City Council makes parking optional for some San Diego businesses

Speaker 1: (00:00)

Some San Diego businesses won't have to provide parking anymore. So it'll be

Speaker 2: (00:05)

The choice of each individual business to decide how to handle it.

Speaker 1: (00:09)

I'm Maureen Cavenaugh with Jade Heinemann. This is KPBS midday edition. The CDC moves away from the goal of herd immunity against COVID.

Speaker 3: (00:29)

Unity is predicated on the idea that enough people are safe, that we can protect people who are vulnerable. The problem is the Delta variant is so infectious that it's very easy for it to kind of slip through that wall of protective adults.

Speaker 1: (00:42)

And I knew source documentary follows a veteran's journey after an experimental brain treatment and the czar of war Eddie Mueller of TCM talks about some dark films for this [inaudible] that's ahead. On mid day edition,

Speaker 1: (01:01)

The days of easily finding parking spaces outside your local restaurant or retail store may be coming to an end in San Diego. On Tuesday, the city council approved a measure that would free some businesses from the requirement of providing parking to customers. Those businesses could start using their parking lots as dining areas or extra retail space. The unanimous city council vote is intended to increase the use of mass transit decrease, driving, and bring the city in line with its climate action emission goals. But the decision may be out of step with many residents. A group of neighborhood leaders voted overwhelmingly against the proposal several months ago. Joining me is San Diego union Tribune reporter David Garrick. Welcome back,

Speaker 2: (01:47)

David. Hey, thanks

Speaker 1: (01:48)

For having me under this new measure. What would make a business exempt from providing parking? Well,

Speaker 2: (01:55)

There's two ways that the business is within a half a mile of a transit hub, which is defined as a trolley line or a bus rapid transit station or two high-frequency bus routes. They would be exempt in that scenario. Also, if they're near a, if they're in a neighborhood commercial zone, which is a fancy city zoning term for like a small Plaza that serves only sort of the adjacent, uh, residential area, as opposed to like a regional mall, like fashion balance,

Speaker 1: (02:23)

And this would apply to both new construction and existing businesses.

Speaker 2: (02:27)

Yeah. And that's the interesting rub because typically when Citi does a policy like this, it will only apply to new things, but this is also retroactive. So if you're a business now and you've been operating for 30 years, you theoretically could get rid of all your parking when this takes effect. And just

Speaker 1: (02:41)

To be clear, a transit hub could be a bus stop.

Speaker 2: (02:44)

It's either a rapid bus. That's a sort of a fancy term for buses that are special buses with a special lane, or if there are two bus routes nearby, that would count.

Speaker 1: (02:54)

Okay. Can the businesses near transit and dense residential areas still to provide parking for their customers?

Speaker 2: (03:02)

Yes. And that's a key thing. Supporters stress and the chamber of commerce endorsed this because they say it shouldn't be looked at as telling businesses that get rid of their parking. It should be looked at as giving businesses the discretion to figure out how much parking they need and then decide whether maybe they have too much right now. And maybe they would be better served by having a little bit less. So it'll be the choice of each individual business to decide how to handle it.

Speaker 1: (03:26)

And what kinds of businesses will still be required to provide parking?

Speaker 2: (03:30)

There isn't really any particular type it's based on geography, like where you are, if you're in any of these zones. You're okay. But I mean, I think the idea is that if you're a business near transit, you're probably going to consider it. And if you're a business that's really far from transit and you know, everyone has to get to your business by car, it seems highly unlikely. You would eliminate your parking spot.

Speaker 1: (03:50)

Now the vote on the city council was unanimous, but some city council members did voice concerns. What did they have to say?

Speaker 2: (03:56)

Yeah. Um, and they were two separate sets of concerns. Uh, council, president, Jennifer Campbell mentioned that, you know, older people and San Diego is getting older. As the boomer generation gets older, uh, older people and handicapped people. They really, you know, can't get out of their cars as easily. They can't take transit or bike or walk as easily it's possible, but it's not very easy. Uh, and then Marnie Von Wilpert who represents a Scripps ranch pointed out that a lot of San Diego, residential, suburban areas like Scripps ranch and Tierra Santa, you know, it's just, they're not really transit friendly areas. They're really car reliant areas. And it would take a lot for them to transform themselves into transit oriented areas.

Speaker 1: (04:33)

So how are those concerns are going to be addressed? You know what

Speaker 2: (04:36)

I think that they, they basically are, except for that Barney got the mayor's office to agree with her that the city's definition of what a transit hub is. They actually call it a transit priority area. But the definition of what a transit hub is, Marty wants to discuss the definition, but also how it's applied. She was concerned in particular that if a large housing project, if a small sliver of it is near the trolley, but the huge rest of it is not, it still counts as in a transit hub. And she says, she doesn't think that's a good call. So she wants to discuss with the mayor, maybe adjusting that policy or refining it in some ways,

Speaker 1: (05:09)

In what areas of the city will, the elimination of business parking likely have the most impact.

