Escondido Neighbors United

This time of year snakes and reptiles are coming out of hibernation.  If you see a snake you don’t want around, we found a great service for any one who may need
it.  Also, please find information below on how to tell the difference between rattlesnakes and totally harmless Gopher and King snakes.

Please keep this number by your phone.

Gopher Snakes and King Snakes- Learn the Difference

One snake wrangler mentioned that the main way people get bit by rattlesnakes is they start whacking at them with a shovel.  



Just Call TOM’S SNAKES and stay safe!!!

We hope that everyone today can stop and take a moment to appreciate our beautiful planet and all the support the Earth offers to us that makes our lives possible.  It is a good day to step outside and be grateful for the clean air and water available to us and see that it is a precious and finite resources.

For Escondido Neighbors, our environmental protection issues continue.   Here are a couple updates:

1.  Update on Chatham Waste Site

On April 15, we presented an update to the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Today we filed this letter  ENU to DTSC April 22 2015.  We have asked several questions of the regulators and hope to hear from them soon.

Many of you have seen the sampling trucks back in the neighborhood conducting the April sampling event for Chatham.   We will be interested to see if wells deJong 2 and 34-E4 are sampled in this round or not.  (For the regular October, 2014 event, the consultants reported that “property owners did not grant access to the Group for groundwater sampling in October 2014”) Although the data set is already compromised, we will hope these wells will be tested per the plan.

2.  Update on City of Escondido stormwater violations.
The city staff has responded to the Notice of Violation issued by the Regional Board.  You can read the response here  Escondido Response to MS4 NOV, April 13 2015.  We will have comments on this in the future.

For those of you interested in the stormwater permit, there will be some  Stormwater Permit Public Workshops where the Regional Board will be seeking input.  Please participate if you are interested.

3.  Save the Monarch for Earth Day
Something we all can do in Escondido is make our yards Butterfly Friendly.
Learn about Monarch Butterfly and what can be done to help save this species.
USFWS Monarch information  and the Monarch Watch

We can all do something to help preserve and protect our precious world!

Join Escondido Neighbors United in remembering –Every Day is Earth Day!

Please submit a survey to DTSC  today about your thoughts
on Oak Creek cleanup plan!!! 

And now for something completely different– GOOD NEWS on the Chatham waste site.

The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the agency in charge of oversight of the cleanup, directed the Chatham Group to propose options for removing the pollution from Felicita Creek.

In a letter DTSC March 17, 2015 letter to Chatham Group DTSC said that the The conditions of the Chatham Site 5-Year Remedy Review Report (RRR) to remove site-related contaminants discharging to Felicita Creek had not been met.  It states, the PRP Group “…only proposed additional surface water sampling locations.  Effective mitigation measures were not proposed.  Therefore, requirement No. 1 has not been met”


The letter goes on to state “The Update does not evaluate in detail the mechanism which would significantly reduce or stop the flow of site related contaminants to the creek.” and noted that in a recent meeting both the DTSC and the Regional Water Quality Control Board identified a number of sites and references where a variety of remedial techniques were used to address chlorinated plumes in surface water.

DTSC has required an Alternatives Analysis by April 2, 2015.

We offer our thanks to regulators at DTSC and the Water Board for this action to remove this pollution from our community.

There is a new major project in public review right now that many people may not know about but will impact all of us in SW Escondido.  The City is planning to lay new sewer lines and replace some old lines in under 3.4 miles of existing local roads.  This includes all of Felicita Road from Hamilton to Via Rancho and much of Park Drive.  The project will last 9 months.

The noticing was very limited and the comments on this project are due on April 1st.  Here is the notice Sewer Project Notice

And here is the  Draft Envl Document SW Sewer Replacement Mitigated Negative Declaration

This matters on several levels because these new sewer lines will set the stage for future annexations and will be dug into areas where the Chatham contaminated plume is present.

While it is good news that sewage lift stations that are currently at/over capacity will be shut down,  it is unclear from the document how much more capacity (read development) this action will allow.

It is of major concern to us that the trenching and excavation will happen in areas where the Chatham industrial waste plumes have been or are currently located.  The trenching will go at least 14 feet deep.  The city does not plan to develop the response plans for contaminated groundwater or vapors that might be released into the air until the project is underway– a significant failing of the draft document.   This could expose workers and nearby residents if not handled well.

