By now, all of you San Onofre State Beach lovers have heard that its beloved beaches, campgrounds and trails will continue to be open to the public for at least another 25 years. 

State officials recently celebrated the signing of a lease agreement between the California parks department and the U.S. military for continued public access of San Onofre State Beach. 

The parties officially signed the agreement last August, prompting a collective sigh of relief from the millions of people who frequent the beloved coastal area each year. 

San Onofre is part of Camp Pendleton, which is a military base owned by the U.S. Marine Corps, a component of the U.S. Navy. For the past 53 years the military has leased part of San Onofre to the California Department of Parks and Recreation for $1. Talk about a bargain. 

Some elements of the new lease are still in “active negotiation,” according to Capt. James Sartain, operations officer for Camp Pendleton. 

I got my hands on a copy of the new lease. It mentions in-kind contributions like an energy storage facility, military training access and more. 

The New Terms 

I previously reported that rent for San Onofre State Beach was expected to go way up, and it did.  

That’s because of a federal law that dates back to the 1970s requiring military land to be leased for an amount that is not less than the property’s fair market value. Only the Secretary of the Navy has the authority to deviate from that fair market price, the law states. A Navy policy enacted in 2013 also has similar requirements.   

The new agreement requires the State Parks Department to pay the military $3.2 million a year for 25 years. It also requires payment of “arrears rent,” or overdue rent, in the amount of $9.6 million. That’s a total of $89.6 million for the full term of the lease. 

Fortunately, the military is allowing the State Parks Department to provide in-kind contributions instead of paying cash. In-kind contributions are contributions of goods or services, instead of monetary contributions. 

Energy Infrastructure Projects: The agreement requires the State Parks Department to provide “government-approved and state-funded energy infrastructure projects to [Camp Pendleton], other Marine Corps activities and activities at San Onofre State Beach and Campground.” 

Mutually agreed upon projects will receive state funding from the California Energy Commission, or CEC, according to the agreement.  

The California Energy Commission announced one of these projects last December; a long-duration energy storage project at Camp Pendleton funded by a $42 million grant. 

“The project will provide electricity to the statewide grid and backup power to the base for up to 14 days during power outages,” according to a press release from the commission. “It will also reduce greenhouse gas emissions by replacing fossil fuel-powered back-up generation and demonstrate solutions that can be scaled and replicated to meet the state’s climate and clean energy goals.” 

The grant is part of the Long-Duration Energy Storage Program, which is funded by Gov. Gavin Newsom’s multi-billion-dollar plan to combat climate change. The project is the largest grant awarded under the program and is expected to be completed by summer 2027. 

Capt. Sartain, who represents Camp Pendleton, would not comment on the energy storage project, and instead reiterated that parts of the agreement are still being negotiated. 

Representatives for the State Parks Department did not respond to a request for comment about the project. 

Training Venues: The State Parks Department has agreed to provide four venues for military training on State Parks’ properties anywhere in the state. According to the agreement, training access will start four years into the lease and continue through the end of the lease. 

This term also requires that a Training Opportunities Working Group be established with representatives from the Marine Corps and the State Parks Department to select which State Parks they will use for training and to create a contract outlining the terms of the training access.  

Law Enforcement & Security Services: According to the agreement, the State Parks Department must also provide state law enforcement and security services for non-leased portions of San Onofre State Park and a large desert area near Twentynine Palms that doubles as an annual off-roading event and a Marine Corps training area. 

Lease Termination: Both the U.S. military and the State Parks Department can terminate the lease at any time with a year’s written notice. The only exception is if a national emergency is declared by the U.S. president or Congress that requires government use of the San Onofre property, the U.S. military can terminate the lease immediately and without notice. 

The government or U.S. military can also choose to sell or transfer the property with a year’s written notice. 

What Else I’m Working On 

You may remember a story I wrote last year about a family of five who was living in a family homeless shelter run by nonprofit Interfaith Community Services. 

José, Mercedes and their three children went from living in rental cars, U-Haul vans and motels to finally getting accepted into a shelter. 

Now, the family has found permanent housing. I’m working on a second story about the ups and downs they have endured to get here, and a special surprise they received to help make their new apartment feel like a home. 

In Other News 

• Some San Marcos residents are raising concerns about a proposed 150-bed substance use disorder treatment facility by Interfaith Community Services. Residents say it’s too close to several schools. (Coast News) 
• Nurses at Tri-City Medical Center recently held informational pickets, warning hospital officials of understaffing, workplace safety issues and stalled pay negotiations. (Coast News) 
• Oceanside’s City Council set beach restoration and homelessness as top priorities for the upcoming budget cycle. Both areas will get funding from a half-cent sales tax extension approved by voters last November. (Union-Tribune) 
• Five people were charged in connection with a suspected smuggling attempt that killed at least three migrants when a panga capsized off Del Mar. (Union-Tribune) 

The post North County Report: A Closer Look at New San Onofre Beach Lease Agreement appeared first on Voice of San Diego.

A longtime planning commissioner in Escondido is now out of a job, and the reason remains a mystery. 

The Escondido City Council, following the recommendation of Mayor Dane White, unexpectedly removed Planning Commissioner David Barber at an April 9 City Council meeting. The Council approved the removal in a 4-1 vote, with Councilmember Consuelo Martinez opposed. 

“I was just wondering, Mayor, if you could share the reasoning,” Martinez said at the meeting. “Because I believe Mr. Barber has one more year left on the Planning Commission, and I haven’t heard any complaints from any of the commissioners, so I’m just wondering what the reason is.” 

White said it was “an effort to bring the Planning Commission more in line with the vision of the City Council.” When Martinez asked him what that vision is, he said it includes the things the Council discussed in a recent “priorities” workshop. He refused to share any specifics but added that he would be happy to go into more detail with Barber privately. 

Barber, who gave a public comment during the meeting, seemed just as confused. 

“I fully understand that I serve at the pleasure of the City Council, and the City Council may remove me at any time,” Barber said. “However, I would simply like the courtesy to know why I have been put on the agenda to be dismissed as a Planning Commission member.” 

Barber said he has seen members being removed from the Planning Commission before for inappropriate behavior, criminal activity, poor attendance and poor performance. None of these reasons apply to him, he said, adding that he has always received glowing recommendations from other Planning Commissioners, representatives from the Building Industry Association and the Association of Realtors and more. 

Barber did not respond to a request for comment. 

White told Voice of San Diego via email the same thing he said at the dais – that the decision was “an effort to bring the Planning Commission more in line with the vision of the City Council.” 

Barber has served three different terms on Escondido’s Planning Commission since the 1980s. His current term was set to expire on March 31, 2026. The city is now accepting applications for Barber’s replacement with interviews scheduled for May 14.  

Elsewhere in Escondido, ‘Empty-Chairing’ Is Back 

Amid a surge of protests throughout San Diego County and the nation against policies coming down from the Trump administration, the “empty-chair” protest seems to be making a comeback. 

Voters throughout the country have been holding empty-chair protests against their Republican representatives who are refusing to appear at town hall meetings. If someone is empty-chaired in a discussion, an empty chair is left where the representative would have sat to draw attention to the fact that they are not there. 