Speaker 2: (05:15)

It will happen in areas where the businesses have looked at it and realize a lot of their customers get there by walking or by transit or by bike. Um, so I think that's where it'll happen at the most. Um, and I guess, I think it's Scripps ranch, Rancho, where I'll go, you won't see hardly any businesses take advantage of this because they need parking. Their customers all rely on it and they don't want to have people circling around the block for an hour, looking for a spot where they can come in and shop at the business.

Speaker 1: (05:40)

What do supporters say taking away the parking requirement for some businesses will accomplish?

Speaker 2: (05:45)

Well, it says can accomplish a lot. They say it's going to help businesses, but their number one goal is talk about climate change and how San Diego wants to reduce its greenhouse gases by 15 people out of cars onto biking and walking and transit. And they say, this is a way to sort of accelerate that process, sort of force people a little bit, kind of nudge them in the direction of saying, Hey, if you really want to go shop, you're going to have to switch to transit or bike or walking because there's a lot of businesses you just can't park at anymore.

Speaker 1: (06:13)

And you mentioned in your reporting that an overwhelming majority of neighborhood leaders voted against eliminating the parking requirement when it was proposed last spring. So could this be in a sense of sort of tone deaf vote by the council?

Speaker 2: (06:27)

I mean, I, I guess you could characterize it that way. I think they've been taking no tone deaf votes in that regard for a while now, because they've been focused on this idea since mayor Faulkner was an office on putting dense housing along trolley lines. And pretty much almost every one of those housing projects has been not popular with the neighbors and nearby residents, but the city council has approved it anyway because they have this idea, this agenda, this, I guess, vision of a city where there's dense developments along existing transit routes and trolley lines, because that's where it makes sense to add new housing where people can get to places without adding to congestion and sprawl and those problems. So, I mean, I think all those decisions could be characterized as similarly tone deaf to this one. But I don't know if it is tone deaf. I think it's just a different perspective. I think a lot of San Diego residents lived here a long time. They live in a suburban area and they're not really comfortable with the idea of transit, but I think if you look at the climate change data, they may need to become more comfortable.

Speaker 1: (07:24)

And when does this new measure go into effect

Speaker 2: (07:27)

January 1st in, in most places, but in the cities coastal zone, which is generally west of interstate five, it's not quite like that, but generally, um, it has to get approved by the coastal commission. And there is some doubt that the coastal commission will approve it exactly as it is because the coastal commission generally is really focused on allowing people access to the beach. And so if you're gonna eliminate parking near the beach, they might have a problem with it. Some heartburn, I can't be sure, but I know in the past that they've raised issues about such things,

Speaker 1: (07:55)

Okay, then we'll have to keep an eye on it. I want to thank you. San Diego union Tribune, reporter David Garrick. Thanks so much.

Speaker 2: (08:01)

Thanks for having me.

Speaker 4: (08:12)

When the pandemic began leading health officials hoped herd immunity would provide a clear path back to normality. The idea goes that when a large portion of the population becomes immune to a disease, it becomes harder to spread. But what happens when a large portion of the population refuses to get immunized just recently, the CDC has moved away from messaging that touts herd immunity as a national goal for the American public signaling, a distinct shift in the fight against COVID-19 joining me now to discuss the nation's dwindling prospects for her to immunity is Rebecca fielding Miller and epidemiologist and UC San Diego professor Dr. Fielding Miller. Welcome back to the program. Hi, thanks

Speaker 3: (08:54)

For having me. Can you give us a

Speaker 4: (08:55)

Quick recap on the concept of herd immunity and why it was such a strong goal in the fight against COVID-19?

Speaker 3: (09:02)

I think we've all learned a lot of new words in the last couple of years in terms of our public health jargon toolkit. So herd immunity is a really specific idea and what it means is enough people are vaccinated or not vulnerable to infection that when a virus is going around, we can sort of form a protective law around people who aren't able to be vaccinated or who are extra susceptible. So imagine 98 people in a room and they're all vaccinated and they're all surrounding a two year old who can't get vaccinated. The virus can't break through to the vulnerable person. So we, as a, as a herd, as a community are protecting people. And I think that's kind of gotten confused with the idea of eradication or elimination or, or control

Speaker 4: (09:46)

When health officials began to discuss herd immunity as a way of fighting COVID. Did it always seem like a realistic prospect in the United States?

