The perversion of citizen led petition drives by big money
By Richard Riehl
My afternoon nap was disturbed last month by the sound of a man’s cheery voice from behind the screen at my open front door.
“Hello, hello!”
Awakening from a sound sleep, I shuffled to the door to find a man standing there, holding a clipboard. He didn’t introduce himself, just explained, “We’re gathering signatures to save the strawberry fields.” I didn’t recognize him, but his easy way led me to believe he was a fellow resident of our 40-unit condo community.
Despite full knowledge of our HOA ban on door-to-door solicitation and my own vow never to sign a petition without knowing the details of what it meant and who was pushing it, I allowed the phrase, “save our strawberry fields” to cloud my better judgment. When Karen called from another room to ask who was at the door I told her it was someone who wanted to save the strawberry fields. She gladly added her name to mine for the apparent do-gooder at the door.
The following day, as I awaited my prescription in the pharmacy, I picked up the June 12 edition of The Coast News. The headline, “Nordstrom Signs On to Strawberry Fields Shopping Center,” of Ellen Wright’s article told me we had happily signed up to clear the way for a two-story shopping mall next to I-5, hiding from public view the bucolic farming scene we’ve treasured through the years.
Reading further I discovered the developer, Caruso Affiliated, has launched a “citizen-led” initiative campaign to bypass the usual approval process. The city council will be able to approve the project outright, or put it on the ballot. If 15% of registered voters signatures are gathered (8,900 signatures of 59,000 voters) and the council chooses a ballot measure, a special election will be held.
I soon discovered another news article about the project. This one in the San Diego Reader, “More Shopping, Less Strawberry Picking in Carlsbad’s Strawberry Fields?” By Ken Harrison on May 29. Harrison opines, “Some say the initiative tactic used by big developers is a ploy to sway a generally uninformed electorate, or, in some cases, hoodwink them with slick or misleading campaigns.”
I also learned Caruso Affiliated’s citizen-led initiative campaign is headed up by a former planning commissioner, a member of the Lagoon foundation, and a former Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce CEO, hardly a cross-section of community interests.
A few days later, Karen and I came upon another signature gatherer lurking outside the door of our local grocery store. His appearance was a far cry from the well-dressed neatly coiffed gentlemen at our front door. I asked him who he worked for. Visibly taken aback, he asked why I wanted to know. I told him we want to know who paid him to gather signatures. (I, too, was a far cry from the sleepy old man who shuffled to his front door last week.) He finally told us he had a card. I asked him if I could have it. He handed it to me. I discovered he worked for Voter Contact Services, Inc. in Oceanside offering services for Petition Drives, Door-To-Door, and GOTV, For Issues and Candidates. On the reverse side were instructions for turning in signatures for payment.
Here was the classic example of how citizen-led petition drives have been perverted by big money. I remember the days when signature gatherers had a personal interest in the issue and not in $1 to $3 to get my autograph.
Although I blame myself for giving away my name so readily, I also blame the lack of a local daily newspaper. If a developer calling himself “Papa” had not purchased the North County Times to kill it, Carlsbad residents would have been able to gain a far better understanding of the issues and be less vulnerable to developer spin. Full disclosure: for 9 years, as a freelancer, I wrote op-ed community opinion columns for the newspaper.
In case you haven’t heard, a Sacramento County judge ruled an initiative campaign for a new law titled Sodomite Suppression Act was “patently unconstitutional,” since it calls for the killing of gays. State Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris had to ask for the ruling because she had no power to keep it off the ballot.
It makes you wonder how the author of that initiative would have spun the new law for his signature gathering campaign. Maybe something like, “Save Our Children, the Right Way.”
The Caruso Affiliated campaign for the strawberry fields shopping mall chose the title “Preserving Carlsbad Open Space” in bold type, followed by “The Right Way” in smaller, gray type. The right way means one more shopping center, not a new venue for the arts and entertainment, a place that would attract visitors for what makes Carlsbad unique, rather than just another parking place to shop, dine and catch a movie. Like L.A.
Latest posts by Richard Riehl (see all)
- Carlsbad’s Bogus State of the City Video - August 16, 2017
- Will District Elections Loosen the Grip of Carlsbad’s Old Guard? - August 7, 2017
- Carlsbad Mayor Matt Hall’s Profile in Cronyism: Formalizing Appointments to City Committees - June 14, 2017
Thank you! If you search the Carlsbad city website you can find the 9212 Report (Cal-trans) regarding the proposed development, roadwork at I-5 & Cannon Road will not begin until 2035 & finished 2050. Please also look at 85/15 Agua Hedondia pages on Facebook.
Oh my! This is really upsetting.
I like how your article made me think, though. I appreciate what you said about needing smaller local newspapers with journalists who are digging deeper into our community needs.
It is hard to know if Mr. Riehl is upset with himself for not reading the petition, with the State of California for its initiative process or with newspaper publishers who struggle to stay in business.
