"No public money will be used to cover the sports stadium projec"t...So said the Padres PR team and John Moores etc...It turned out that the City was on the hook for a 15M per year note from the General fund, plus maintenenace, police, fire and other hidden costs that all come from the city treasury...funds used for roads, streets, libraries, police, fire and infrastructure. Later, The City deftly moved the yearly payment on the Petco note to another downtown agency tangentially related to the general city fund for political purposes.
And, they didn't count the hundreds of millions of dollars in free land downtown by Petco given to Moores and his development companies. And, they did not count the tax revenues to be generated for the City by a promised downtown hotel by Petco...that Moores and companies later never built/reneged on and got a waiver from the City...the revenue tax streams promised never materialized...Any other deal between private parties and that deal would have either been called off OR the opposing party would have required the Padres to pay the 15M dollar yearly note on the stadium bonds since Moores and the Padres were in serious breach of contract on the Padres/Petco Park deal. It is frustrating that either the City had incompetent negotiators OR Moores/Padres made "silent/secret off the record deals" with higher level city officials to look the other way while they trampled on the Petco contractual deal. It may not be a coincidence that the former SD City Manager was and others were given cushy, lucrative paid deals with the Moores Padres and Development companies owned by Moores JMI after they did their parts for Moores in the Petco Park deal.
Expect similar shenanigans with the Chargers deal and City/County officials....Great place to "double dip" for City/County executives wanting a "soft landing" after they sell out the Taxpayers in favor of the Spanos family and the Chargers..by negotiating a "one sided deal" in favor of the Chargers and later letting the Chargers trample provisions of the agreed deal with waivers and major changes etc..
Read the fine print. Chances are, there are both "open costs" and "hidden costs" that the City and its general fund and ancillary funds may be on the hook for in the proposed New Chargers Stadium.
How crowded, over-run with traffic, short on water and other resources, and developers pockets stuffed....till you finally call enough "enough"!
This is why residents shout so loudly against this, because the majority of our representatives don't!
Oh yeah, they ran a double full page color spread to sing Dougie's praises. When you own the paper, it really doesn't cost that much to add a couple pages to the paper you're already producing. Humility isn't part of his makeup in the slightest. He's determined to be a legend in his own time (he already is one in his own mind.) So, a few folks made Facebook postings that were not flattering and they took them down? I'm not surprised, and that's sort of funny. But then we also can cry for what that rag has become.
tomjohnston: One example: SDGE, PG&E and SCE are trying to end net energy metering, which gives consumers fair credit for the solar power they deliver to the grid. That effort should be stopped. The California Solar Initiative is supposed to provide incentives for ratepayers to install solar, in conjunction with the big utilities. But the incentives are not good enough. Best, Don Bauder
jnojr: Maybe because I have been in the media business 50 years -- 53 years if you count PR and advertising -- it pains me to use a newspaper for such purposes. Best, Don Bauder
aardvark: Then the Austin paper would be the only media outlet in the nation calling Gov. Rick Perry an intellectual. Best, Don Bauder
And apparently not so much when the wind is blowing in.
I like going down there for the excitement of being in another country, another culture. As I'm not a drug dealer, user, or smuggler... and because I'm too poor to be a kidnapping target, I feel pretty safe. And I've never been pulled over in many trips.
aardvark: Admit one other thing: you looked at the young ladies in bikinis doing their thing. Do you suppose they are: 1. hired for the occasion? 2. social friends of Papa Doug? 3. Reporters from the Union-Tribune? If No. 3, I can see that I left that newpaper too soon. Best, Don Bauder
Here's the real story:
HERE ARE THE QUESTIONS LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS WOULD HAVE PUT TO FAULCONER. Candidate Mike Aguirre made a brief appearance after a Faulconer/Sanders show this afternoon.
According to Aguirre, these are the questions the League of Women Voters intended to ask Faulconer in the debate that was abruptly canceled when Faulconer backed out: 1. What is the real financial status of the City at the present time...are we in the red or black? 2. What are your plans to stop deferring normal operating maintenance and cover such costs within the City's annual operating budget? What services should be cut back to stay within the budget?
Understood by voters? No wonder Faulconer chickened out. Best, Don Bauder
aardvark: There is controversy on how much Petco costs the taxpayers each year. There is no controversy about this: it's a lot. Best, Don Bauder
It is specifically prohibited for redevelopment money to be spent on beautifying existing government buildings. State law is clear on this.
It's also prohibited to transfer tax increment funding to outside the boundaries of a redevelopment area.
The County wants to spruce up the Administration Building on the waterfront.
The City wants to re-shape the C Street Trolley Corridor.