Speaker 3: (09:55)

I think that it's a hard number to calculate what percentage of people need to get vaccinated. And it depends on a lot of things. It depends on how easy it is to transmit the virus. It depends on how susceptible people are to getting the virus. And I think that in, uh, in their early days, we really confuse the idea of herd immunity. Um, like just to say enough of us are vaccinated who can get vaccinated to protect those who can't. We really confuse that with the idea of, of elimination or eradication. So COVID was never going to be eliminated through vaccination. That was never the goal, but the goal was enough. People can get vaccinated to protect people who are vulnerable. And I think with the Delta variant really taking off the increase in how easy it is to transmit has really made that number even harder to achieve.

Speaker 4: (10:48)

We're seeing the CDC move away from herd immunity as a tangible goal. Why is that?

Speaker 3: (10:53)

I think that has a lot to do with the Delta variant and the fact that again, herd immunity is predicated on the idea that enough people are safe, that we can protect people who are vulnerable. So babies kids under five, who can't get vaccinated in an ideal world, we could vaccinate enough people that little kids could go to T-ball or a gymnastics and not worry about it because so many people are vaccinated that the virus isn't circulating enough to get to them. The problem is the Delta Varian is so infectious. That it's really that it's very easy for it to kind of slip through that wall of protective adults and kids over the age of five. And we're seeing that there's just not a willingness, um, nationwide so far among people who are eligible to get vaccinated, to protect those who can't

Speaker 4: (11:39)

Transmission is a key aspect of this. Why haven't any available vaccines been able to reliably block transmission of COVID-19?

Speaker 3: (11:48)

What did vaccines are really, really good at doing is preventing kind of a systemic, like a whole body infection. So when we see these kind of breakthrough infections, what that typically is is somebody has an infection that's like living in their nose or their respiratory track. So the virus can still replicate a little bit before the vaccine can knock it out. And in that short window of time, you can still potentially breathe out enough virus to get somebody else sick, but you're sick for a shorter amount of time, which is really important because it means you have less time to breathe out that virus and you yourself are going to be healthier. And hopefully you'd be breathing on somebody who also would be sick for a shorter amount of time, if they did get sick and it would be breathing out that virus less well. So they do, even when there are breakthrough infections, they do severely limit how bad the spread is from a vaccinated person.

Speaker 4: (12:41)

Uh, you mentioned earlier how the Delta Varian plays into this, but why is COVID-19 a particularly hard virus to achieve herd immunity for? Is it mainly due to the Delta variant or are other factors at play here?

Speaker 3: (12:55)

There are a lot of non-vaccine related reasons why it's been really hard to reach that number. For example, it's become really clear that COVID is, is an occupational disease. Um, if you look at data out of, for example, UC San Francisco that found that line cooks, um, had some of the highest rates of illness and death out of any occupation. We know that professions where you can't work from home, where you're constantly in contact with the public. Those folks are really, really high risk. And because we didn't have employment protections in place for enough people, the virus was really allowed to continue transmitting until, um, a variant came along. That was so transmissible that it made herd immunity even harder to get to, and that could continue to happen. Delta doesn't necessarily need to be the end, all be all of variants. Another one could come along that is even better at evading our vaccine. So the number of people vaccinated matters, but so does protecting people who are at the highest risk, um, socially of getting the virus,

Speaker 4: (13:53)

Given this new messaging from the CDC, what new ways can we mark progress against the virus?

Speaker 3: (13:59)

I think one thing that we can certainly keep an eye on is the, um, the case rate. Um, so here in San Diego, our case rate has been plaid towing a little bit, and we can see there's a really big difference between, um, the rates of illness for people who are vaccinated and not vaccinated. And I think it's really important and the county has done a really good job of using, um, some, some health equity and markers. So people who are the most vulnerable to getting sick people who, you know, live in crowded housing conditions, people who have these frontline jobs, if we see that numbers are consistently pretty low for those communities, that's a sign that we're all doing a really good job because it's, it's an airborne infectious disease and everybody's not safe. Like you're not safe until everybody is.

Speaker 4: (14:47)

So now, since we're moving away from herd immunity, what are the long-term strategies now of limiting the spread of COVID or even just treating COVID?

Speaker 3: (14:55)

Yeah. So the, the strategies really remain the same, um, that we've been talking about this whole time, um, a mask that fits you well, um, and that you're willing to wear, um, that your kid is willing to wear, um, is always going to be a really helpful MIS uh, risk mitigation strategy. I wear kn 90 fives. My daughter wears tiny child K in 95, um, spending as much time outdoors and fresh air as you can. And making sure that we have bigger social structures in place to make that easy for people, making sure that everybody who wants to get vaccinated has the opportunity. And, um, you know, the south county, um, has done a really phenomenal job in ensuring equitable vaccine access, um, making sure that people have access to paid sick leave so that if they need to stay home, they can, and they don't spread it. These are all what we call sort of like non-pharmaceutical or policy-level interventions. And they're also incredibly important, just as much as these new pills that are coming out, that's really exciting or vaccines are boosters.