Surely, Mr. Riehl is not upset with a project proponent who has tried to reach out to every person in the community through hundreds of community meetings, open space tours to everyone, by mail, phone, and traditional media and social media to provide information about the 85/15 Plan.
How could he be upset about a plan that offers – at no cost to taxpayers – 176 acres of newly accessible open space?
And finally, when the Carlsbad Strawberry Company president says the 85/15 Plan will sustain and expand his family-owned small coastal agriculture business, is Mr. Riehl really upset?
I think all of Carlsbad will be upset if uninformed citizens keep us from getting this once-in-a-lifetime community amenity. That would be truly upsetting, Mr. Riehl.
What do you personally have to gain should the shopping mall be constructed? How would a polluted lagoon, excessive traffic, and the desecration of open space be beneficial to your life and livelihood?
Every voter had a chance to read.
As required by California law, an impartial title and summary of the purpose of a proposed measure appears at the top of every page on which voters are to sign. For the 85/15 Plan, the Carlsbad City Attorney was legally mandated to provide that important information.
Before signing, every Carlsbad voter had the chance to read the initiative for herself or himself. More than 20,000 people read the details and signed without incident.
I wish Mr. Diehl had taken time to read, too. I did and I support the 85/15 Plan.
The 85/15 Plan does in fact save the strawberry fields. All you have to do is watch the May 19, 2015 City Council meeting online to see Jimmy Ukegawa of the Carlsbad Strawberry Company speak about what this plan means for his business, and most importantly for his family. I hope Mr. Riehl will take the time to do just that so he can be comfortable that this Plan does exactly what the signature gatherer at his door told him it would do.
One thing about every signature gathering effort that is important to remember. Printed on every signature page is the “Title and Summary” as prepared by the City Attorney’s office. In the case of the 85/15 Plan, it is detailed and very clear in explaining exactly what this project will entail, including:
“Commercial: Retail development is proposed on 26.7 acres (approximately 15% of the Specific Plan area) of a 48.30 acre site designated “Travel/Recreation Commercial.” The Specific Plan allows up to 585,000 square feet of commercial uses in an outdoor shopping, dining and entertainment promenade.”
Nobody was hiding the fact that a retail center is part of the Plan. If someone doesn’t take the time to read what they are signing, then I guess they must be part of “a generally uninformed electorate”!
I hope most readers will find it to be inappropriate for Mr. Riehl in any way to compare this 85/15 Plan initiative to the court case he cited. Sure, he can say “I never said they were the same” but clear thinking folks know that this specific case was cited on purpose with the veiled intent to make readers gasp, even if just for a moment. It is unfortunate he chose to play that game.
Thank you Richard Riehl for voicing the concerns of many Carlsbad citizens. The other media outlets (I won’t call them “news” because they are not journalists) seem to offer an exclusively positive, one-sided view of this issue.
I haven’t signed yet, as it seemed a little too glitzy to be a petition for open space as the main goal. I’m not interested in more shopping centers. My question is what is the alternative? What will happen to the current open space and lagoon we already have, if this doesn’t pass? If the choice is 85/15 or 100% development, it’s an easy choice. If it’s leave it as is, then that’s an easy choice for me as well. I haven’t seen that explained in any of the marketing material or opposing efforts.
Yes, Mr. Kirchoff, I am upset with myself for not reading the fine print. That’s why I wrote the article. But when I did look more closely at the campaign claiming to be all about preserving open space, I began to wonder why it was so important to push the project through without a vote of the people. Then I learned “A California Supreme Court decision last August ruled that if a project gets enough signatures to put it on the ballot, a city council can approve it without going to voters and without a California Environmental Quality Act review, the state’s landmark environmental law that sets mandates for big projects to disclose their environmental impacts and reduce as many of them as possible.” (VOSD, Aug. 10) I also read more carefully the promo material by Caruso Affiliated. The deceptive message in them is that without a strip mall adjacent to I-5, the strawberry fields will be lost. It’s a false choice, given the passing of Prop D., which protects the open space from development. A daily local newspaper would have created a public discussion of these issues. Without a vote of the people, three city council members could decide the fate of those 200 acres. Here’s a link to an analysis of the city’s preliminary environmental review, cause enough for the council not to fast-track the project past city voters. http://www.osidenews.com/2015/08/11/carlsbad-initiative-report/
Richard, that “analysis of the city’s preliminary environmental review” is not an analysis at all. It is a “Letter to the Editor”, simply the opinion of an opponent of the 85/15 Plan. She cites those things that support her opposition but leaves out important clarifying statements in the report. For instance, regarding her air quality claim, she left this out: “The EA (Environmental Analysis) conclusion regarding Air Quality is consistent with most other large project’s that have been evaluated and approved by the city over the years through the normal CEQA review process.”
And regarding the parking and signage, she doesn’t include the fact that, “…the Westfield Carlsbad Specific Plan was recently approved by the City Council with development standard modifications for parking ratios and project signage that were similar in nature to the modifications proposed in nature to the modifications proposed in
the AH-SP Initiative”.
