Escondido Looking at Charter Status

Assemblymember Marie WaldronAssemblymember Marie Waldron 8 Comments


North County –

Escondido, the only city in North County not to become a charter city is finally looking at the change.  Considering the major projects that the city is looking at developing in the near future, including a Triple A ballpark for the Padres minor league team and a Marriott hotel on city land,  the savings from eliminating prevailing wage in construction is enormous.

The North County Times article indicates that the initial hearing will be March 9th.  However, Deputy Mayor Marie Waldron would like to try to get the charter to the ballot by the June election, if there is one, or on the next closest cycle.

Eliminating prevailing wage, prohibiting project labor agreements (PLA’s) and working in other beneficial arrangements for the city, will reap huge savings in the redevelopment projects the city is looking to construct.  Cities like Oceanside, have already seen real savings, of almost $1 million by becoming a charter city.   It will also allow Escondido to manage it’s own elections, bidding processes and land use in a way that frees it from state control.


Comments 8

  1. Marie, if you could clarify for the readers… the requirement to have a measure on the ballot is that the agency must take action no less than 88 days prior to the election. For the June ballot, that would make the deadline the Council hearing on March 9 ?

  2. Yes, with all the required public posting of agendas, we will have a tight timeframe. It doesn’t look likely for June, but then again the statewide election may not happen in June either. We want to be prepared for the next available election at best!

  3. If the GOP legislators hang tough and refuse to put the tax increase measure(s) on the ballot, then doubtless the labor unions will do it via the initiative process — with the election later in the year, or in next year’s primary. One way or the other, we WILL vote. And I think we taxpayers will WIN that vote. But at least if the unions have to put it on the ballot via petitions, it will cost them millions.

    So Escondido hopefully can piggyback on that election. If not, consider a mail ballot (which it might end up being anyway as a state election).

  4. Marie, how many project labor agreements has Escondido entered into in the past? What savings should we anticipate from prohibiting them?

    Also, what were the primary cost drivers behind the high price of the new Police and Fire Headquarters? It seemed like the unending flow of change orders from the city’s contractor drove the price up.

    Lastly, do you still intend to push for an identification requirement at polling places to be included in the charter?

  5. There is speculation that ‘Jason’ is a former Escondido city council candidate, who competed with Councilwoman Waldron in last year’s election.

    That does not affect his ability to post here, but if that is actually the case, then why not acknowedge it? If the speculation is incorrect, then simply say so.

  6. We’re guessing Jason has no intention of being anything but up front about his identity. Generally, if commenters are posting under their own names and intend it that way, it would be helpful to use first and last names, so it is clear. Likewise, those using pseudonyms would be advised to pick something more specific than a simple first name, which could be confused as someone else with that real, actual name.

    For all we know, this could be Jason Roe, but we’re guessing not. Just a wild guess. The point is made, however…how would we know?

  7. a million dollars in oceanside? really? all from making construction workers poorer? sure the city saved about 20% on the aquatics center in 2010 from its 2008 bid. but rebids almost always come in cheaper and a 20% savings on an identical project (which is itself subject to question) at a time when other public agencies are seeing 25-30% savings on their public works because of the lousy economy sounds to me like (1) removing the prevailing wage didn’t save oceanside anything that it wouldn’t have saved simply due to economic conditions, (2) the city may have actually ended up paying more than it should have since there were fewer bidders than in 2008 (something few other public agencies see these days), & (3) oceanside residents lost two years in which they could have used the facilities. i guess there’s a kind of justice there. screw the worker…screw yourself.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.