November 2022 City of San Diego Measure C: Reach for the Sky! Or Else?
November 2022 City of San Diego Measure C: Reach for the Sky! Or Else?
There’s a frenzy going on over a proposed development occurring on city land surrounding the Sports Arena.
First, La Prensa San Diego ran an expose suggesting that the city’s decision to enter into negotiations with a development company was influenced by 2020 campaign contributions. The scrappy outlet obviously has some sources at city hall, because they have been a fountainhead of insider information suggesting that something’s rotten at 202 C Street (City Hall), especially regarding the white elephant at 101 Ash Street.
The Union-Tribune echoed those inferences in a front page story on Sunday.
In light of the city’s failings via an attempt to acquire a multistory asbestos-laden office building, there’s tons of suspicion about any and all proposed real estate deals these days.
If we are to believe the implications of accounts about political donations (mostly to an Independent Expenditure committee), Mayor Todd Gloria was wandering about with tens of thousands of dollars stuffed in his pockets while the city bureaucracy and elected officials were signing on to a questionable redevelopment deal.
The allegations concerning the dollar amounts of campaign donations are absolutely true. What’s missing is context.
The Termini family, backers of the currently leading contender (Midway Rising) for redeveloping the area, coughed up $100,000 to “San Diegans from Every Community in Support of Todd Gloria for Mayor 2020 sponsored by Laborers Int'l. Union of No. America Local 89.”
They also made individual donations up to the legal limit of $4500 directly to Gloria’s campaign.
The problem here is that a lot of organizations made those kinds of donations to that particular IE. Assorted labor unions (not necessarily in the construction industry) coughed up more than a quarter million dollars. The Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation, and California Apartment Assoc. PAC also made five figure donations.
The Labors Int’l Union shut down that particular Independent Expenditure group following a controversy over an attack ad aimed at Barbara Bry. “Neighbors for Housing Solutions Supporting Todd Gloria for San Diego Mayor 2020” took over the heavy lifting, raising way more money than its predecessor, but none from the Termini family.
Protect Neighborhood Services Now Sponsored by the SD Municipal Employees Association coughed up a quarter million dollars to this second group. The LGBT Caucus Leadership Fund contributed $155,000.
Omar Passions knows a few things about local politics. Based on my observations of him over the past decade, he’s also as honest as the day is long. Here’s part of his reaction to the UT’s front page story.
Is there a quid pro quo?
I don’t know, but so far the case for corruption doesn’t include evidence of intent by any of the parties involved. Based on what’s been revealed, only the wannabe TV prosecutors in town would go for the opportunity to lose in front of a jury.
It does tell us that corporations and labor unions all wanted to make sure they had a place at the table. I am absolutely sure that the political consultants involved here pitched potential donors based on what they understood to be their candidate’s sensibilities.
This sucks. It’s not fair, and we really need a better way of financing politics. But it’s what we have for now, and virtually everybody who wins elections plays this game.
The selection process was overseen by city staff, yes. Outside experts were brought in to oversee the evaluation. The recommendation was blessed by the state housing agency because it best met Surplus Land Act requirements. Maybe they were all impressed by those campaign contributions from two years ago. Maybe not.
Getting back to the Midway project, no redevelopment deal exists, just an agreement to move forward on negotiations with one group that apparently did the best (there is some dispute here) on meeting the requested criteria.
The Midway Rising proposal features a 16,500 seat facility replacing the current Sports Arena, retail spaces, parks, and 4,250 housing units, almost half of which are legally considered affordable.
In order for any deal to be consummated with any developer, the voters have to weigh in on a fundamental prerequisite concerning the (city owned) properties involved.
So it might be wise to consider the possibility that these allegations are being framed in a manner to negatively influence a decision by the electorate.
The desperation of those seeking to prevent a significant change to the landscape of the area in question is likely driven by NIMBYism, despite their claims of environmental degradation.
