Comments by Ken Johnson

HMB to Sacramento: If you don’t support AB1991, we’ll kill this dog

The amended AB 1991 is scheduled for hearing 30 April. A small change in strategy. It is now a ‘Non-Urgency’ bill - majority only vote required. Also, added as Coauthor: Assembly Member Ma.

Although it is unlikely to make it out of the Committee on Local Government, I would like to see it make it to the Assembly floor. It would produce an ‘anti-environment hit list’ for the November election.

If you liked the Settlement Agreement, you will love reading: The Amended AB 1991 full text.

Ken Johnson

HMB to Sacramento: If you don’t support AB1991, we’ll kill this dog

HMB City Council,

PULL THE TRIGGER - FILE FOR BANKRUPTCY!

The City Council Majority has committed to an expenditure regime without rational expectation of success.  AB 1991 is DOA, yet funds are being expended on Orrick beyond that required in the Settlement Agreement. This is not ‘rational’ behaviour.

Bankruptcy represents an opportunity to set aside all, or a part, of the higher than justified cost of the Settlement Agreement.

Dissolution presents the opportunity to re-organize under court supervision, minimizing a sell off of public owned assets.

For better or worse, the Settlement Agreement has set a cap on the financial risk. All costs since 1 April 2008 on legal costs and anticipated legal costs represents a raising of this cap.

Ken Johnson

HMB lawyers issue city’s statement on AB 1991

Nancy,

Orrick represents their client - unfortunately, ‘we’ are not their client. The HMB City Council majority is their client. 

Orrick could have advised the City Council to pursue the Appeal and reject the Settlement concept! The advice is bound up in confidentiality.

I wrote back on 30 Nov 08 “The list of who might join on the City’s side and amicus curiae briefs would / will be interesting.”

There is now a clear written record that the City Council majority knew that the Coastal Commission AND the Attorney General’s office were willing to back HMB on an Appeal.

”The Commission was prepared to assist the city with an appeal to the 9th Circuit, and, along with the Attorney General’s office, made that offer known to the City.”

The City Council majority chose to make them an enemy! And they are using our checking account to fight another loosing battle against those who should have been recognized as friends.

Ken Johnson

HMB lawyers issue city’s statement on AB 1991

Kevin,

I agree that Obama should go – somewhere else! After his performance last week, his new book will be titled “The Audacity of Being Questioned”. I thought he was going to cry - but that would wait for the 527 groups if he is the Dem Nominee. He will make “Bambi Meets Godzilla” (1969) look like a full length feature film.

Ken Johnson

HMB lawyers issue city’s statement on AB 1991

Orrick is headquartered in S.F.  The ‘Political’ Practice Group is located in D.C. Hourly rate is equal to one month mortgage payment.

Ken Johnson

Coastal Commission votes unanimously to oppose Beachwood settlement bill

Steven,

You wrote, “to try and kill the bill” - that presumes the fantasy that AB 1991
has shown any life since it was introduced on 14 Feb 08. It has not! The Settlement Agreement pulled the life support on 1 April.

The forthcoming California Coastal Commission staff reports may assist the City if / when it goes to court for the Bankruptcy Reorganization Hearing in setting a reduced value on the $18,000,000 settlement amount.

As to your F.O.F., Fear Of Frogs, I can’t help you there - I always liked Kermit the Frog.

Ken Johnson

Coastal Commission votes unanimously to oppose Beachwood settlement bill

AB 1991 and the Settlement Agreement - Another Nail in the Coffin!

Ken Johnson

HMB settlement gives Keenan 129 houses on Beachwood and Glencree—and more

Thanks Barry. And maybe bring it back to topic - maybe. AB 1991 still sits as originally submitted back in February. A good rumor is that the legislative analyst had to be ambulanced to hospital - something about laughing so hard that ribs were broken and chanting ‘you want to do WHAT!’