Speaker 4: (16:00)

I've been speaking with Dr. Rebecca fielding Miller and epidemiologist and UC San Diego professor Dr. Fielding Miller. Thank you so much for joining us.

Speaker 3: (16:08)

Yeah. Thank you.

Speaker 5: (16:11)

[inaudible]

Speaker 1: (16:26)

This is KPBS mid day edition. I'm Maureen Kavanaugh with Jade Heinemann racially restrictive covenants ones prohibited black, Latino, Asian, and Jewish families from living in certain neighborhoods across San Diego county, KPBS race and equity reporter. Christina Kim tells us how they shape the region's housing in this special three part series

Speaker 6: (16:49)

Ever since 2014, when Michael du bought his home in San Diego is El Sorito neighborhood. He's been a fixture at his blocks parties and happy hours, but every now and then something happens that reminds him that as a black man, he didn't always belong like the time and older neighbor mistook him as a gardener.

Speaker 7: (17:08)

So I'm talking and I was going to refill a drink and an older woman. I wish I knew who she was. Uh, you know, it's just kind of caught me off guard. And she says, so are you one of the gardeners? And I was like, why would a gardener be at a happy hour

Speaker 6: (17:21)

Years later when reading over the 1950 deed of his ranch style home, do figure it out. Why his older neighbor might've said such a thing. The deed included a racially restrictive covenant

Speaker 7: (17:33)

That neither said lots nor any portion thereof shall ever be lived upon or occupied by any person other than of the Caucasian race provided. However, that if persons not of the Caucasian race be kept there in by a Caucasian, strictly in the capacity of, or employees actually engaged in the services of each occupant or in the care of said, premises for said, occupant Gardner

Speaker 6: (18:00)

For years hired help was all he could have been in his home. Racially restrictive covenants were legal documents attached to deeds, subdivisions, and entire developments. They took off at the turn of the 20th century

Speaker 8: (18:13)

As early as 1927, they were on, you know, three quarters of the new homes in America and about half log homes. So they spread very quickly and became a dominant way of limiting, who

Speaker 6: (18:26)

That's Jean Slater, an affordable housing specialist and author of freedom to discriminate. He says real estate brokers and developers created and enforced racially restrictive housing covenants across the nation.

Speaker 8: (18:38)

They created a whole system, including all the other brokers in the city and the homeowners association, neighborhood associations, public officials who work together to make certain a city or a neighborhood remain.

Speaker 6: (18:52)

San Diego was at the forefront of this national trend, a sample of San Diego city deeds from 1910 to 1950, found that every single one at a racial restriction advertisements for San Diego properties from the earliest 20th century, all allude to these racial restrictions. One from 1910 for lots and inspiration Heights, which is now part of mission Hills says the area has the necessary restrictions and is planned and protected for particular people. In other words, white and affluent, black, Asian, Latino, and Jewish San Diegans were all bought, locked out of the city signature neighborhoods like LA Jolla, north park and mission valley. And instead purposely segregated into Southeast neighborhoods in 1948, the Supreme court struck down the legality of racially restrictive covenants. But as we see with do's home, they continued into the fifties as the patterns of racial segregation that they in concert with redlining steering and zoning created patterns that continue to shape San Diego today. It's not hard to see says Denise Mathis, president of the California association of real estate brokers,

Speaker 9: (20:03)

Whether you're African-American Hispanic or white, we still use the interstate eight as the dividing mark. Okay. So south of the eight, you expect one thing in north of the eight. You expect something else.

Speaker 6: (20:19)

San Diego is more segregated today than it was 30 years ago. According to a recent UC Berkeley study, and much of the segregation is still marked by interstate eight, with more wealthy, wider communities in the north. As a black woman from San Diego Mathis, his own grandfather was impacted by housing discrimination that continued long after racially restrictive covenants became illegal.

Speaker 9: (20:43)

I remember him telling us that he looked at a house right outside of mission valley on top of the hill, and he was told he could not purchase there. So what would that home in mission valley be worth that I could have inherited compared to the home that they stabbed him to buy in Oak park? Where would my wealth being

Speaker 6: (21:09)

Today? Home ownership plays a bigger role in creating wealth for black families and for white families, the gaps continue to persist. Only 30% of black San Diegans own their homes compared to 61% of white people in San Diego. According to a 2018 Redfin study

Speaker 7: (21:27)

Needs to be more evolution of thought as to the impacts of some of the rules and regulations of the past. That kind of determined where your socioeconomic position is today.