Congressmember Darrell Issa, who represents the 48th Congressional District, recently got empty-chaired in Escondido. 

Last month, more than 800 people attended an “Empty Chair Townhall” at the California Center for the Arts, Escondido protesting Issa’s refusal to hold town hall meetings with his constituents. Someone dressed in a chicken costume, representing Issa, sat in the empty chair for a portion of the event. 

Jonathan Wilcox, Issa’s deputy chief of staff and director of communications, told Voice via email that he wasn’t impressed. 

“The Empty Chair routine is so dated, that if these Democrat protesters had also been doing the Macarena, their event would have been significantly updated,” Wilcox said. 

The protest was organized by a group called Indivisible North County, which has been picketing outside of Issa’s Escondido office for several weeks. 

Questions Arise About How Poway Does Inclusionary Housing 

In recent weeks, I’ve seen a resurgence of a topic I’ve heard about on and off in Poway – the city’s inclusionary housing policy.  

Inclusionary housing requires developers to set aside a certain number of units as low income when they’re building; if developers don’t want to do this, they pay a fee to the city called an in-lieu fee. 

That’s where some residents’ complaints are centered. Many are calling for city leaders to raise the fee, which is the lowest in-lieu fee in San Diego County.  

In Poway, the inclusionary housing policy requires developers to set aside 15 percent of units for low-income households. The in-lieu fee is a flat rate of $500 per project.  

For comparison, San Diego’s in-lieu fee is $25 per square foot, Oceanside’s is $20 per square foot, Del Mar’s is $27,000 per project, and Coronado just raised its fee from $7,000 per project to $59 per square foot, now the highest in the county. 

Proponents of a higher fee say the idea is to incentivize developers to include affordable housing in their projects. But with such a low fee, it becomes easy for developers to opt out of building low-income housing, they argue. 

In Other News 

• ICYMI: As homelessness increases in Encinitas, an anonymous social media account and some residents are targeting nonprofit homeless services provider Community Resource Center (CRC), claiming the nonprofit is attracting homeless people to the city. CRC says the account is spreading misinformation and dangerous rhetoric. (Voice of San Diego) 

• Also, Encinitas leaders will consider hiring private security to patrol downtown Encinitas for illegal camping, public urination and other illegal activities by homeless people. (Union-Tribune) 
• The Oceanside City Council approved limited tenant protections earlier this month, after originally considering a sweeping set of tenant protections that received backlash from some residents and city leaders. (Coast News) 

The post North County Report: Escondido Planning Commission Shake Up Still a Mystery appeared first on Voice of San Diego.

Two recall efforts, a potential lawsuit and a whole lot of bickering – political drama in Poway is reaching a boiling point. 

If you’ve been tuning into Poway’s City Council meetings over the past few months, then you’ve noticed quite a bit of tension among councilmembers, city staff and residents. And by tension, I mean heated exchanges between elected officials, residents announcing efforts to recall councilmembers, city staff alleging harassment and bullying from a councilmember and more. 

Last month, I wrote about how Poway residents kicked off an effort to recall District 2 Councilmember Tony Blain, who has only been on the council for a little over three months. 

The recall effort began after the Poway City Council censured, or officially reprimanded, Blain after public emails revealed Blain attempting to vote trade with another councilmember.   

Dozens of emails going back several months also show Blain threatening and harassing elected officials and city staff members on multiple occasions, including City Attorney Alan Fenstermacher, who accused Blain of bullying and harassment at a Jan. 21 City Council meeting.   

But Blain’s not the only one facing threats of a recall. Another group of residents have started a recall effort against District 3 Councilmember Peter De Hoff. 

Those leading the effort to recall De Hoff say he ran his campaign, back in 2022, on a platform that “strongly opposed high density development,” according to his candidate statement. Some residents now say that he hasn’t stayed true to that sentiment, which has eroded their trust in him. 

Poway’s Council has approved several major development projects in recent years, sparking criticism from residents who say the projects clash with the city’s character and worsen issues like traffic and infrastructure strain. De Hoff has supported some of these high-density projects. 

De Hoff did not respond to a request for comment.  

There are also social media rumblings from residents pushing for yet another recall — this one aimed at Poway Mayor Steve Vaus. Vaus was the target of a recall effort back in 2021, but it failed to garner enough signatures to make it to a recall election.  

There May Be a Lawsuit, Too 

Earlier this year, the Poway City Council had to fill a vacant council seat after District 1 Councilmember Brian Pepin announced he was resigning from his seat to focus on his political consulting business.  

Councilmembers then made a controversial decision to appoint someone to the seat instead of holding a special election. This frustrated many residents who argued that Poway has a “troubled history” with appointments.  

The council ended up appointing Christopher Pikus to represent District 1 until the term ends in 2026. Now, one resident is challenging the legality of that appointment. 

Hiram Soto, a Poway resident who ran for council in 2022 and lost to Pepin, is asking the attorney general for permission to sue to have Pikus removed. Soto claims that Pepin, who voted for Pikus’ appointment, no longer lived in the district during the appointing process, making his vote ineligible. 

Poway’s municipal code says that a councilmember who moves out of their district for more than 30 days creates an immediate vacancy, but representatives for Poway disagree.  

City Attorney Fenstermacher and Poway spokesperson Rene Carmichael told Axios San Diego back in February that the city is looking to state law to determine that, despite his move, Pepin was still eligible to vote because he had not yet established a new residence by the time of the vote. 

The attorney general’s office is still reviewing the case to determine if it can proceed to court, Fenstermacher said at a recent City Council meeting. 

Tensions Are High 

As the recall efforts and (possible) lawsuit continue, tensions on the council have continued to rise. 

Recent City Council meetings have been filled with heated back-and-forth exchanges, digs and bickering between Blain and Vaus, and between Blain and De Hoff. 

Vaus and De Hoff have also taken turns introducing new legislation seemingly aimed specifically at Blain. For example, at the April 1 meeting, De Hoff and Vaus introduced rules that would define attendance criteria for Council meetings, including tracking how long a councilmember sits at the dais during each meeting. 

This is in response to Blain’s habit of walking out of the Council chambers whenever he is being criticized by his colleagues or by public speakers. Ironically, he walked out again — right as De Hoff was introducing the proposed attendance criteria. 

“Last night’s council meeting was an embarrassment,” wrote one Poway resident on Facebook, referring to the April 1 meeting. “The personality duel between Tony Blain and Mayor Vaus stole the show and pulled everyone down into the gutter to watch.” 

Her post was accompanied by a meme that read, “This is a shitshow!” 

In Other News 

• Escondido is behind on reaching its state-mandated housing goals across all income levels, according to a city staff report last month. (Coast News) 
• SANDAG’s upcoming beach restoration project will be the largest one yet, delivering three times the sand previously pumped onto the coastline and at 10 times the cost. The agency is expected to place about 5.8 million cubic yards of sand on 15 sites in San Diego County and three in Orange County at a cost of about $260 million. (Union-Tribune) 
• Oceanside is cracking down on sidewalk vending by making it easier for city officials to impound carts belonging to vendors who don’t have the proper permits. (Coast News) 

The post North County Report: Drama Continues on Poway’s City Council appeared first on Voice of San Diego.