So they hatched a plan:
The individual steps of this arcane scheme (much more complex than I'm describing) were kept quiet, and only Grantville Veterinarian Brian Peterson stood up to object. Well educated, well informed, taking countless hours from his personal and professional life, Brian attended all the meetings he could, objecting, even paying for lawyers to help him fight this clear injustice.
And the courts found that, while the overall effect is clearly illegal, because each baby step in the process was either technically allowed or, found no objection at the time -- hocus pocus, it's all somehow legal. By myopically focusing only on the details, and willfully refusing to acknowledge the big picture, and public policy implications, the judges have disgraced themselves and the legal profession.
Should the Grantville Action Group continue the fight? Take this to a higher level?
Or will Mayor Filner and the City perhaps reconsider this folly with the trolley, and restore justice and common sense to redevelopment.
Filner has made it clear he stands for the neighborhoods. Here's a good test case. Grantville's money should be spent in Grantville, not downtown.
What I hear and assume is that what REALLY matters is the bottom line...PROFITS FOR THE SHAREHOLDERS...who cares what the customer's want...They think by having a person greeting you IS, customer service. Twice, in the last week I went to that store and the one off the 78 and College. At the Encinitas store, I asked if they carried a partilcular item and was told my two associates, "we don't have that", when in fact they did. I had to spend 35 minutes finding it myself. At the Oceanside store, I went to the plumbing dept. and asked an associate if he carried this item...he said, "yeah, I think we do, if we have it it'll probably be either the next aisle or we don't have it" Why didn't he walk with me to help me find it? In both cases, their customer service, except greeting me at the main entrance, was horrible. The guy they made leave (Dog House Diner) should be hired by HD to teach customer service classes to the associates...They gave AMAZING customer service.
The Encinitas store put up a big sign after DH left that says
"we appreciate your business" It should say, "we appreciate making money for our shareholders" Wake up Home Depot swollow you pride and greed and
...bring back the Dog House Diner That will make a lot of your customers and many of your associates very happy
aardvark: Dylan Thomas wrote a poem about you: "Some few small ants, not wanted in the kitchen nor anywhere else for that matter, sat on the very edges of their chairs, afraid to break, like faded cups and saucers, just waiting for aardvark to lick the saucers." Best, Don Bauder
Don, a great piece that sums up the current newspaper situation in a few thousand words. I've not seen anything in the financial press that brings the industry into focus better, or more concisely. And as an individual investor, I'm not the slightest bit interested in buying the stocks. (Yes, there may be opportunities for short-term profits in some of them, but I don't look for that kind of deals.)
I fully agree with Bob Hudson's remarks above, except that I would not equate the Reader with a liberal community. I'm sure not a liberal, and Don Bauder and I agree far more often than we disagree. "Truth seekers" would be a more apt description.
tomjohnston: Midnight Cowboy does ring a bell. Admittedly, I have gone through life without watching sitcoms or going to many movies. Nor did I watch Seinfeld, but I do know who he is. (It seems to me I did watch part of one show and couldn't figure out what was funny.) At least, I admit I am not up on popular culture. I remember one time at the U-T. Somebody had written a book with a title something like "Invest Like Warren Buffett, Live Like Jimmy Buffett." I went out into the financial department and asked if anyone had ever heard of Jimmy Buffett. They howled. Best, Don Bauder
Lakeside. Unless you live there, you probably only know it as that rodeo alcove of tweekers, rednecks, and Klansmen out past Santee. Often the butt of the joke, Lakeside touts a handful of merits that ...
“Centre City ‘was often criticized for keeping all of the downtown tax-increment money downtown, yet the critics choose to ignore that it was illegal to do otherwise,’ bristles Graham.’’ But wait. The Fourth District Court of Appeals just ruled that it is legal to take money out of Grantville redevelopment and send that to downtown. Over $31 million! This suggests if CCDC or The Downtown Cheerleaders had the will, they could have transferred downtown tax increment to other communities. They wanted to keep all the Centre City money downtown, plus suck it in from other communities. Besides, Katheryn Rhodes is correct. California redevelopment law allows TI for affordable housing to be spent anywhere in the region, not just within the project area.
"Papa" Doug can bite me.
Gloria Ciprian 12:30 p.m., Jan. 20
Candice Reed 11 a.m., Jan. 20
Traci Deleon 9 a.m., Jan. 20
Don Bauder 8:30 a.m., Jan. 20
Marty Graham 5:30 p.m., Jan. 19
Ian Anderson 5 p.m., Jan. 19
Jeff Smith 3:30 p.m., Jan. 19
© 2017 San Diego Reader. All rights reserved. No part of this site may be reproduced without our written permission.
Each newsletter subscription means another chance to win!