Speaker 6: (21:36)

It's why Michael do wants more people to know about racially restrictive covenants. Like the one in his home, the home, his grandfathers, both veterans couldn't have bought the overt housing discrimination they faced may have been illegal for decades, but we're still a long way from understanding, let alone undoing the generational harm. These practices have caused.

Speaker 1: (21:59)

Joining me is KPBS race and equity reporter, Christina cam, Christina. Welcome.

Speaker 6: (22:04)

Hey Maureen,

Speaker 1: (22:06)

What prompted you to look into the history of these restrictive covenants?

Speaker 6: (22:10)

This is a topic that's actually near and dear to my heart. When my family left San Diego and moved to the bay area. I remember my dad, who's Korean looking at the deed of our home in Moraga and actually finding in that deed that it said something like no Orientals were allowed to live there. And it just stuck with me. I must have been in third grade and I always wanted to know more. So when the opportunity came up to start digging into what this meant for San Diego's history, I just knew that as a race and equity reporter, this was such a great way to understand just how race is embedded in the region's housing stock.

Speaker 1: (22:46)

Yeah, let's talk about that. Why did this kind of racial restriction become so popular in real estate? I mean, did real estate agents say it had something to do with property values, the

Speaker 6: (22:58)

Racial restriction and it within covenants really started to take off because after 1917, there was a us Supreme court decision, which actually made government instituted racial zoning illegals, because that was made illegal. This left a huge loophole for individual homeowners, property developers and real estate agents to do it through other means. And so here is where we really start to see racially restrictive covenants, which are kind of more privatized take off. And to your point, so it sort of snowballs from there. And according to Jean Slater, who released a book this year called freedom to discriminate, and he looked really into the history of racial covenants, as well as real estate agents. He says, realtors really developed this idea that racially mixed neighborhoods led to lower property values to your point. So what he found is that there was no real studies that prove that that, that proved that racially mixed neighborhoods actually led to lower property values, but it became something of a self fulfilling prophecy. And then it became encoded in practices like redlining. And to this day, you often hear, oh, what will happen to the property values? And it's really rooted in this myth and this ideology that was created by real estate agents, right? As they were beginning to privatize and professionalize in the turn of the century. Now

Speaker 1: (24:13)

From your report, it sounds as if there were some but not many legal actions taken to enforce the covenants here in San Diego. So how was the segregation actually maintained?

Speaker 6: (24:26)

So racially restrictive covenants were only as strong as the neighbors and the will of the neighbors to enforce them. So while there is evidence of legal action, there were other ways that segregation was kind of implemented and maintained. For instance, there's a practice called racial steering in which real estate agents might steer people from one neighborhood instead of another. And you hear that in my piece, I speak to a realtor named Denise who says her own grandfather was, you know, steered away from certain neighborhoods because he was a black man. And the second part is the way that neighborhoods were just welcoming or not welcoming to people of color, our reporting partners at I knew source found evidence of people of color, actually going door to door before buying a home in order to just introduce themselves to their neighbors, to make sure that they weren't going to be pushed out after the fact. Um, and so in addition to that, we know there's, you know, there was, there were some, you know, legal ways in which this was brought up what we also know that violence happened. I didn't find any evidence of that here in San Diego, but there are many accounts in Los Angeles, for instance, with black GIS coming home from world war II and moving into, you know, wider middle-class areas. And they were met with burning crosses and, you know, very threatening neighbors who just didn't want them to live there.

Speaker 1: (25:43)

So black, Latino, Asian, and Jewish families not only had to contend with restrictive covenants in neighborhoods, but even if a seller would defy the covenant redlining meant they probably wouldn't be able to get alone. Isn't that right?

Speaker 6: (25:56)

That's right. Racially restrictive covenants were just one tool in a larger toolkit of racially discriminatory practices. Redlining used a lot of the same ideology that was embedded in racially restrictive covenants, for instance, federal money wouldn't flow to new developments and unless they had such restrictions. And then the maps that, you know, we all are so familiar with carved up our cities into areas of risk based if they were racially mixed, or if they predominantly black, Latino, Asian, or immigrant communities live there.

Speaker 1: (26:26)

Now in the past, you report that when neighborhoods began to age like Valencia park and Logan Heights, then people of color were allowed to move in, but now kind of the reverse is happening as black and brown residents sometimes find themselves priced out of their neighborhoods. So I'm wondering are soaring home prices becoming a sort of new racially restrictive covenant? I'm not sure.