Amid ongoing financial decline, Palomar Health has borrowed cash from two other hospital systems since 2024. But one of those loans has ruffled some feathers. 

Sharp Healthcare has threatened to file a lawsuit against Palomar Health for allegedly breaching an exclusivity arrangement the two hospital systems established last year. The threat of litigation comes after Palomar recently accepted a loan from UC San Diego Health. 

Palomar Health, a public healthcare system that operates Palomar Medical Centers in Escondido and Poway, recently borrowed $20 million from UC San Diego Health. Palomar’s board of directors approved the loan at a March 7 board meeting. 

Previously, in May 2024, Palomar Health borrowed money from, and approved an “exclusivity arrangement” with, another local hospital system – Sharp HealthCare. The exclusivity arrangement provided one year for Sharp and Palomar to work toward a “joint affiliation,” and the loan was in the amount of $25 million. 

A few months later, in August 2024, Palomar and Sharp announced a partnership where they planned “to jointly establish programs across clinical service lines,” according to a press release from Sharp. 

The two healthcare systems formalized the collaboration “through a fully executed Letter of Intent that will maintain Palomar Health’s public designation,” the announcement said. 

“Sharp will expand its network into North County, including primary care and medical specialties as appropriate for the communities,” the press release said. “Palomar’s patients will also have access to Sharp’s specialized and higher-acuity services not currently available at Palomar Health, including transplants, advanced oncology procedures and more.” 

“We anticipate having the program solidified and ready to go within 12 months,” said Palomar’s CEO Diane Hansen in the press release. 

But then Palomar approved the loan from UC San Diego Health. Sharp officials sent a letter to Palomar’s CEO concerning the loan agreement and exclusivity arrangement Sharp and Palomar entered into last year.  

Palomar Health refused to share a copy of the letter from Sharp. Representatives of Palomar health told us that was because of confidentiality reasons. But then a spokesperson provided Voice with Palomar’s response letter to Sharp sent via Palomar’s attorneys. The full response from Palomar Health can be found here. 

The response references Sharp’s letter and the threat of litigation. 

“We write to address the allegations Sharp Healthcare … raised in its correspondence to Palomar dated March 17, 2025, regarding Sharp’s threatened lawsuit against Palomar for Palomar’s alleged breach of the Amended and Restated Confidentiality, Non-Disclosure and Exclusivity Agreement … with Sharp,” Palomar’s response says.  

It also says that Sharp’s letter was triggered by Palomar Health’s acceptance of a “no strings attached” loan from UC San Diego Health, whose “only objective was ensure Palomar survives and remains in operation to service the underserved population of North County.” 

According to the letter, Palomar Health officials deny Sharp’s allegations of a breach of agreement and instead claim that Sharp didn’t attempt to follow through on a “joint affiliation” until the one-year exclusivity arrangement was almost up. The arrangement expires on March 28, the letter says. 

“Sharp’s allegations come at the tail end of a one-year period of exclusivity, wherein Sharp alone had the right to negotiate a long-term affiliation deal with Palomar,” Palomar’s response says. “During that year, while Palomar dedicated human resources, time, and money to develop a long-term plan of affiliation with Sharp, Sharp dithered and sat idly by while Palomar’s financial condition worsened.” 

After finally discussing a proposal from Sharp, the letter says, “Sharp’s CEO contacted Palomar’s CEO and unilaterally terminated negotiations between the parties.” 

The letter also notes that the exclusivity agreement did not prevent Palomar from obtaining other loans. 

Nonetheless, the letter says Palomar is still committed to continuing negotiations with Sharp moving forward. 

Palomar Health Board Member Laurie Edwards-Tate received a copy of the letter from Sharp. 

“In view of a recent U-T story regarding a loan from UC San Diego Health, it causes me to feel that there is concern from Sharp over repayment of the loan and what a future partnership might look like between Sharp and Palomar,” Edwards-Tate told Voice.  

Edwards-Tate was not present for the March 7 board meeting to vote on the loan from UC San Diego Health. 

A representative from Sharp declined to provide a copy of the letter or a comment. 

UC San Diego Health emailed a statement to Voice that says the hospital system “serves as an essential healthcare safety net for the region.”  

“If we allow any health system to fail, patient access will suffer, and our staff and facilities will feel the strain,” the statement said. “Palomar Health is a long-time community partner of UC San Diego Health, and this loan reinforces our continued collaboration as we work together to meet the expanding need for high-quality health care services in the region.”  

Palomar Health’s Financial Woes 

Palomar Health has been seeing financial declines across its operations for the past couple of years.  

In 2023, Voice of San Diego was the first to report that Palomar Health’s financial position was rapidly worsening. It’s part of a larger trend of hospitals across the nation seeing less patient volume and less overall revenue.    

Palomar experienced a $165 million operating loss in its previous fiscal year, which ended in June 2024. And according to a recent financial report from February of this year, the healthcare district is still operating at a loss this fiscal year. 

Palomar has seen an operating income loss of almost $41 million from July 2024 through February 2025, records show. 

Last month, Palomar also received a downgrade in its credit rating from Moody’s, one of the world’s big-three credit rating agencies. 

Palomar’s rating went from Ba2 to Caa3; in other words, it went from having a substantial credit risk to having a very high credit risk and being of poor standing, according to a report by Becker’s Hospital Review. 

The lower rating reflects Palomar’s thinning liquidity, which refers to how much cash is readily available, or how quickly something can be converted to cash. It also reflects an increased risk of “bankruptcy filing or liquidation,” the Moody’s report says. 

But Palomar Health officials have said they’re working on recovery. 

In January of this year, Palomar reached an agreement with its lenders to turn its finances around in the next two years. 

The healthcare district’s financial decline means it failed to meet bond covenants tied to more than $700 million it has borrowed against future revenue. Investors could technically demand immediate repayment, but to avoid a financial crisis or possible bankruptcy, Palomar negotiated a forbearance agreement, which is a deal to delay or adjust payments. 

The post Palomar Health’s Borrowing Has Ruffled Feathers at Sharp HealthCare appeared first on Voice of San Diego.

Correction: This story has been updated to correct that the city of Carlsbad has only one shelter and it’s for men.

Carlsbad is moving forward with new rules that ban people from living in their vehicles on public property.  

It’s the latest North County city to crackdown on homelessness. The other is San Marcos, which adopted a public camping ban last year.  

The new bans follow a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that gave cities more power to crack down on homeless encampments regardless of shelter availability.  

The decision empowered many cities throughout San Diego County to either adopt new homeless camping bans or update their existing ones. 

Most cities who have updated their public camping regulations, like Oceanside or Vista, have at least one homeless shelter operating in their respective cities, although most shelters throughout North County are full and often have long waiting lists. 

A couple of cities, though, have moved forward with public camping restrictions despite criticism from residents who say city leaders should offer more alternatives for homeless people. 

Carlsbad’s Ban on Living in Vehicles 

Earlier this month, Carlsbad’s City Council expanded its public camping ban to include people living in their vehicles with no plans to create safe parking options. 