We are also concerned this project is also a precursor to annexation of more areas.  A surprise revelation for many of us living in Southwest Escondido was that the Escondido General Plan includes many current county neighborhoods in Escondido ‘Sphere of Influence’ for the purposes of ultimately annexing us.   This was a shock for many county residents who thought our Escondido address was merely a convenient designation for mail etc…

Escondido Neighbors United will publish our comments once they are completed.  But, EVERYONE is encouraged to read and comment on this as well.  Bottom-line, there is not enough information in the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration to ensure that human health and the environment will be adequately protected.  More sampling and analysis needs to be done, response plans need to be developed and disclosed, and the document should be recirculated.

More soon.

During the Oak Creek public meeting last week, Sam Abed attacked, among others, two community residents, Fred Progner and Ron Forster, who had a Community Editorial published in the San Diego UT about our collective concerns about Oak Creek and Chatham.   SDUT Residents Seek Action

Today, Forster sent an annotated version of the Opinion piece with the references included. Annotated Opinion Editorial . Here is a text of the message accompanying the Annotated Editorial

Everett DeLano is a highly skilled, intelligent and competent attorney who is committed to helping communities protect and defend themselves.  He is the people’s champion.  He has been an incredible ally and friend to us during all of this.  Here is his response  posted at A Blue View  Response from DeLano and DeLano Please read it.
And, if any one out there needs a great attorney– DeLano and DeLano is the firm for you

One thought on “Oak Creek–Unhealthy for Oaks and Creeks”

1. Everett DeLanoMarch 10, 2015 at 9:28 am

   Near the end of the March 4th Escondido City Council hearing regarding a proposed 65-home development on land currently in the County and proposed to be annexed into the City, Mayor Sam Abed took it upon himself to criticize my firm and some of the good neighbors who had come out to express their concerns about the project.

   He called out aspects of a comment letter I had written a couple days earlier, decrying what he labeled as “complete ignorance.” Mayor Abed alleged my letter incorrectly claimed the City’s General Plan calls for a 50-foot buffer to protect wetlands. Yet City staff put that very language up for all to see – Escondido General Plan Water Resources and Quality Policy 6.8 requires “a minimum of a 50-foot buffer and setback for development.” City staff had claimed that the language also mentions an exception might be possible where wildlife agencies approve of a smaller buffer, but two things are problematic with that assertion: (1) the wildlife agencies have actually called for a 100-foot buffer and (2) even if the wildlife agencies had said a smaller buffer might work, my comment was still valid, since the General Plan clearly expects a minimum of 50 feet and the project has buffers as small as zero feet. He also asserted my letter incorrectly claims that the development would create an island of City land. City staff made the rather ridiculous claim that the land was not an island because one tiny corner of the project site will touch a tiny corner of existing City land. But again that does not make my comment incorrect. Merriam-Webster defines “island” to mean “an isolated group or area.” In this instance, the project, a gated community surrounded by County land, will create both an isolated group of residents and an isolated geographic area.

   But I wouldn’t even bother to write this if his only attack was on my work. Unfortunately, Mayor Abed next unleashed his vitriol on some of the good area residents who had taken so much of their time and energy to express their concerns. He reminded everyone of the applicant’s “property rights.” Of course, under both the state and federal constitutions, everyone has a right to express their opinions. He may disagree with those opinions, but they were completely within their rights to express them.

   Perhaps Mayor Abed was angry, since some speakers (but not the people he attacked) expressed concerns about a possible conflict of interest. One speaker said a consultant to the project was on his staff, and another speaker noted that he is listed in minutes from a City Council meeting several years ago as “Co-President” of the very applicant who was seeking project approval. But that anger could not justify his venom against the good citizens who were there in the hopes their voices would be heard.

   And here’s the worst part about Mayor Abed’s diatribe: earlier during the same hearing, he commended everyone (both supporters and opponents of the project) for being “civil.” He congratulated the speakers for not engaging in personal attacks. Yet like a cowardly bully, he didn’t ask me or the other residents about our statements when we were up at the podium. He didn’t give us a chance to respond or clarify anything he thought he might have heard. He waited until the hearing was closed, and then he engaged in personal attacks. In fact, when one of the residents stood up to respond, he pounded his fist on the dais and reminded him that the hearing was closed and his turn to speak was over.

   At one point he said my comment letter was “embarrassing,” but I think Mayor Abed was the real embarrassment that evening. It’s one thing to know you have the power to wield the mayor’s gavel and vote against the wishes of area residents. But it’s quite another thing to abuse that power and to abuse those good people who come before the City Council to express their concerns. Mayor Abed should be ashamed of himself.

   Everett DeLano
   DeLano & DeLano

Just a quick reminder that the final Council vote will be today at 4:30 at Escondido City Hall.