Speaker 6: (26:49)

Sure. If soaring home prices are the new racially restrictive covenants, because there's no paper trail of follow and this isn't about legally enforcing anything but soaring prices on top of an already significant racial wealth gap are definitely going to mean that only the wealthy will have opportunities to buy and create more generational wealth here. And I know that's kind of causing a little bit of fear and anxiety for folks. I was just speaking to a local business owner yesterday in skyline, who says that people are worried that these kinds of new sewers and new apartments really aren't being built for them. They're they're not being built for the largely black, Latino and Filipino community that already lives there. And so there's a fear of displacement. And to your point, seeing a lot of segregation and changes in our housing that are again rooted in race,

Speaker 1: (27:36)

We'll hear part two of your report on covenants tomorrow. So can you give us a preview?

Speaker 6: (27:41)

Yeah. So stay tuned tomorrow. We're going to be taking a closer look at Rancho Santa Fe's, protective covenant. Some residents there want to stop referring to the area as the covenant and have a real reckoning with Rancho Santa Fe's exclusive and discriminatory past.

Speaker 1: (27:56)

Right then I've been speaking with KPBS race and equity reporter, Christina Kim, Christina. Thank you very much.

Speaker 6: (28:03)

Thank you.

Speaker 4: (28:11)

A new documentary film tells the story of a former Navy seal. John Surmont who turns to an experimental brain treatment after suffering a traumatic brain injury only to face devastating consequences. The film rewired is based on original investigative reporting by new source who produced the film. Here's a clip from the film's trailer

Speaker 10: (28:34)

When my ex-wife would interact. She did say there's a noticeable difference between the John that left, went to Afghanistan and the John that's back. I think I was really irritable. I didn't sleep well. That's kind of how it began. We've been thinking about you thinking about how to help you, and we've come to find out about this experimental brain treatment. That's where it all started to unravel

Speaker 4: (29:05)

Rewired is premiering this Sunday at the USS midway museum at six 30 here to tell us more about the film and the extraordinary story it tells is investigative data reporter for I new source, Jill Castillano Joe. Welcome. Thanks for having me. The film rewired is based on a wide ranging investigation. I knew source did last year. What made you decide to turn this into a film?

Speaker 11: (29:29)

Yeah, I was just reflecting on this with, uh, my colleagues, Zoe Myers, who's our newsroom, photographer and videographer. She remembers sitting in on a meeting hearing about this Navy seal. John's when my other colleague, Brad and I were working on this investigation and thinking, wow, that's a compelling story. I really want to photograph or feel him. And over time, as we all got to know, John Surmont, it became clear that he was open and he wanted to share intimate details. And he was very vulnerable in the ways that we put it to me is whenever someone is willing to go there with you, you should seize it. So she wanted to tell his story through a film and make it available for people in that way. So how,

Speaker 4: (30:13)

How did you first come across John Surmont and learn about his story?

Speaker 11: (30:17)

Yeah, it's so long ago now. Uh, I remember we were looking into Dr. Kevin Murphy, who had a important position at UC San Diego at the time. And someone said, you should look into his research and what he's doing with, uh, brain stimulation treatments. So we were asking around and somebody said, you should talk to John Surmont. He got treated by Dr. Murphy and something went horribly wrong. And at the time John was already recording a podcast about what had happened to him. He was pretty open. So he was willing to put himself out there.

Speaker 4: (30:51)

And the film Chronicles John's story, after being treated for his traumatic brain injury, with a new type of treatment called TMS or transcranial magnetic stimulation, what is TMS and how did John come to be treated with it?

Speaker 11: (31:06)

Yeah, it's such a mouthful. Um, so it, it basically uses electromagnetism to change the brains neural networks. Um, it's a little bit hard to explain and people don't even fully understand how it works, but it works very well and is really well tolerated. Um, that FDA has actually approved TMS machines to treat depression and migraines and OCD. As for John, um, he had post-traumatic stress symptoms when he came back from the military and then he had this terrible collision. He was hit by a truck. He suffered this traumatic brain injury that was exacerbating his symptoms and he became depressed. So finally, someone he knew at the Navy seal foundation said, you should check out this treatment. I think it could really help you.

Speaker 4: (31:52)

The doctor who treated John, Dr. Kevin Murphy uses what you refer to as a unique type of TMS treatment with his patients. Uh, how does his version of TMS treatment differ from more traditional TMS treatment?