Carlsbad Police Chief Christie Calderwood said at a March 18 Council meeting that the ordinance is another “tool” that officers can use to get people to accept the services they need. Residents and nonprofit leaders urged the Council to first start a safe parking program before implementing the ban. City leaders moved forward, anyway. 

Safe parking programs are parking lots where homeless individuals and families can safely stay in their vehicles overnight. Many safe parking programs also provide bathrooms, handwashing stations, hygiene supplies, food and case management services. 

Carlsbad has one shelter for men.  

City spokesperson Sarah Lemons told me the city is using a “compassionate enforcement approach,” where warnings and citations will only be issued to individuals living in vehicles if shelter is available and individuals refuse the offer of shelter.  

“The city will not issue citations to people or households living in vehicles who are actively engaging in services to end their homelessness,” she said. 

She added that Carlsbad has received a $3 million Encampment Resolution Funding grant from the state to provide services and housing navigation support specifically for people living in their vehicles. The city also offers a limited-stay motel voucher program, which provides vouchers for a temporary motel stay if other shelter is not available.  

One concern brought up by residents at the recent Council meeting is the possibility of this ordinance driving people to neighboring cities to use their safe parking programs. Encinitas, Vista and Oceanside have the only three safe parking lots in North County. 

“The city maintains a ‘by-name’ list with data from the regional Homeless Management Information System, which tracks individuals the city engages with and those enrolled in services in Carlsbad. Through this, the city will be able to track if an individual accepts services at a neighboring city, including a safe parking lot,” Lemons said. 

The city’s ban on living in vehicles in public will take effect next month. Lemons told Voice there are no current plans for a safe parking program in Carlsbad. 

A Closer Look at San Marcos 

Last year, about a month after the Supreme Court ruling, San Marcos adopted new rules that ban camping in public regardless of shelter availability. There are currently no homeless shelters in San Marcos, and according to city staff, the city does not have plans to open a shelter or contract with a service provider to open one. 

San Marcos had 35 unsheltered homeless people during last year’s point-in-time count, up from just two unsheltered homeless people in 2023. The numbers from the 2025 count are not yet available. 

Kristina Ray, a city spokesperson, told me that the city’s approach has focused primarily on addressing permanent housing resources. The anti-camping ordinance is focused on addressing fire risk, water quality and other environmental concerns to comply with state storm water regulations, she said. 

“For example, when we become aware of someone camping along San Marcos Creek, the first step is for a county outreach team to make contact and provide case management, medical care and other services that might be needed,” Ray said. “To date, everyone has moved voluntarily or been placed in shelters through the regional shelter network, so enforcement hasn’t been needed. We then clean up trash and other waste left behind.” 

She added that the city does contribute $120,000 annually toward the Alliance for Regional Solutions, a network of eight North County cities that collectively contribute funding to homeless shelters in that part of the region. City officials can refer homeless people to those shelters.  

North County nonprofit Interfaith Community Services has proposed opening a 150-bed Recovery and Wellness Campus in San Marcos for substance abuse treatment, but funding for the project currently depends on a state grant that has not yet been allocated. 

In Other News 

• Oceanside’s Planning Commission has unanimously recommended the City Council approve necessary amendments to make way for the city’s first four walk-in retail cannabis shops. (Union-Tribune) 
• Encinitas Mayor Bruce Ehlers recently delivered his first State of the City address and said his administration would prioritize infrastructure, local control over land use decisions and homelessness. (Coast News) 
• Students and faculty at Cal State San Marcos walked out of classes on Monday to protest what they describe as a crackdown on student activists in the California State University system. (KPBS) 

The post North County Report: How a Court Ruling Changed Homeless Enforcement appeared first on Voice of San Diego.

Encinitas’ battle against state housing laws may end up being a losing one. 

Leaders of some small cities across the state, including Encinitas, want to change state housing laws in favor of more local control, but lawmakers and officials at the state level say that’s unlikely to happen. 

Resistance to new development and higher density isn’t new. For decades, the need for more housing at different income levels has clashed with efforts to preserve community character, especially in smaller cities. 

In recent years, California lawmakers and elected officials have been cracking down on cities that don’t follow state housing laws. These laws force city leaders to approve affordable housing projects that are viable and legally compliant, create and fulfill plans to accommodate for housing at all income levels, allow developers to build bigger projects if they include affordable housing and more. 

When cities don’t comply, the consequences are swift. 

Gov. Gavin Newsom, Attorney General Rob Bonta and the state’s housing department have been known to take legal action against cities that try to evade state housing laws, like Huntington Beach and La Cañada Flintridge in Los Angeles County, for example.  

State officials can also decertify, or revoke approval of a Housing Element, a state-required plan that outlines how a city will make way for housing at different income levels. If a city does not have an approved Housing Element, developers can bypass local zoning rules and build affordable housing projects with the Builder’s Remedy law. Last year, Portola Valley in San Francisco became the first California city to have its Housing Element decertified. 

“The most brazen violators are the priority,” said Bonta during Voice of San Diego’s Politifest live podcast back in 2023.  

In Encinitas, a new mayor and new councilmembers have promised to fight back against “overreaching” state housing laws and restore local control. Voice previously reported that Mayor Bruce Ehlers plans to follow housing laws to avoid harsh consequences from the state and will instead be working with other cities across California to change the laws that he says are impeding local control. 

For decades, much of Encinitas’ leadership and a large part of the city’s population have been hostile to new development. In the past, city leaders have tried multiple times to get around the state’s density bonus law, which allows developers to increase the size of their developments if they include affordable housing units. Encinitas was also late in approving its previous state-required housing plan, also known as a Housing Element.  

This earned the small coastal city a few lawsuits from developers and threats of legal action from state officials, though some have argued that the state’s density bonus law had some ambiguities that left aspects of it up to interpretation. Plus, the city’s efforts to get a Housing Element approved back then were made more difficult by the city’s Proposition A, a growth-control initiative that requires a vote by Encinitas residents for any major zoning and density changes.   

Now, Ehlers says, the plan is to lobby state lawmakers to change some of these state mandates. He also says he’s working with other city leaders in the state to get an initiative called Our Neighborhood Voices qualified for the statewide ballot that aims to give local governments control over land-use planning and zoning decisions, allowing them to override conflicting state laws. 

State Sen. Catherine Blakespear, who was the mayor of Encinitas before getting elected to the state Senate in 2022, told Voice she understands the allure of the idea that local control can be the solution to these housing issues, but it isn’t realistic. 

“The reality of these large problems, and they are problems that are not just at the state level but at the federal level – like around homelessness and around housing affordability – they’re bigger than any one city, and they need solutions that are bigger than any one city,” Blakespear said. 

She added that how the state implements these solutions can be frustrating to some cities, but the reality is that not all cities share that sentiment. A lot of communities want more housing, she said, especially lower income communities.  

“It does appear to me like there’s not an appetite and also even a belief that there needs to be a change,” Blakespear said. “If anything, I think there’s a perspective that the laws need to get stricter on cities. There continues to be the perspective that some cities are not acting in the best interest of solving problems and are creating the barriers to housing.” 