The City’s 9212 Report is thorough and comprehensive and over 250 pages. Carlsbad residents can read it for themselves or read just the Executive Summary (pages 1-10) and draw their own conclusions.
And please stop spreading the falsehood that the 85/15 Plan conflicts with “Prop D., which protects the open space from development”. There are no open space zoned areas that are going to be developed, unless you call restoring the habitat and adding trails some type of development.
Arnie, I did not say the 85/15 Plan conflicts with Prop D, just that it is not the only way to protect open space, implied in the project’s promotional campaign. A venue for the performing arts, for example, would serve as well. As for Diane Nygaard’s letter, it was indeed a brief analysis of the 9212 report that raises just a few important questions the public should be made aware of.
Richard, Arnie Cohen seems to be arguing in support of Caruso’s shopping mall in every local media outlet. He keeps posting the same “The EA (Environmental Analysis) conclusion…” quote everywhere, that’s all he’s got. I was also offered to “save the lagoon” by several paid people around town, and they would quickly move on to the next person when I would ask them how the lagoon was in danger under the current Prop. D arrangement and who they were working for.
You asked the right questions, Gentster. Wish I had.
Proposition D states “The measure cannot be amended except by a subsequent vote of the people of Carlsbad.” Very clear. they are trying to avoid a vote of the people
Richard, What people like Arnie refuse to see is that many people don’t object to the mall itself. We object to the fact that we’ve been lied to and tricked in order to further the interests of the developer. He wanted this fast-tracked and is taking advantage of a loophole in the initiative process to exploit people. The irony here is that Arnie professes to be a loyal American patriot, but then he also wants to deny US our right to vote. So basically he’s saying we should trust the City Council when they agree with him. What would he say if they proposed something HE disagreed with? You can bet your last dollar he’d be out in front of city hall with his Tea Party buddies yelling and waving signs. You just can’t win with his type. He figures if you say something often enough and loudly enough then it becomes true. I think I know where learned that…from a certain media outlet that he is very fond of and likely spends most of his time watching. Some of us would prefer to think for ourselves. Thank God you’re one of us.
Sneaky beginnings usually lead to sour surprises. The manner in which Caruso is working leads me to believe his money usually or always buys him what he wants. And undisclosed plans await us if this 85/15 plan is not stopped. My neighbors and I too were plagued by the canvasers and some did sign thinking the strawberry fields were at risk. The man kept yanking at my private gate as I stood in the patio and said the gate is locked for a reason. He tried peering over it to talk to me and I refused to sign. His approach was suspicious. Caruso is suspicious. I suspect those in favor of this are gaining more than a local Nordstrom. Caruso, if you are reading this, please take your ideas somewhere else. Carlsbad has more than enough shopping. The traffic potential and a paid to park 4 level parking garage blocking our open view of farmland and beyond is not what we want or need here. Please take your money to a different kind of town. We in Carlsbad care and we don’t like your ideas. Enough is enough! Goodbye
Ah yes, right on cue here come the personal attacks from someone who only uses his first name. All I did was state facts in rebuttal to an opinion that is different than my own, and rather than respectful discussion about the 85/15 Plan, I become the target. Oh well, “You just can’t win with his type.” Next he’ll take credit for chasing me off because I am no longer going to be part of this conversation. Take a bow Don.
Ah, yes…mission accomplished. Of course Arnie has to personalize everything and takes every criticism personally. He can’t win the argument so he just leaves in a huff and takes umbrage. Arnie, people are tired of your endless repetition. Come up with a new line of argument for a change instead of repeating the same “talking points”. The FACTS are that people were misled and there is NO good reason why this shouldn’t be put to a vote. After all that’s what Caruso’s mailer and signature gatherers promised. But we know the reason you’re opposed to a vote….because you’re afraid you might lost and then Caruso will take his plan and pack up and leave in a huff. I guess you and Caruso have a lot in common. Arnie, grow up. It’s the real world you’re living in. You can’t win by spinning “facts” and making specious arguments and when people stand up to you, you can’t act as if you’ve been slandered (which you haven’t). If you would take the time to READ what I’ve written, you’d see that I have no objection to the plan being completed IF IT IS THE WILL OF THE CITIZENS OF CARLSBAD AS EVIDENCED IN A FAIR AND HONEST ELECTION. I think even you, the loyal patriotic flag-waving American that you claim to be, would agree that the Founding Fathers would be appalled at what’s going on here. Or are you too blinded by the pixie dust Caruso has thrown in your eyes?
I went to a house party at the very beginning and also took a tour of the fields in August of this year. I guess what I’d like to see is even ONE person out of 20,000 who signed speak up and say “I like this plan, but I understand the way that the petition was done taints the idea – so let’s ALL vote”. Where are those people ? Why the odd silence ? Why the lack of confidence in American ideals ? Actually what I’d really like to see is Carlsbad City Council have the character and confidence to say this. I don’t understand why the two ideas have to be mutually exclusive. I’d also like to see less and/or on who is going to manage the open space. A legitimate land conservancy was glaringly missing from the petition and the City’s analysis.