Ken Johnson

HMB settlement gives Keenan 129 houses on Beachwood and Glencree—and more

Steven,

I agree about the frustration from things that “take sooo long” here. In 1978, I proposed a “Coastal Trail” so the kids could safely bike along the coast from the north to the southern borders of the town and between neighbourhoods. It is still not complete.

As to the re-build at the current Cunha site, there was a discussion about parcel sizes to try and kill the current Cunha site.

But the Cunha site was killed by CUSD Board Member Jolanda Schreurs before she was elected. She claimed that the Bond Money couldn’t be used at the Cunha site because “it wasn’t new”. The current efforts to rebuild at the Cunha site has proved, once again, that she was wrong on that and so many other things. But it did get her the support she wanted to get elected after a previous failure - and it only cost all the previously mentioned squandered millions of dollars of Public Money and the inability of all our kids to have a decent school facility for all those so many years so she could personally get elected!

Ken Johnson

HMB settlement gives Keenan 129 houses on Beachwood and Glencree—and more

Steven,

Forgot to mention the $15,000,000 to $18,000,000 already squander by you, the CUSD Board (past and present), et al on waiting on the Wavecrest site for a middle school. Weren’t you also one of those who opposed the “Build It Now” ballot measure which would have saved us MILLIONS?

As Jonathan Lundell mentioned above, the correct solution was available: “the solution to siting the new school was available from day one.” Jonathan was right and would have saved the Public MILLIONS OF DOLLARS!

I suppose you are going to support the upcoming “recommendation” to sell off the current School District Office site, maybe one Elementary School Site and other property for residential development to cover the loss in the School District Capital Fund!

My goal is to limit the Public loss, due to elected officials bad decisions and their supporters.

Ken Johnson

HMB settlement gives Keenan 129 houses on Beachwood and Glencree—and more

Steven,

Thank you for correcting your prior statement! Significantly different from “will be paying” to ‘has already paid’. The difference between “paying $23 million” and paying $18 million—see, I all ready saved the Public $5 million in future payments for this absurd agreement. <grin>

Ken Johnson

HMB settlement gives Keenan 129 houses on Beachwood and Glencree—and more

Steven,

Please support your statement: “$5 million for lawyers”; in “Assuming the new law isn’t passed, the City will be paying $23 million ($18 million settlement and $5 million for lawyers) for a piece of dirt that’s actually worth a fraction of that.”

I may have missed it but:
A quick ‘drive by’ of the agreement:

P E(7) No legal fees due to Keenan

OTOH, if your desired course is followed:
P B(3):
The City (us) will bear ALL: legal costs, settlements and judgments; brought by those with truly deep pockets: the State of California, the US Government, and litigants DOES 1 - ~

You recommend the City (us) take on an anticipated series of suits of unlimited unknown cost!

Ken Johnson

Stop SB 1295: Defend Coastal Commission

Anneliese,

Glad to brighten your day.

OTOH, embarrassing for Thomas Roman to be singled out for personal derision in the impartial Official State “BILL ANALYSIS” as the Chair of the Half Moon Bay Planning Commission!

I can’t remember the last time that an individual was singled out in this way at a State level. It was as if they were laughing at him for claiming the ‘Earth was Flat’.

I don’t know him well personally, but seems like an OK guy.

Ken Johnson

HMB settlement gives Keenan 129 houses on Beachwood and Glencree—and more

Steven,

Is there some reason you don’t reference the “City Council of 1990”, that voted to approve the Discretionary Vesting Tentative Map (VTM) for Beachwood in 1990, with full knowledge of a forthcoming moratorium, which is the subject of the Settlement Agreement and AB 1991 as currently written? A “City” doesn’t make a decision. A “City Council”, with named individuals, makes a decision by a vote. That vote is on record. It is that vote, that created an explicit definition; a definition wrongly the base, argued and accepted, for a question of a Fifth Amendment taking, that Mr. Keenan wishes to return to in the Settlement Agreement.