Some of these barriers come from the way cities are set up, she added. City governments are most responsive to the loudest voices who participate the most at City Councils, and those people tend to be more privileged with more time on their hands and more money, Blakespear said. 

“I spent more time on housing than any other topic when I was the mayor and it was always extremely difficult and there is no silver bullet, but I don’t I don’t see the rhetoric that is being expressed in Encinitas reflected in Sacramento,” Blakespear said.  

Assemblymember Chris Ward, who represents the 78th Assembly District, which includes small cities like Coronado, Del Mar and Solana Beach told Voice that housing problems are solved regionally, and cities have a responsibility to do their “fair share.” 

When it comes to some cities’ efforts to get around that responsibility, Ward said, he doesn’t think it’s going to work. 

“I say this with all due respect, try as you might, at some point you could even try to get something passed as a local policy that conflicts with state law, and courts are going to rule that the state law, which enabled cities to exist in the first place, overrides that policy,” Ward said. 

He added that it would be more constructive for city leaders who have these concerns to work with the attorney general and their state legislators to find ways that are “workable for them moving forward.” 

“You are rallying up the masses to try an approach that has been tested time and time again –whether you are Beverly Hills or Newport Beach or Coronado – and you have failed at the courts.” Ward said. “And so, I don’t know how reinventing this strategy, with a new set of characters and a new coalition that’s been coined, I don’t know how that results in a different outcome.” 

But despite indications that state officials are unwilling to budge on housing laws any time soon, Ehlers says he’s not giving up. 

He told Voice that residents and city leaders across the state have only recently started to recognize the negative impacts these laws are having on their communities. 

“We are now at a point where things are getting built. I won because the concrete and bulldozing is occurring,” Ehlers said. “Where it wasn’t real and on the ground before, it is now, so that’s what’s changing. And that was also part of the reason the Our Neighborhood Voices initiative didn’t previously qualify for the ballot.” 

Ehlers and the coalition of other city leaders are hoping to get their initiative qualified for the 2026 or 2028 election.  

“I believe just the process of going through the qualification, will show the number of people opposed to what’s happening,” Ehlers said.  

The post Encinitas Is Banking on the State to Let Them Limit Housing, But Lawmakers Aren’t Interested appeared first on Voice of San Diego.

More detox beds are coming to Escondido, a vital addition amid the region’s ongoing shortage. 

The Escondido City Council last week approved an expansion of detox services proposed by nonprofit homeless services provider Interfaith Community Services. Supporters say the new detox beds, or withdrawal-management beds, are a much-needed addition to the city and to North County, which has high demand for drug treatment services and not enough supply. 

Escondido has the highest rates of overdoses for methamphetamine and fentanyl and one of the highest overdose rates for Opioids in North County, according to recent data from the Substance Use Overdose Prevention Task Force, a countywide coalition that includes health care officials and law enforcement. 

Interfaith plans to expand its existing 10 detox beds to 32 beds with help from a $12-million grant from San Diego County.   

“The reality today is that help is not immediately available,” said Interfaith CEO Greg Anglea at the Feb. 19 Council meeting. “Just today, we actually had to turn away a young man who was seeking detox because our detox program is currently full.” 

There Are Mixed Feelings About It 

Last year, Escondido leaders passed a homeless policy that indicated a shift in how the city would be addressing homelessness moving forward. It became controversial because it emphasized addiction treatment services as a primary method for addressing homelessness over housing first. 

Housing First is the statewide approach to addressing homelessness that prioritizes providing a stable home first before treatment.    

The city’s new policy was controversial, but Interfaith saw an opportunity.  

“The policy adopted by this council on homelessness draws a clear line that this city is committed to addressing and providing pathways out of addiction and out of homelessness for our residents,” Anglea said at the meeting. 

But another piece of the city’s policy is to prioritize services for homeless residents already living in Escondido, not people from other cities. That’s where some of the skepticism came in. 

Because Interfaith is using county funds for the expansion, that means the program would be open to people from throughout San Diego County, not just people from Escondido. And because there aren’t many detox beds in North County and the region, some worry the program will attract homeless people from other cities. 

The Council ultimately approved the expansion 3-2, with Councilmembers Joe Garcia and Judy Fitzgerald voting “no.” 

Garcia, Fitzgerald and some public speakers pointed out that Escondido is already home to multiple homeless shelters and homeless services, while some North County cities don’t have any shelters and provide minimal services. Allowing more detox beds in a region that is severely lacking substance abuse services could bring more homeless people to Escondido, they argued. 

Mayor Dane White, who has previously experienced homelessness and drug addiction, said during the meeting that he shares those concerns, but he believes the need outweighs that risk. 

“To me, the risk seems worth it. Currently, these people have nowhere to go to get help,” White said during the meeting. “My ultimate vision has not changed. We need an emergency shelter… to get people off the streets immediately, but in the meantime, there is no alternative.” 

Out of 200 people served with Interfaith’s existing 10 detox beds last year, 70 percent came directly from the streets of Escondido, Anglea said during the meeting. He also assured the Council that Interfaith’s outreach workers prioritize residents in Escondido, and for any clients that enter the program from another city, transportation is provided for them to go back to their city when they complete the program or choose to leave the program. 

The Region’s (Lack Of) Detox Beds 

Most residents, service providers and public officials in the region agree there is a severe shortage of substance abuse treatment programs and detox services throughout the County. 

In North County: Anglea said he’s aware of about 22 other detox beds currently available at three different locations in North County. These are The Fellowship Center in Escondido, Serenity House in Escondido and Family Recovery Center in Oceanside. 

These are facilities that can serve clients with Medi-Cal insurance. 

In San Diego County: Countywide, there are only 78 detox beds available for San Diegans with Medi-Cal insurance, Voice of San Diego previously reported. 

There are plans to open dozens of new detox beds this year in Downtown San Diego and possibly other communities, but those are still in the works. 

Currently, San Diegans with Medi-Cal insurance seeking detox or longer-term residential treatment programs often wait weeks for a bed. 

Interfaith’s detox services includes 14 days of 24/7 oversight and support for each individual to safely withdraw from drugs or alcohol. During that time, they also receive medical support, behavioral health services, and substance use disorder counseling. After the 14-day period, individuals can choose to enter a longer-term residential treatment program provided by Interfaith or another organization. 

The existing 10 detox beds served more than 200 people last year, Anglea said at the council meeting. Seventy percent of those 200 successfully completed the program and moved on to long-term treatment. 

The new beds are expected to be up and running by March 3, Anglea told Voice. 

Around Town: Arts Center Is Safe, for Now 

Things are looking up for the California Center for the Arts, Escondido. 

The Escondido council last week extended its management agreement with the arts center for another five years. 

Let’s rewind: Last year, city leaders began looking for a new entity to take over the operations and financial obligations of the California Center for the Arts to save money because of the city’s significant budget deficit. 

The city owns the arts center, which opened in 1994, but the California Center for the Arts Foundation, a nonprofit overseen by a board of directors, manages it.   