Measure C: Do we want to change the Municipal Code to allow structures higher than 30 feet in the Midway-Pacific Highway Community Plan area?
There’s some history here worth sharing.
In the late 1960s, San Diego’s coastal communities were a battleground. The aging single family homes and small apartment buildings constructed during the first half of the twentieth century looked like easy pickings for those with a vision of luxe beach towns with marinas, skyscrapers, and occupants who weren’t hippies.
A nascent activist movement caught wind of a proposed remake and stopped that particular round of scheming in its tracks, using protests and petitions to mobilize the existing population and property owners.
The economic incentives for redevelopment remained in conflict with a desire to preserve the unique character of local beach communities. In 1972 San Diego voters passed Proposition D, a citizens’ initiative that imposed a 30-foot limit on the height of buildings constructed in the City’s Coastal Zone. The term Coastal Zone was defined as everything west of Interstate 5.
In 1998 voters approved an amended ordinance (also named Proposition D) allowing Sea World to exceed the limit for “exhibits, attractions, and educational facilities”. That’s ultimately how they got into the roller coaster business.
In 2020 voters approved Measure E, allowing buildings, or additions to buildings, that exceed the 30-foot height limit to be built in the Midway-Pacific Highway Community Plan area.
A court decision overturned the results of that election, and –while the original case is still being appealed– the city decided to correct the objections leading to the judicial ruling and try again.
There was an initial attempt (made under Mayor Faulconer) to entice developers to offer up proposals for the area. This was thrown out because state law says surplus city properties have to be offered up for affordable housing.
So it was back to square one.
While there is no specific development currently tied to the 2022 Measure, none of the proposed projects by any developer pencil out without eliminating the height restriction. It’s a prerequisite to building the less-than-market-rate housing that’s mandated to be part of the deal.
The 2020 measure hardened divisions on the question of creating an exception to the height limits, and those are evident in this year’s District 2 City Council contests. Incumbent councilmember Jennifer Campbell faced an unsuccessful recall effort based on her support for the 2020 Measure (along with her shepherding a short-term rental housing deal).
Linda Lukacs, the nominally Republican challenger facing Campbell this year, is opposed to the measure, as is former Assembly member Lori Saldaña, the progressively minded candidate who finished third in the June primary.
Both women will take the stage at Voice of San Diego’s Politifest to argue against the measure, facing termed-out Republican Councilmember Chris Cate and Dike Anyiwo, the chair of the Midway-Pacific Highway Community Planning Group.
Reform California’s Carl DeMaio has decided that this is an issue he’d like to oppose, and that’s caused consternation over at the OB Rag, which has traditionally opposed just about everything coming out of his far-right camp, while at the same time promoting what I’ll call a “left-NIMBY” stance on new development.
From the OBRag:
Yet, opposition to Measure C is more important than DeMaio or SOA, and progressive voters who greatly dislike the Establishment Dems shoving the redevelopment of the Midway down everybody’s’ throats still must vote “no,” despite the other guys.
The OB Rag had earlier drawn a line in the proverbial sand and we will refuse to support this unholy alliance between San Diego’s Trumpiest of Trumps and a group that calls themselves “environmental.”
But we continue to steadfastly oppose the destruction of the 30-foot height limit.
The argument against Measure C includes the slippery slope concept, with opponents warning that once tall buildings go up in the Midway district, their march to the sea is inevitable.
From the Peninsula Beacon:
Opponents of removing the 30 feet height limit in Midway District have filed a new lawsuit claiming the City failed to comply with updating an environmental impact report before the measure could be voted on.
The lawsuit was filed on Aug. 31 by Save Our Access. The suit responds to a second measure placed on the Nov. 8 ballot, which asks for a re-vote on lifting the current Midway 30-feet height limit.