Speaker 11: (32:05)

But Dr. Kevin Murphy is doing, is he's looking at the person measuring the patient's heart rate and brainwaves, and then he's employing what he calls this proprietary software to analyze that data and develop a treatment plan. So he's essentially changing all the knobs and settings on the machine based on what he's seeing in your brain and in your heart. That's not how standard TMS works. It doesn't measure your brainwaves or anything like that. Uh, just depending on the condition being treated, it's going to be applied to the same location of your brain. It's going to be pretty limited in what it's doing now, the standard TMS we know it's really well tolerated and works really well. We don't really have the research on the kind of thing that Dr. Murphy is doing. We don't really know how well it works is

Speaker 4: (32:52)

The treatment John received being used widely

Speaker 11: (32:54)

Today. Well, standard TMS is certainly used widely around the country. I was actually in a doctor's office recently and saw a sign saying, ask your doctor about TMS, but these personalized treatments, they're not as common. Um, they're still out there though. So if you Google around you, you may come across one of them. And as for Dr. Murphy, he's, he's still practicing in San Diego and in other states. So you can access those treatments

Speaker 4: (33:21)

Once Dr. Kevin Murphy investigated for his treatment of John. And is he still treating others with this unique TMS treatment? Yes, he is.

Speaker 11: (33:29)

It's still treating other people in his private practice, but he's no longer employed by UC San Diego. In fact, late last year, uh, UC San Diego finished and its own internal investigation into Dr. Murphy and uncovered that he had been misspending a $10 million research fund. So they, uh, they're no longer working with him and they actually decided to Sue him for fraud. Now, Dr. Murphy is also counter suing the university for wrongful termination, and that's all playing out in court.

Speaker 4: (34:02)

What's the experience like translating your in-depth reporting into a documentary film?

Speaker 11: (34:08)

Yeah, I was discussing this with my colleague, Zoe, who made the film and she said the important thing is not to get hung up on capturing every single detail of the investigation. You know, there's so much of that in the written project that we produced, but in a video that's a different medium where you can really connect to somebody on a personal level and see them and hear them and feel what they're feeling. And that's what this is really about.

Speaker 4: (34:33)

And what are you most hoping viewers of the film take away after seeing it?

Speaker 11: (34:37)

Well, one thing is we hope that it sheds light on the wrongdoing by the stocked, or, but beyond that, this is an opportunity to understand someone beyond the cliches and the stereotypes. You know, John is a former Navy seal, and I think we've got all of these expectations about what it means to be a Navy seal, someone who's heroic or romantic or whatever. Um, but this shows a different side of what it means to be a Navy seal. It may contradict what you think a Navy seal is. Um, and him sharing his experiences being so open, talking about stigmatized topics like his own mental health issues. We hope that can help others.

Speaker 4: (35:18)

I've been speaking with investigative data reporter for, I knew source Jill. Castillano about I new sources, new documentary film rewired. The film will have its premiere this Sunday, November 21st at 6:00 PM at the USS midway museum. And it's free of charge. It will also be live streamed on I new.org. Jill, thank you so much for joining us. Of course, You're listening to KPBS mid-day edition. I'm Jade Hindman with Maureen Cavenaugh, it's new, our Vember and the latest edition of the cinema junkie podcast hosts. Beth Armando Mondo speaks with Eddie Mueller host of TMCs, new our alley and the founder and president of the film, new our foundation. Here's an X-er.

Speaker 12: (36:09)

Eddie is known as the czar of noir. So to start a discussion, I asked him to define war and what he thinks of film needs to have to be classified as one.

Speaker 13: (36:21)

Well, this is the $64 million question adjusted for inflation. They are crime movies from the mid 20th century by and large. That's what they are, but they're very unique because they have a vision and a style and a language that is indicative of that era. And they came out of an organic artistic movement that existed for no reason other than the artists wanted to do it. There was no real economic reason for it. The films weren't like colossal moneymakers. I mean, if you go back and look, there's no noir film, that was like the most popular film of the year in 1946 or 47, there were hits like the postman always rings twice and Gilda.

Speaker 14: (37:06)

And you hear about me, Gabe, if I'd been a ranch, they would have named me the buy, nothing.

Speaker 4: (37:11)

There never was a woman.

Speaker 13: (37:13)

It was a movement. They made money. They were made cheaply relatively, but they have stood the test of time. So, so by and large, we're talking about crime movies, but obviously we'll go beyond that and discuss, you know, why they were unique and not like crime movies of an earlier era or a later era necessarily. But for me, Beth, the key to what made noir so unique and special and a bit subversive in Hollywood of that era was that it was the first time that the people who were doing the wrong thing were the protagonists of the films, right in double indemnity is Fred MacMurray and Barbara Stanwyck

Speaker 15: (37:57)

What if they do hang me, they're not going to hang up. Maybe it's better than going on this way. They're not going to hang in because you got to do it.