Each year, Escondido pays a monthly management fee to the foundation for the operation of the Center and pays for all gas and electric bills for the facilities, as well as some maintenance fees. Last year, the city paid around $1.9 million. 

But the city only received one proposal to take over management of the arts center and it was from the foundation that is already managing it. 

The new plan: Escondido residents passed a sales tax increase last November that is projected to bring in around $28 million per year in revenue. Now, the city has agreed to continue its management agreement with the arts center, with continued financial support, until June 30, 2027. 

In Other News 

• ICYMI: Encinitas’ new mayor, Bruce Ehlers, has been approving controversial housing developments that come before the Council, but he says he has his eyes set on changing state housing laws to bring local control back to Encinitas. (Voice of San Diego) 
• Del Mar officials were contacted by the District Attorney’s office in response to a complaint it received about Del Mar’s handling of its council vacancy. After the Council failed to agree on an appointee for the vacant seat and deadlocked on whether to proceed with a special election, the seat will now remain vacant until the November 2026 election. (Coast News) 
• Oceanside could soon allow in-store cannabis sales at up to four store fronts, expanding beyond its delivery-only model. (Union-Tribune) 

The post North County Report: More Detox Beds Are on the Way  appeared first on Voice of San Diego.

Encinitas’ new mayor, Bruce Ehlers, has his eyes set on the prize. 

Formerly a councilmember, Ehlers defeated incumbent Mayor Tony Kranz in November with a campaign that promised he’d fight back against state housing laws that are impeding local control. 

The message clearly resonated with Encinitas residents, who, for decades, have largely been hostile to new development in the city. 

Residents also voted out incumbent Councilmember Allison Blackwell in favor of newcomer Luke Shaffer. And they elected newcomer Jim O’Hara over his more pro-housing opponent Destiny Preston. Ehlers, Shaffer and O’Hara have all expressed their desire and readiness to challenge state housing laws.   

Now, in the aftermath of the election, residents are closely watching the new Council. Some have already expressed disappointment about a few housing projects the Council allowed to move forward. 

These were projects that were already approved by the city’s Planning Commission because they were found to be compliant with state housing laws, but after being appealed, or challenged, they were brought to the Council for final approval. 

That was the case at a Feb. 12 City Council meeting. The Council reluctantly upheld the Planning Commission’s approval of a controversial 448-unit development called Quail Meadows Apartments. Ehlers was the one who encouraged the Council to move the project forward, noting that the city was being forced to do so by the state.  

Though it’s not the decision most of the residents packed into the Council chambers were hoping for, Ehlers says he knows why he was elected, and it’s bigger than any individual housing project. He has his sights set on a larger effort: changing the state laws that he says have taken control away from Encinitas, Ehlers told Voice of San Diego. 

While he and the council work on creating those changes, he said, the city is forced to follow state housing laws and approve qualifying affordable housing projects. 

‘Sophie’s Choice’ 

There was a lot of buildup leading to Wednesday’s City Council discussion about Quail Meadows Apartments. 

The project had already been discussed at four previous public meetings, and many residents were hoping the newly elected mayor and councilmembers would be the ones to finally shut the project down. 

Public speakers and councilmembers expressed concerns about the impacts that such a large development will have on traffic, flooding infrastructure, fire safety and more, especially with multiple other housing projects already being developed nearby on Quail Gardens Drive. 

Councilmember Luke Shaffer suggested halting the project because it could be a fire risk, especially given recent fires throughout California. But Barbara Kautz, a land use attorney who the city regularly consults with, said at the meeting that the Council didn’t have a concrete reason to reject the project without exposing the city to lawsuits from the developer and serious consequences from the state. 

State officials could decide to decertify, or revoke approval of, Encinitas’ Housing Element, a state-required plan that outlines how a city will make way for housing at different income levels. That could trigger the Builder’s Remedy, a law that allows developers to bypass local zoning rules and build affordable housing projects regardless of the city’s wishes. 

“This is the nuclear option, it would absolutely ruin Encinitas,” Ehlers said at the meeting. 

The state’s housing department, or HCD, sent a letter to city leaders ahead of Wednesday’s meeting warning them that “if HCD finds that a local government’s actions do not comply with state law, HCD may notify the California Office of the Attorney General that the local government is in violation of state law.,” the letter said. 

Ehlers called it “Sophie’s choice,” where every alternative has significant negative consequences. 

“We need to go fight at the state level to fix these crazy laws, but ignoring them would be at our own peril, and that’s what we would be doing if we can’t make a finding that fits into this,” Ehlers said. “We’ve got to be very careful here, we are headed straight toward decertification. It’s a very credible threat, to the point where it’s not an ‘if,’ it’s ‘when.’” 

He ultimately made the motion, or proposal, to move the project forward, specifying that it is “under duress,” meaning the city is being forced. When the motion failed 2-2 (Councilmember Joy Lyndes recused herself), he asked the Council to vote again, and the motion passed 3-1. 

“This decision is based on unavoidable ramifications of state housing policies coupled with credible threats from HCD that will result in unavoidable and even greater harm to the city’s environment, traffic, flooding and community character,” Ehlers’ motion said. “Our discretion has been usurped, possibly illegally, by the state through the forcing of unfunded mandates and threats of greater harm if we disapprove the project. We are approving this project under duress only because the credible threats made by HCD and the state leave us no choice. A ‘Sophie’s choice’ is not a choice.” 

The Mayor’s Plan 

Ehlers is no stranger to the fight against state housing mandates and has previously taken different approaches. 

He was the author of Proposition A, a growth-control initiative approved by voters in 2013 that requires a vote by Encinitas residents for any major zoning and density changes.  

During his time on the Planning Commission, Ehlers regularly pushed back against proposed housing projects leading to him being removed from the Planning Commission in 2022 by the then-City Council, who said Ehlers had a record of opposing the city’s efforts to stay compliant with state housing laws and an inability to remain unbiased and objective when considering housing projects.  

Now, he believes the answer lies at the top. 

He’s involved with multiple grassroots coalitions of cities and neighborhoods throughout California, like one called Our Neighborhood Voices, that are trying to get a statewide ballot initiative passed to restore local control when it comes to housing and development.  

They’re hoping this initiative will pass in the November 2026 election. He’s also supporting groups like Livable California that are working on challenging the legality of some of the state’s housing policies.  

Another strategy Ehlers plans to employ is lobbying. The city of Encinitas’ legislative policy, which outlines its lobbying strategies, says the city can take a position on state laws or policies and can communicate that position to state officials.   

“We’re not alone. I’m talking to mayors across San Diego… and mayors across the state,” Ehlers said during the meeting. “There are many cities out there that feel exactly the way we do. But let’s not do anything that would harm us worse, let’s minimize the harm and move forward to fight it as we got elected to do.” 

Correction: This story has been updated to correct that Councilmember Joy Lyndes recused herself from Quail Meadows votes.

The post Encinitas Mayor: Push to Regain Local Control Must Start at the State  appeared first on Voice of San Diego.

The city of Del Mar’s plans to build an affordable housing project at the Del Mar Fairgrounds just hit a snag. 

