Skip to main content









Donation Heart Ribbon

Comments made by GandT

Judge Rules Barrio Logan Community Plan Will Be Referendum On June 3 Ballot

Please us the live links to link to the judge's actual ruling... and NOT to your own tweet about it! Hmph, thought I was on the wrong website for a moment... we all expect better backup documentation from PBS, if you please <3

June 1, 2014 at 2:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Roundtable: Who Says Primary Politics In San Diego Is Boring?

Regarding YES on Props B&C:

It is worth noting that local Community Planning Volunteers all over the City are extremely concerned about the precedent that would be set should Props B&C Fail and overturn Barrio Logan's Community Plan. This referendum will impact every single community plan in our City.

The concern is that if the proposition fails - YOUR neighborhood's carefully crafted zoning and land-use protections for YOUR community could be subjected to just such a city-wide vote by folks who may never even have set foot in your community... because some well-funded interest objected to any provision in it... objected enough to spend the many $$ it takes to buy the signatures to get such an item on the ballot.

The Chair of CPC (Community Planners Committee - Monthly meeting of the Chairs of every planning committee in the City of San Diego), Joe La Cava, has gone on record at press conferences supporting YES on Props B and C, and the North Park Planning Committee unanimously passed the below motion supporting YES on Props B&C at their April Board meeting

Minutes: April 15, 2013– 6:30 PM
“ XIV. Discussion/Action Items
a. Environmental Health Coalition re: Barrio Logan CPU Ballot Initiative: The Barrio Logan CPU was approved by City Council after an extensive multi-year consensus process. An initiative to overturn the approved the CPU was filed immediately. Presentation by Corrine Wilson – volunteer with Yes on B&C campaign: Item On the June 3rd ballot. Signature gatherers spread many false rumors regarding the CPU. The CPU was created by a large group of stakeholders. Consensus was reached on most issues despite large diversity of stakeholders.

. Whereas, The North Park Planning Committee does not support community planning by initiative;
. Whereas, The NPPC believes the community plan update process for Barrio Logan was transparent and inclusive;
. Whereas, Should propositions B & C fail, the NPPC is concerned about the profound implications for future community plan updates city-wide.
. Therefore the NPPC supports the San Diego City Council's decision to approve the community stakeholder derived community plan update and endorses the passage of Propositions B & C on the June 3, 2014 City of San Diego ballot. Carlson/Gebreselassie 15-0-0 “

May 30, 2014 at 12:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Mayor Filner Answers Our Questions, And Yours

Question for Mayor Filner:

In service to your new policies of transparency and better access to the Mayor's office for all San Diego residents; would you discuss your various staff members in terms of your vision for their various duties and responsibilities? Perhaps a little about them each, who is responsible for what departments, who should a resident call for what kind of service or problem resolution, etc. What changes have you made in how the Mayor's office runs and what changes are ongoing? And where and when will you be available for more "meet the Mayor' events. (And Midday Edition.. would you post a link to some of this info on your website?) Thanks.

February 6, 2013 at 11:46 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

California Legislators Suspend Requirements of Public Meeting Law

Wow, are you kidding me? Can they do actually do this? Really?

July 14, 2012 at 5:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Roundtable: Balboa Park, Bridgepoint, Backcountry Wildlife Killings

If you too are disappointed in our City Council for approving the Plaza de Panama Bypass Bridge project, you can help overturn their decision by supporting SOHO:

Save Our Heritage Organization (SOHO) - donate to SOHO here

Here are some links to help you understand why opponents of this project are so upset:

NY Times Article: "Surprised taxpayers are paying for bonds they did not vote on"

Independent Budget Analyst (IBA) Reports on the Plaza de Panama Parking Structure:

July 2011:

July 2012:

Good Article that explains the Legal issues after the City Council Vote:

July 13, 2012 at 3:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Roundtable: Balboa Park, Bridgepoint, Backcountry Wildlife Killings

Fiscal Considerations regarding the Plaza de Panama Project:

* The Proposed Plaza de Panama Project provides not enough “bang for the buck”.The estimated cost of $45M (and growing) is too much to pay for too little… introducing paid parking into the park for the first time and only 270-odd new parking spaces for all that?

* The core of Balboa Park can be pedestrianized for far less money by simply closing the Cabrillo Bridge to traffic. More on this later.

* The Proposed Plaza de Panama Project removes existing, already paid for infrastructure (550 odd parking spaces and two restrooms) and replaces it with similar but relocated infrastructure for which funds must now be raised, with the burden placed on taxpayers.

* The Proposed new expensive infrastructure will add to an already large structural deficit in maintenance funding for the park. There is no guarantee that the revenue for maintenance will be forthcoming from the paid parking structure, leaving taxpayers on the hook for this as well.

* The Proposed Plaza de Panama Project introduces parking fees to Balboa Park in a fiscally unsustainable way. The Pay-to Park Organ Pavilion parking garage that will create significant impacts to the surrounding no-fee parking lots, and will likely lead to paid parking through the park, impeding equitable access to the “People’s Park” for the average citizen of San Diego, as well as causing a hardship to volunteers and employees in the Park’s institutions. See letter from the San Diego Zoo, indicating that they will exercise their right under their lease to institute paid parking in their lots if Balboa Park introduces paid parking.