“This (removing height limit) is not about the sports arena,” said John McNab, SOA spokesperson. “This is about cramming 150,000 to 250,000 (projected build-out of the sports arena, NAVWAR, and other housing projects) people into Midway, which will wreck traffic and the quality of life for everybody while denying people access to the coast. They’re (City) playing games and lying to the public. This is called getting Shanghaied.”
NAVWAR (the Navy’s cyber war complex), by the way, is not included in the area covered by Measure C. That property is owned by the federal government and will likely be leased on a long-term basis, meaning local zoning laws or building height restrictions do not apply.
Here’s the SOA response to the question of what should be done to the area instead of the various redevelopment plans that have been considered.
“What we’re saying is, ‘Here is an opportunity to increase parks in our area along the coast that the public can enjoy on these scorching days,’” concluded McNab. “Don’t let the City build a bunch of stacked boxes with no open space. There is no reason to build housing on public land when we have a park deficit. There is no reason to put more housing on the coast when we have a capacity problem.”
A park deficit as an excuse not to build housing is just plain lame. And, based on what I saw the last time this was on the ballot, there will be willful attempts to mislead voters about this measure permitting skyscrapers on the coast.
An honest approach to arguing against an exception to the height limit would be a real world idea capable of being profitable for a private developer or a commitment to supporting the taxation needed to rehab the area into something green (er).
The argument for Measure C holds that unless it passes the concrete wasteland that exists in the district will remain in place because it’s not financially feasible to redevelop the area without taller buildings.
It’s city land, and, as such, any redevelopment has to include accommodations for affordable housing. And, even though “affordable housing” is an oxymoron in San Diego (think Kosher ham), we do have a severe housing shortage. Build, we must, even if greedy developers make a profit.
To me, the arguments against Measure C have a distinctly NIMBY vibe. And, yes, I’m a YIMBY until such time as something better comes along. No, I don’t knw any billionaire developers. Hell, I’m still waiting for my check from George Soros for supporting criminal justice reform in the 2018 election.
My favored solution to the housing shortage is and always will be social housing; the problem in building it comes down to financing… and the fact that no matter what the format, the same people always seem to have excuses why density shouldn’t happen near where they live.
Excuses about traffic are just silly. When are people going to accept that a car-centric society can only exist alongside a highway to hell? And, no, we can’t wait. The people saying more transit first historically won’t support the taxation needed to build that transit.
As I’ve said at least twice already here, this is not a done deal. City officials will still have to negotiate more details with the development team led by Encinitas-based Zephyr (Owned by Termini). Affordable-housing developer Chelsea Investment Corp. and Legends, which built the SoFi Stadium home to the Los Angeles Rams and Chargers, are also part of this plan.
Yet to be determined details include how much revenue the city will gain from the project and how the affordable housing will be financed. Should the development team cover the cost of building the affordable housing, it’s likely that would likely require the city to forgo revenue resulting from the property's ground lease.
Details, details. As some critics of the process have noted, the overall proposal on the table has more holes in it than Swiss cheese. I’m not surprised there are so many unanswered questions at this stage, and they’re certainly not evidence of a conspiracy. A proposal is, I think, different than a contract.
The biggest unanswered question is whether or not the 30 foot height limitation stands.
So ultimately, the choice with Measure C comes down to: Do Something or Not Do Something. Are we to insist on perfection at the expense of something nominally better?
Vote Yes on C.
Measure C - Ballot Title, Summary, and Impartial Analysis
***
Next Up– Measure D, In pursuit of profit at the expense of fair wages, a tsunami of right wing lies is on tap.
Also, Coming Soon —Education blogger Thomas Ultican has given permission for me to repost for his take of various Board of Education races in San Diego.
Previous voter guides:
(More coming soon)
California State Officials
California’s DC Delegation
State Senate Races
State Assembly Races
SD County Supervisors
County Sheriff, Assessor, and Treasurer Races
SD Measure B: Cash Meets Trash
***
Email me at WritetoDougPorter@Gmail.com