Yesterday, the board that runs the Fairgrounds, called the 22nd District Agricultural Association, or 22nd DAA, voted to suspend affordable housing discussions with the city of Del Mar after Del Mar leaders continued to show support for an underground train tunnel route that would run underneath the Fairgrounds. 

The proposed underground train tunnel is called the LOSSAN Rail Realignment project, a plan led by SANDAG, the region’s transportation agency, to move a portion of the train tracks that run along the fragile Del Mar bluffs into an underground tunnel. 

Del Mar city leaders previously supported the Fairgrounds by adopting a “guiding principle” asking SANDAG to protect operations at the Fairgrounds. In exchange, Fairgrounds officials would continue plans to let the city build an affordable housing project on the Fairgrounds property. 

But despite that agreement, Del Mar officials have continued to advocate for the exact tunnel route that the Fairgrounds doesn’t want because it happens to be the route that would have the least impact on Del Mar residents’ homes.  

“They stabbed us in the back,” said Board Member Michael Gelfand at Tuesday’s board meeting. 

The Dilemma 

Despite objections from officials at the Del Mar Fairgrounds, a tunnel option running underneath the Fairgrounds is still on the table. 

Fairgrounds CEO Carlene Moore said at Tuesday’s meeting that construction of this specific option would make a significant portion of the Fairgrounds unusable for seven to 10 years.  

If this route is chosen, officials have said it would derail plans for an affordable housing project that the city of Del Mar is planning to build on the Fairgrounds property. The project, which would create up to 61 low-income units, is one the city is banking on to fulfill its state-mandated affordable housing requirements.   

It wouldn’t be “feasible” to have two massive construction projects on the Fairgrounds property at the same time, a Fairgrounds rep told Voice of San Diego back in June. 

After initially considering the Fairgrounds tunnel route to be a good option, Del Mar city leaders agreed at a City Council meeting in December 2023 to support the 22nd DAA and urged SANDAG not to consider a tunnel route that would impact the Fairgrounds’ operations and the potential for an affordable housing project. Then, in September of last year, Del Mar, Solana Beach and the Del Mar Fairgrounds all signed off on a joint agreement calling for a “mutually agreed upon” process to select a new tunnel route. 

Fast forward to last month, Del Mar city officials appear to still favor the tunnel route option that would run underneath the Fairgrounds, previously known as Alternative A, despite the previous agreement.  

Del Mar Mayor Terry Gaasterland told KPBS on Jan. 23 that Alternative A would be the best option to protect residents’ homes. 

That’s because the other route options would run underneath Del Mar residents’ homes and could trigger eminent domain, which gives the government the power to take property and use it for public use, even if owners don’t want to sell.  

“About 50 homes would be right in the area where the portal is. And then about 500 homes would either be above the tunnel or laterally next door to a house above the tunnel,” Gaasterland told KPBS. “That is a lot of residential housing that would be impacted.” 

Now, officials at the Fairgrounds aren’t happy. The board voted to suspend discussions with the city regarding the affordable housing project. 

“As a member of the DAA, I know I and I think the rest of the board, really wants to work cooperatively with adjacent cities in all regards, including the issue of affordable housing,” said Board Member Gelfand. “However, we had a joint resolution that has not just been disregarded, it’s been blatantly contradicted. This is not retaliation; this is a response to a betrayal.” 

Board Member Mark Arabo echoed that same sentiment. 

“There was a deal. We had a deal, and Del Mar broke the deal. Simple as that,” Arabo said. 

The board voted 5-3 to temporarily discontinue discussions with Del Mar until the next 22nd DAA board meeting on March 25. If Del Mar officials can show that they don’t support a tunnel route that would impact the Fairgrounds, then the Fairgrounds will resume housing discussions, board members said. 

Del Mar City Manager Ashley Jones commented on the decision via email. 

“While the board’s decision yesterday was disappointing, I look forward to connecting with their CEO to determine next steps and actions needed to resume work under the ENRA [Exclusive Negotiating Rights Agreement] following next month’s Board meeting,” Jones said. “I’m optimistic that we can find a path forward.” 

We can’t forget Seaside Ridge: If Del Mar’s plans for an affordable housing project at the Fairgrounds ultimately doesn’t pan out, the city will have to consider other projects. And developers of a proposed affordable housing project called Seaside Ridge are more than ready to step in.  

Seaside Ridge is a controversial housing development that I’ve been following since May. City officials are against it, but the developer is trying to use state housing laws to override the city’s wishes.   

The project proposes 42 low-income units, 43 moderate-income units and 174 market-rate units.    

City officials argue they already have enough sites identified in their Housing Element to meet their housing goals, and they would have to rezone the site to even consider moving forward with it.   

But the developers argue that the city has no choice in the matter because at the time they submitted their application to the city, Del Mar’s Housing Element hadn’t been approved by the state, triggering the Builder’s Remedy. The Builder’s Remedy says if a city doesn’t have an approved Housing Element by the time an affordable housing project is proposed, then the city can’t deny it.  

In February 2023, the developer sued the city of Del Mar for repeatedly rejecting the project. That lawsuit was on pause while a similar case in Los Angeles County played out, but now the developers have a hearing in June.

Also: Last week, SANDAG released a new batch of tunnel routes, or paths the underground tunnel could take, expanding the options from three routes to 16 after the previous three routes, released in June of last year, received criticism from different stakeholders. 

The new options will be presented to the SANDAG board of directors at its Feb. 28 meeting, where the agency’s staff will recommend the top three or four alignments. 

In Other News 

• The YMCA of San Diego County, located in Escondido, recently announced new partnerships, new leadership and a new vision. (YMCA Press Release) Related: The YMCA’s future was uncertain in 2021 after it lost about three-quarters of its members and program participants during the pandemic, resulting in a significant loss in revenue and, subsequently, thousands of layoffs. (Voice of San Diego)  
• ICYMI: Poway City Councilmember Tony Blain received the city’s first-ever censure last week. Public records revealed Blain’s history of harassing and threatening elected officials and city staff. (Voice of San Diego) 
• Oceanside has allocated $17 million to build a new community park at El Corazon and continue flood control measures on the San Luis Rey River. (Union-Tribune) 

Clarification: This story has been updated to include that the Seaside Ridge developers have a hearing in June for the lawsuit against Del Mar.

The post North County Report: Fairgrounds Suspends Affordable Housing Talks with City of Del Mar appeared first on Voice of San Diego.

Poway’s City Council chambers were packed Tuesday night as residents gathered to witness the city’s first-ever censure of a public official. But the subject of the censure hearing, Councilmember Tony Blain, was notably absent. 

“Mr. Blain, I am certain you’re watching from home,” Poway Mayor Steve Vaus said during the meeting. “Your absence here speaks louder than words. I am not at all surprised that you were too cowardly to be here.  But you cannot run and hide from this censure resolution. You have brought it upon yourself.” 

It’s been less than two months since Blain was sworn into office. Now, he’s being accused of vote trading, harassment, intimidation and bullying, earning him the first censure, or official reprimand, in the city’s 45-year history. 