* The City’s own Independent Budget Analyst’s report deems it unlikely that the parking structure be able to sustain such an occupancy level while other free parking remains in the park (which is most of the time during the week. The Park’s parking lots only fill up on weekends and special event days). An expensive empty parking garage will increase pressure to make all parking in the park “pay-to-park” in order to fill the garage and pay off its bonds. - link to IBA report

* The Proposed Plaza de Panama Project creates substantial general fund liabilities for City taxpayers to repay the parking garage bonds when (not “if”) the project’s projected parking garage occupancy levels of 77% cannot be sustained. The project requires a $14M bond, for which the taxpayers of the City of San Diego are on the hook. See IBA report.

* There will be a substantial amount of intrusive construction in and around Balboa Park during the 2 year construction phase of this project. This cannot but impact the visitor experience to the park and could lead to a loss of tourist dollars and a reductions in Museum and event attendance.

July 13, 2012 at 1:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Roundtable: Balboa Park, Bridgepoint, Backcountry Wildlife Killings

The Historic Preservation issues with the Plaza de Panama Project:

1) The Plaza de Panama Project does NOT meet Secretary for the Interior Standards for Historic Preservation.

2) The highest Historic Preservation authorities in the Land say this project is so historically destructive it could actually put Balboa Park’s National Historic Landmark District (NHLD) status at risk.

* California’s State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) opposes the Proposed Plaza de Panama Project:
* The National Parks Service opposes the Proposed Plaza de Panama Project:
* San Diego’s own Historic Resources Board opposes the Proposed Plaza de Panama Project:
* The Plaza de Panama Project’s own Environmental Impact Report (EIR) admits it is has significant and unmitigable impacts to Historic Resources:
direct quote from the EIR:

" Impacts a. Centennial Bridge Architectural Character
The Centennial Bridge component of the project would require the demolition of 70 linear feet of the south balustrade of Cabrillo Bridge and the construction of new abutments and a curvilinear concrete bridge over Cabrillo Canyon, located southwest of the California Quadrangle. The work would also require regrading a portion of this canyon.
The new Centennial Bridge would introduce a modern architectural element in a historical setting, thereby, resulting in a significant impact on both Cabrillo Bridge and the California Quadrangle, including a permanent visual impact on an iconic view of the two structures from the West Mesa and from the floor of Cabrillo Canyon. Impacts associated with incompatible architectural style would be significant for this project component. Significance of Impacts a. Centennial Bridge
Impacts associated with neighborhood character/architecture would be significant for this project component because it would introduce elements of modern architecture"

July 13, 2012 at 12:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

How Smart Are Smart Phones?

Beware of being an "early adopter" :

Blackberry smartphone users might like to know that Blackberry has not yet released the necessary software update to allow Blackberries to sync with MSOffice 2010. And likely won't for at least another month. So don't upgrade to the new MSOffice 2010 yet if you are a Blackberry user.

And when you email an enquiry about the problem to "" (the email address your phone provider will give you) all you get is this response: "Thank you for contacting BlackBerry Technical Support. The email you submitted has NOT been delivered" and a thoroughly irking suggestion you try their useless website and forums. I must confess it was the complete lack of information, customer service and support that sent me ballistic, more than the delay, although the delay is irritating, and one more reason RIM is starting to lose market share. Microsoft was perfectly helpful when I eventually called them, by the way, and gave me far more useful info than Blackberry did.

July 28, 2010 at 11:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Election: SD City and Chula Vista

Prop D:

Almost every community activist I know and many community Groups have come out against this proposition.

This is not a referendum on Mayor Sanders (no doubt a decent man with a difficult job to do) but on the Strong Mayor System as it is current written in this proposition. It gives much greater power to Mayor's office than ever before (even more than currently during this trial period) without demanding any transparency or common access. As Donna Frye says (and doesn't she have a habit of being proven right in the most inconvenient ways- ie the pension debacle) it is a lot more convenient to buy the one powerful veto than to buy 8 city Council votes.

Access is a thorny issue for anyone involved in local community planning issues. There is none. The Mayors office operates in splendid and in-accessibly isolation, seeming to consult only the Mayor-appointed TAC and the lobbyist and developers invited to the 11th floor.

A prime example is Thursday's "Neighborhood Innovation Forum" to which not a single local planning group member or neighborhood activist (well, that I can find so far.. go ahead find the exception that proves the rule) was invited. This despite the fact the the community planning groups are supposed to be the advisory panel for the Community Plan Updates ongoing in the inner city neighborhoods. See the press release below.

Neighborhood innovation forum convened to stimulate revitalization
By JENNA LONG, The Daily Transcript
Thursday, June 3, 2010

Several innovative national experts on community development shared their
collective successes and best practices in an effort to galvanize San Diego
civic, business, government and philanthropic leader support for a
coordinated neighborhoods revitalization strategy.

The experts shared their experiences at the first-event Neighborhood
Innovation Forum, co-sponsored by San Diego-based Local Initiatives Support
Corp. (LISC) and city of San Diego. Mayor Jerry Sanders kicked off the day's
forum with comments on the city's role as a driving force for neighborhood

"Today was about sharing real-world examples of how other cities are going
beyond focusing on just bricks and mortar to stimulate and coordinate
community development and create economically resilient neighborhoods,
particularly in low-income areas," said Joe Horiye, executive director of
LISC San Diego.

June 5, 2010 at 10:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Election: SD City and Chula Vista

District 6: Donna Frye's Chief of Staff is Steve Hadley (you didn't mention his name in the discussion) and he is a serious contender in this race, with lots of grass roots support

June 5, 2010 at 9:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal )