diegodissenter
Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
$250k raised, lifeguard project stopped
Yes Mr. Powell. I would imagine the residents and private citizens who fronted the money for a quarter of a million dollar bond- that they would forfeit if their case was lost- know what they were getting into and know what they are talking about. Please note the article referenced "residents" and citizens. The fact that residents of the area are involved is significant to me. I'm not a betting man but I would guess these residents and private citizens are the same ones who funded fire pits in south mission when the city wanted to remove them because of budgets restraints. All of your other questions posed were answered in the article except for "previous lawsuits?" and your final question. I'm not sure if there were previous lawsuits nor am I sure what exactly you are trying to ask with those two words? For your last question asking what the "real story" is, it is this: There is no excuse for the city not following their own rules. That's the bottom line. That's why the judge gave the opportunity for residents to front a $250k bond, and probably why the citizens are willing to put up that kind of money. What the city is doing, for lack of a better word, is sneaky. I personally expect more than dishonesty and good team of lawyers from my local government. The government institution (not sure which one it is because there are so many) is building based on an expired permit and the building is larger than what was agreed upon in the original permit. And they continued to build, without a valid permit, in an effort to put more pressure on the judge to rule in their favor, according to this article. That's not right and it sounds almost criminal (I'm not a prosecutor or an attorney). Those residents should be applauded for holding the local government to the same standards it holds its citizens/residents/subjects (however one wants to call "we the people"). If you are a homeowner of a permitted residence, I'm sure you would appreciate the Idea that government buildings need to be permitted as well. As stated in the article, the residents are all for a permitted state of the art lifeguard station. I think it's a shame it has to go to court but I'd say it has been handled pretty reasonably by the citizens/residents considering what they were up against. I also don't think attempting to build anything during an El Niño winter in south mission is wise at all. Does anyone remember the one from the late 90's? How much is that contractor going to have to pay his workers and subs when they can't work because the whole job site is literally underwater for days at a time?— October 6, 2015 3:49 p.m.