meetings are permitted in certain instances, they are not required. I would like to see the public's business conducted in public.

• It is time for a complete, independent audit of Oceanside's finances including redevelopment. We need to see if city officials are serving our best interests.

• Airport- It is time to encourage quiet airplanes by setting fees based on noise output.

• Internet Voting could empower residents by providing us with a veto over City Council actions. (Arizona has already held elections using Internet voting.) In addition, the voting records of the city council members should be posted on the Internet. Let us take advantage of technology for civic purposes.

• Transportation- Although the automobile is a comfortable and convenient mode of transportation, we also need alternatives. Public transportation needs to be made as convenient and seamless as mailing a letter. Through good zoning practices, alternative modes of transportation could become popular in Oceanside. I favor lowering the north-south railroad tracks through Oceanside as was originally proposed by redevelopment.

• Redevelopment - It is time to end redevelopment bcause it has not been cost effective. It is also unfair to the remainder of the city which has had to pay for city services to the redevelopment district. The "increment" which should have been used to pay for city services has instead been used to fund subsidies to favored businesses.

• Camp Pendleton- We should wait until military officials formally request annexation by the City of Oceanside before we consider the subject.

• Community Policing- I fully support our police officers performing their lawful duties. I believe that they should be given the best equipment that we can afford. In addition, I am committed to community policing. Our volunteer police are doing our community a very valuable public service. I believe in neighborhood police stations rather than a single central police station. I believe that community policing means taking the time to consult with the community on police matters. This means that the police department should have consulted with an existing citizens advisory committee consisting of communications experts prior to purchasing a $140,000 police radio system that does not function properly. It should not have taken an order from the City Council to get the police chief to hear that "...loud and clear." (San Diego Union-Tribune, May 13, 2000, Page B-5)

• Fluoridation- Because I believe in your right of free choice, I will oppose any attempts to fluoridate Oceanside's water supply. However, I am not opposed to providing free fluoridated water to those who choose it. Take the time to read an article published by the American Chemical Society: Bette Hileman, Fluoridation of Water, Volume 66, Number 31, Pages 26-42, Chemical & Engineering News (August 1, 1988). This journal is available at most university research libraries.

• Library- Our library is a vital community resource which deserves better funding. The book collection needs to be improved and library hours need to be extended. In addition, library functions should be expanded to include affordable day care. Day care would be offered in a separate building and the staff would consist of volunteers to keep costs low. Library resources would be used for instruction.

• Big Box Retailers- Residents should have a vote in deciding how many stores and in what locations. Over the years, I have watched as new stores just cannibalized existing stores with no net increase in business. We have lost valuable open space and gained nothing but urban sprawl.

• Low Income Housing- Oceanside already has more than its fair share of low income housing. As a result, many neighborhoods are no longer as attractive as they were in the past. Rather than more subsidized housing, we need residents with higher incomes. Wages should be sufficient so that housing subsidizes, food subsidizes, health care subsidizes, etc. are unnecessary. Why should we pay higher taxes so that others can pay lower wages?

• Average prices of existing homes- (Data from San Diego Association of Realtors, May 2000) Oceanside $207,000; Carlsbad $364,000; Encinitas $544,000; Solana Beach $520,000; Del Mar $772,000. Oceanside has the same climate with better beaches, and yet, our property is worth thousands of dollars less. Ambiance does translate into dollars. As a result, we need to improve Oceanside with a beautification program.

• Ocean Hills - I have read the Ocean Hills Improvement Program given to me by John Dunzer. I agree that more money needs to be spent on recreational facilities and libraries. This is the main focus of my campaign. In addition, I see nothing which would prevent the City of Oceanside from contracting with the San Diego County Sheriff's Department for police protection in Ocean Hills. However, I would like to see an independent evaluation of the potential savings. Finally, why should the City of Oceanside be giving 15 million dollars to Manchester when there is such a shortage of recreational facilities and libraries in Ocean Hills? Why indeed?

• "Scenic Oceanside" - I invite you to help establish a beautification committee which I propose to call "Scenic Oceanside". Visit http://www.scenic.org on the Internet to get an idea of the type of organization that I have in mind. Contact me, if you are interested.