When you wrote of “the advice of lawyers and anti-growth supporters” at that time, I presume you are referring to me among others. I have been reticent to go on about it, but I am on the record of that time. I had advised the City Council, on the record, that the “Sewer Allocation Plan” that they had was inadequate for the shortage of sewer, water and road capacity. I advised them to adopt a “Growth Management Plan” of 3% per annum - a question of time not a taking. I was an author and one of three signatures filling Measure A and filled a suit against the City of Half Moon Bay when they didn’t timely move it to the ballot. A friend of mine, Darel Bergland, also filled suit for inadequacy of the “City General Plan”.

There was a willy-nilly rush to approve VTMs by the “City Council of 1990”, creating legal “ticking time bombs” for the future, before the approval of Measure A in 1991 by seventy-something percent of the electorate! They wanted them approved, hence exempt, of the timing of Measure A.

Steven, I have a pretty good memory of the events of that time. You wrote “I’ve lived here now for over 25 years” - funny, I don’t recall you being ANY part of the solution!

Dennis,
I remember the “City Council of 1990” approving a VTM to permit an identified habitat pond to be lined in concrete, chlorinated and a filter system - a definition of a swimming pool for people not for an endanger species!

Steven,
The question of the wetlands / habitat areas - it is Federal and State Law! Get over it!

The probability of AB 1991, ZERO! I did offer a suggestion for alternative legislation.

At any rate, the land will be purchased for $18,000,000. I really don’t think the people will assess the blame as you wish - to those who tried to defuse the legal “ticking time bombs” - but to those who created the “time bomb” and then exploded it!

Ken Johnson

Anyway, back to trying to survive the Bush-Cheney Recession.

Beachwood and AB1991: The view from Sacramento

Barry and Kevin,

Thanks for all the news stories links. Maybe I can provide a synopsis for the reader.

14 FEBRUARY 2008 AB 1991 INTRODUCED
By Assemblyman Gene Mullin
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST [in part]
“This bill would allow an approved tentative map, whose expiration was due in part to a city-initiated utility-service moratorium and that is the subject of pending litigation, to be deemed in full force and effect as part of a litigation settlement.”

Sounded benign - right?

2/3 Vote Required

Assemblyman Gene Mullin sent an email broadcast to our Bay Area Legislators to ‘help save Half Moon Bay’.

State Senator Leland Yee stood up.

28 Feb 2008 - Referred to Committee on LOCAL GOVERNMENT
HEARING DATE :  30 April 2008
Co-Sponsors NONE

1 April 2008 - the Settlement Agreement was approved by our City Council
When I received it, I scanned to the bottom for the “APRIL FOOLS”

It would gut every Environmental and Land Use Protection on the books: Coastal Act provision, environmental review, and on and on.

State Senator Leland Yee - intelligently said, I didn’t sign up for that!

The text of the new Bill is:  not yet published / not available.

IMHO, getting 2/3, two-thirds, of the Assembly, in an election year, to vote to gut all Environmental and Coastal Protections in not only the affected area of a Law Suit, but also the adjacent area, is less likely than replacing the centre of the State Seal with a picture of baby seal bashing!

How about replacing the contents of an Appropriations Bill with a bail out of HMB of $13,000,000 with the requirement of the resignation of the four who authorized the Settlement Agreement. Much more likely to pass!

Ken Johnson
PS
We can actually have an impact.

Stop SB 1295: Defend Coastal Commission

YEEHAAA! We Won One!
If you didn’t hear: SB 1295 Failed in Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee!
Failed passage in committee. 8 April 2008

(AYES 3. NOES 5.) (FAIL)

**** - NOES

Migden Steinberg Kehoe Kuehl Machado

**** - AYES

Margett Cogdill Hollingsworth

Not totally killed, ‘Reconsideration granted.’

A little recent history:
Apr. 2 From committee with author’s amendments.  Read second time.
Amended.  Re-referred to Com. on N.R. & W.