How We Got Here 

Blain is a political newcomer and somewhat of an outlier. The military officer and physician won the District 2 City Council seat last November with 38 percent of the votes, defeating two other candidates including police officer Jared Wilson, the Republican Party of San Diego County’s preferred candidate. 

Blain, who is also a Republican, was controversially endorsed by state Assemblymember Carl DeMaio, a move that put Blain and DeMaio at odds with the Republican Party. 

During his campaign, he promised to “bring back honesty, integrity and transparency” to City Hall. “No more backroom politics!” his campaign website says. 

It was a message that resonated with many residents, whose trust in Poway’s elected leaders has dwindled over the years due to concerns about overdevelopment and speculation about councilmembers prioritizing developer interests, which Poway officials have denied. 

It turns out, Blain was engaging in his own backroom politics, public records show. Emails going back several months show Blain attempting to vote trade with public officials on multiple occasions. Emails also reveal several instances of Blain threatening and harassing elected officials and city staff members, including City Attorney Alan Fenstermacher, who accused Blain of bullying and harassment at a Jan. 21 City Council meeting. 

Blain provided a statement to Voice of San Diego via email. 

“This is all political lies and retaliation from a corrupt Mayor Vaus and corrupt sycophant Vaus-appointee Councilmember Peter De Hoff who take millions of dollars from battery plants and developers then vote yes on their developments,” Blain wrote. “Mayor Vaus is trying to divert attention from his attention to benign e-mails. Poway residents are smarter than that and will vote Nov. 2025 and 2026.” 

What the Emails Revealed 

Blain was very engaged in Poway politics long before he announced his run for City Council. 

Public records from 2023 show hundreds of emails from Blain to the mayor, councilmembers and city staff about a range of topics from graffiti removal to water rates to his plans to introduce a ballot measure that would create term limits for elected officials. 

But over time, some of the communications from Blain started to take on a harsher tone, public records show. 

On Oct. 11, 2023, Blain emailed Poway City Manager Chris Hazeltine asking him how the American Legion can apply for a Poway grant. Hazeltine responded with a link where Blain could find information about his question. 

“As we’ve discussed before, the city’s website has a wealth of information; please see the below link,” Hazeltine wrote in the email. 

Blain then followed up with at least four emails over the next two days. 

“I really want to see you fired, Chris / you are unhelpful to residents and a liability for entire city of Poway. We need new [sic] helpful city manager with a good attitude who wants to be friendly and help citizens/ voters,” Blain wrote. 

“Mr. Hazeltine, you have received your last communication from me until I am elected, then I will call for a vote at the first meeting to have you replaced with new city manager. Best regards,” Blain wrote in another email the following day. 

In 2024, records show Blain’s emails becoming increasingly combative. 

For example, around August, city staff took down some of Blain’s campaign signs because they were in the public right of way, which are public areas owned by the city, like sidewalks. 

In multiple email exchanges, Blain asked City Attorney Fenstermacher why his signs were taken down. Fenstermacher explained the city’s code, but Blain wasn’t satisfied. 

“Mr. Blain – I have your [sic] 3 emails and two voicemails in the span of the past half hour asking for the same thing. The city is closed today. I will get a copy of the notice from staff when I can, and send it to you,” Fenstermacher wrote in an email. 

Then, things escalated. 

“Mr. Fenstermacher, you appears [sic] to be political in your dealing with me, which is both unethical and questionably legal. You really have no business being the Poway city attorney with your obvious political leanings,” Blain wrote. “I confirmed with each homeowner that they in fact own the land on which my signs were placed – I will provide you proof of that next week, after which I expect you to provide me with permission to place my campaign signs on private property.” 

After a few more emails back and forth, Blain again told Fenstermacher that he should resign.  

The next day, on Aug. 31, Blain sent an email to the entire City Council, Fenstermacher and Hazeltine, threatening to file a lawsuit against the city for taking down his campaign signs and demanding Fenstermacher’s and Hazeltine’s resignations. Otherwise, he wrote, he would talk to the media. 

“I will also go to all local and national newspapers with what you did above if you do not respond,” Blain wrote. “You can make lawsuit and newspaper coverage disappear by immediately replacing all of my campaign signs on private property on Espola Rd.”  

A few days later, Blain sent an email to Fenstermacher saying he was writing a letter to the California bar requesting that Fenstermacher be disbarred, meaning he would lose his law license.  

“I will be publicly requesting your resignation in Nov. 2024 and Nov. 2026 after I am elected to Council and later as mayor – start looking for another job – you are unprofessional and unethical,” wrote Blain in the email. 

More Threats and Intimidation 

As Election Day approached, threatening emails from Blain to staff and public officials continued, growing more menacing in tone. 

In one instance back in September, Blain emailed then-Councilmember Cailyn Frank, accusing her of writing a disparaging article about him on a website called Poway Votes. Frank denied writing the article or having any affiliation with the website. 

“Bullshit you are smiling instigator / gloves are off Nov. 6: you will no longer have political protection,” Blain responded. “You and I need to figure out how to work together on Council next 4 years – you know I’m way in lead and all of your negative publicity cannot change my overwhelming grassroots support. Everyone knows you’re all lying.” 

On Oct. 10, a month before the election, Blain wrote a seemingly unprovoked email to then-Councilmember Brian Pepin with the subject line “request.” 

“Hi, Brian, I actually like you, unlike [Councilmember] De Hoff’s lies / ‘anonymous’ stupid political stories. Work with me on Council and I will support you. If you do anything I hear about that is lying or mean to me, I will work tirelessly to get you OFF Council,” Blain wrote. “You and I are good for now unless I see anything you do underhanded. And I have ways of finding out what you are doing behind the scenes. I have heard rumors, but I will give you this once [sic] chance to behave.” 

After winning the election, Blain sent multiple emails per week to Fenstermacher and Hazeltine demanding they resign.  

“We will force your resignation in 23 months when we have 3 votes on Council (hopefully sooner),” Blain wrote in an email to Hazeltine on Nov. 26. 

He also sent emails to multiple other officials demanding their resignations, including Vaus, De Hoff and members of the city’s Budget Review Committee. 

A Censure and Calls for Resignation 

The City Council voted 4-0 Tuesday night to censure Blain. Vaus and former Councilmember Anita Edmondson, who gave a public comment, both urged Blain to resign. 

The meeting agenda included recent emails sent from Blain to city staff asking staff to call the police on two different residents who criticized Blain via email. In one email, Blain wrote that he filed a police report against a resident who criticized him. 

In other recent emails Blain sent ahead of the council’s meeting to fill the vacant District 1 council seat, Blain wrote De Hoff saying he would drop his recall effort against him and vote for De Hoff to be Deputy Mayor if De Hoff voted for a special election.  

Christopher Pikus, an applicant who was seeking an appointment to the vacant seat, and was ultimately chosen for the seat, also received a threatening email from Blain urging Pikus to vote for a special election if he is appointed. If not, Blain wrote that he would lead a recall effort against Pikus.  

Legal experts, including City Attorney Fenstermacher, have indicated that the threats and offer of vote trading could violate state laws.   

The post How a Poway City Councilmember Earned the City’s First-Ever Censure appeared first on Voice of San Diego.