Letters to the Editor: Oct. 26, 2012

Vote yes to regulating medical marijuana dispensaries 

In case you thought your elected officials were compassionate towards seriously ill citizens who benefit from the use of medical marijuana, the Mayors of Del Mar and Solana Beach have set the record straight.

This November, citizens of these cities will have the opportunity to do what our elected officials have failed to do for the past 16 years — regulate where and how patients may obtain medical marijuana. Despite the fact that Californians overwhelmingly support the right of sick individuals to use marijuana as medicine, none of our elected officials have an answer to this simple question — where does one obtain this medicine? Because of our local government’s failure to address this simple but critical question, the citizens of Del Mar, Solana Beach, Lemon Grove, and Imperial Beach have proposed a solution. Mssrs. Mayors: I have a simple question for you. Got a better idea? If so, let’s hear it please. Every day you fail to enact regulation your constituents literally suffer needlessly.

Lance Rogers, Esq.,

Encinitas

 

Signs on steroids

Each election cycle, our candidates put up signs to indicate endorsements. I would like to call attention to the fact that some candidates have what I call signs on steroids.

But what is more telling than the size of the signs is their location. I have noticed that they are mostly on nursery land and empty lots. Now, anyone can put signs up to endorse their candidate. Tony Kranz and Lisa Shaffer signs are up throughout many neighborhoods in people’s yards.

This tells me that the community of Encinitas endorses Tony and Lisa. The signs on steroids are on locations with the potential to develop. Anyone who pays attention to local politics knows that there is a disconnect with what neighborhoods want and what is being built in our fair city. No one can stop development and everyone wants business to thrive.

We live in a very special place and development should fit the community character. We should not change our character to suit the development. There is a reason that most of us moved to this incredible place. If you value this unique area, please vote for Tony Kranz and Lisa Shaffer.

Rachelle Collier,

Leucadia

No on J

Look at the major flaws in Parking Section of the VSP (Prop J) —

1. Claim of 200+ additional public parking spaces in public lots or structures, when the only discussion is of a future 200 space parking structure at the City Hall site, which will be the amount of parking spaces required for the City Hall and any other development on that site.

2. Claim of additional capacity on CDM, where the Plan chart indicates 30 public spaces, which is the number required for only approximately 9,000 of the proposed 220,000 square foot new construction.

3. Claim of a “Park-Once” strategy that claims more “public” parking spaces by calling 773 existing “private” spaces as “public”, without creating one new parking space.

4. Claim that a “Park-Once” strategy promotes “shared parking” by reducing the required number of spaces. But the strategy is “elective,” and I for one will not elect to take away my tenants parking to give to anyone of the public that visits other properties, the beach, or the Fairgrounds.

5. Claim that the 200+ “public” parking space structure to be built sometime in the future will be partially paid for by “in-lieu” fees paid by developers for parking spaces not provided for on their own development, and 50 such fees can be collected before the parking structure is ever built. Approx 15000 sq.ft. of new “private” development could be built, without ever providing the 50 new spaces!

6. Claim of providing over 500 public parking spaces. The exact figure is 495, including the existing 265 street parking spaces, plus the 230 in items 1 and 2 above. The fact is, there is really NOTHING in the VSP that will decrease the “public” parking shortage.

Numbers used in the VSP are confusing and mis-leading!

Vote “no” on Prop J.

Ralph Peck,

Del Mar

 

No to bonds

In addition to voting No on the San Dieguito (Prop AA), the Del Mar (Prop CC), and the Mira Costa (Prop EE) schools bonds, voters in the San Dieguito High School District have the opportunity to elect two outstanding board members.

Both Graham Ledger and Steve McDowell have achieved great success in their personal and professional lives. Now they want to help the young adults of San Dieguito Unified get the best possible education. If you are tired of the California Teachers Association using our children as pawns to maintain control of our schools, then you will be delighted to know that Ledger and McDowell are only beholden to our children while simultaneously acting as responsible stewards of our tax dollars.

This is probably why the Teachers Union is fighting to get their own cronies elected. Afterall, if the teachers control the board, then they control their own contracts, and likewise the schools. If you are tired of business as usual at our schools, then it’s time to elected new people who will put our children first.

 

Gary Gonsalves, M.D.

Co-Founder Stop Taxing Us,

Carlsbad

 

Share

Filed Under: Letters

Tags:

RSSComments (3)

Leave a Reply | Trackback URL

  1. Royal says:

    Vote No to pot shops. Mr. Roger’s LTE wants us to believe pot shops are the only answer. Wrong. There are hundreds of daily delivery services all over this county that can provide pot to anyone who truly needs it; all they have to do is pick up the phone. How much easier is that? Mr. Rogers is a paid attorney for the pot shop lobby who wants a piece of the pot market via actual storefronts that only sell pot. Mr. Rodgers has been paid to try and convince the public that pot shops are needed and legal, but they aren’t legal and aren’t needed. Sorry Mr. Rogers, not in this neighborhood.

    Vote No on pot shops.

  2. Dee says:

    We need to vote against Pot Shops in Del Mar and Solana Beach.

    Pot shops facilitate fraudulent medical use of pot and they give kids easier access to pot. On June 18, 2012 the Journal Watch Psychiatry reported that 74% of teens in two Colorado substance treatment programs admit to using pot that came from pot shops. It’s too easy to get a doctor’s recommendation at 18 and then buy unlimited amounts of pot at a pot shop. This problem is one reason why 90% of California cities prohibit pot shops, the other they violate state and federal law.

  3. Keith says:

    We need to vote against Pot Shops in Del Mar and Solana Beach.

    Pot shops facilitate fraudulent medical use of pot and they give kids easier access to pot. On June 18, 2012 the Journal Watch Psychiatry reported that 74% of teens in two Colorado substance treatment programs admit to using pot that came from pot shops. It’s too easy to get a doctor’s recommendation at 18 and then buy unlimited amounts of pot at a pot shop. This problem is one reason why 90% of California cities decided to prohibit pot shops, the other they violate state and federal law.

Leave a Reply




If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a Gravatar.