Speaker 13: (38:04)

I'm going to help you to me looking at it from a writer's perspective. That's what really makes something new are a crime movie in which the central character is a police officer trying to run a crook to ground. And you spend most of the movie with that law enforcement officer. Who's trying to do the right thing. That's not a film noir, right? The F the film noir is where that officer gets tempted into becoming a criminal, just like the guy he's pursuing. And it's usually for a woman and a, and then everything goes to hell. And it all turns out badly that, that then you're talking film. Why do you make,

Speaker 16: (38:45)

Can you do it? You know, you're going to talk, I'm going to make it. I always make you talk. What are you doing?

Speaker 12: (38:58)

So what originally got you hooked on Duar. And how far back does that go for you?

Speaker 13: (39:03)

It goes back to when I used to cut school and watch dialing for dollars on KTV UTV in Oakland, California. Hello, everyone. And welcome to our dialing for dollars movie. I joke about this a lot, but it's absolutely true. There was no video tape or anything like that when I first started watching these movies. So you had to be very diligent and I would buy the TV guide every week, this weekend TV guide, and then I'd go through and I'd highlight all the movies that had night city street or big in the title. I don't know how big fit, but everything was like the big combo, the big steel, the big knife, the big night that, you know, the big carnival

Speaker 12: (39:46)

Didn't take me out for a big evening. Huh?

Speaker 17: (39:48)

I don't know what wash that platinum outta your hair.

Speaker 13: (39:52)

Those all turned out to be pretty Norrish. So that was it. I was just like this nocturnal beast, you know, that I loved movies set at night in the big city. And that was just my thing.

Speaker 12: (40:07)

Well, I think for me, the thing that always appealed to me about Anwaar is how contemporary they still feel. And part of that to me is that they were willing to look at the dark side of things and the moral ambiguity, and not try to be tapping into the particular mores of that time, because when you're promoting something that's popular in the 1930s as a political or social point of view, it tends to get dated. But if you're looking at the darker side of people who are making bad choices and going against the status quo or the, you know, whatever's considered right or moral, you know,

Speaker 18: (40:46)

I can't tell you his name. It ain't ethical. Yeah, sure. You and me both were up to yes. And think

Speaker 12: (40:53)

Those films really tend to stay fresh and contemporary. And that's one of the things I really love about Nore.

Speaker 13: (41:00)

Well, in many ways, that film nor our movement is where America, at least in terms of popular entertainment, it's where America sort of lost its innocence. Uh, we had won the war. So we w we knew we were the good guys, but then we started exploring what really happened here that caused the great depression and what, you know, and, and now that America had come out on the winning side, artists were liberated to kind of question things at home that they couldn't do during the depression, or during world war two, because you, weren't doing your part to, you know, boost morale and all that. So it was very timely in that regard. And, and yeah, I completely agree with you that the film more than a lot of other types of movies made in Hollywood noir has sort of retained its bite. Although we should discuss an, uh, very odd aspect of all of this is, as you pointed out, these were contemporary films and the time they were made, right. We look at them now in, sometimes people can get a little confused thinking. They're watching a period piece. They have to remember that these were not period pieces when they were made, they were the contemporary, thrillers and crime movies of their day. You know, the, the way we look at something today is indicative of our time. That's what these films were for, for their era. And it's just important to remember that. And you can see all the factors that kind of lead into making, you know, why noir happened when it did.

Speaker 12: (42:43)

And you wrote a book Anwar back in, it was first published in 1998 called dark city. And I love, I can't remember if this is the first line in it, in the introduction or in the beginning of the book, but you say film NARS were distressed flares launched into America's movie screens by artists working the night shift at the dream factory. And that seems to sum it up fairly well,

Speaker 13: (43:08)

Thank you. But, but that is, that's kinda what it was. You know, I, I always think of it as the flip side of the Hollywood myth. You know, everybody was familiar with Hollywood movies at that time, you know, trying to sell reassurance and, and people sometimes found them corny because everything had to turn out happily ever after in the end and, you know, send them home happy. And noir did just the opposite. It send them home with a lot of doubt and axed and fear that things are not going to turn out well. And that maybe the system doesn't work quite as well as you think it does. And that's what these artists were doing. And to me, it's endlessly fascinating, because like I said, at the top, nobody was asking them to do this. It just emerged organically and all the different crafts and artists got involved. I mean, from the writers to the directors, to the cinematographers, to the art directors and especially the actors

Speaker 4: (44:18)

That was Eddie Mueller, host of TMCs at new our alley and the founder and president of the film, new our foundation speaking with cinema junkie podcast, host Beth Armando to hear the full new RV Vember podcast, go to.org/cinema junkie.

Speaker 5: (44:35)

[inaudible].