The bill was amended, ‘toned down’, from original outrageous changes.

From BILL ANALYSIS:

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
“Councilmember Jerome Kern from the City of Oceanside supports
the bill based on his view that the use of blank appeals forms
are mis-used by staff to generate appeals to the CCC. 

In this view, he is joined by
Thomas Roman, the chair of the Half Moon
Bay Planning Commission, in his individual capacity, although
the two differ with regard to the use of these forms.
Mr. Roman believes that appeals are generated by CCC staff, not members of
the Commission, and that commissioners sign the appeals after
they are written by the CCC staff (apparently he does not
believe they are pre-signed.)”

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
“The opposition to this measure, generated in part by email and
fax alerts from coastal advocacy organizations, is, by volume,
the largest in memory.”

SUPPORT
City of Oceanside
2 Individuals

OPPOSITION
Amigos de Bolsa Chica
Audubon California
Bolsa Chica Land Trust
California Coastal Protection Network
California Coastkeeper Alliance
California League of Conservation Voters
California Native Plants Society
City of Huntington Beach
Coastwalk
Committee for Green Foothills
Defenders of Wildlife
Environmental Commons
Heal the Bay
Marin Conservation League
Natural Resources Defense Council
Planning and Conservation League
San Elijo Lagoon Conservancy
Save the Waves Coalition
Sierra Club California
South Laguna Civic Association
Supervisor Pam Slater-Price
Surfrider Foundation
The Humane Society of the United States
Trust for Public Land
Village Laguna
Wild Heritage Planners
2764 Individuals

Regards,
Ken Johnson

HMB settlement gives Keenan 129 houses on Beachwood and Glencree—and more

Dennis,

Thanks - a balancing multi-million dollar valuable asset to the City:

“A previous Council had approved 19 homes on the property without violating any environmental laws.”
I missed that.

Vince,
A Bill or its contents can by comparison make ‘Freddy Krueger’ appear to be a frail vulnerable short-lived character. Unfortunately, please read P A(2)(a):(b) - if not enacted, the Bill is not helpful on a timeline. OTOH, it is cheaper to file against the City. Hmm. And the Agreement is silent on a definition of a reasonable defense and consequences, save P B(3).

Leonard,
Correct, residential development in general costs more in services than the tax revenue received - that is why Measure A limitations applied only to residential development.

Also correct about the number of units at Beachwood, the Agreement requires “conformance with the [original] VTMs”.

Ken Johnson

HMB settlement gives Keenan 129 houses on Beachwood and Glencree—and more

Steven,

My compliments for the manner of handling disclosure...although the Cartoon is my favorite part of the Settlement Agreement.

Vince,
More like watching AB 1991 flameout over the next 30 or so days.

Barry,
Well, it just may change me - OMG - into voting for a Tax!

Ken Johnson

HMB settlement gives Keenan 129 houses on Beachwood and Glencree—and more

Steven,

I think we agree that their is / was “bad and worse” options; we might disagree whether the Settlement Agreement is ‘The Bad, The Worse or The Ugly’ [with respect and credit to the Clint Eastwood movie]

The City Four gave up the Appeal option! They committed us to paying $18,000,000! What is yet known is whether they are going to act to make it due on 30 June 2009 or act in a manner which delays it until 31 December 2011.

What, in their actions, makes you believe that “there will be a few years grace period”?

Ken Johnson

P.S. Did anyone else just finish watching KQED’s broadcast of “Leon Panetta Lectures:
Economic Challenges at Home and Abroad”?

Is MCTV worth saving? Part I:  MCTV privatizes the public record

Leonard,

Seems the only thing working on their web site is ‘history’ - there is a message there.

Wasn’t 1 April the date they were supposed to have their video up on the site?

Ken Johnson

Page 6 of 14 pages « First  <  4 5 6 7 8 >  Last »