Quantcast
4S Ranch Allied Gardens Alpine Baja Balboa Park Bankers Hill Barrio Logan Bay Ho Bay Park Black Mountain Ranch Blossom Valley Bonita Bonsall Borrego Springs Boulevard Campo Cardiff-by-the-Sea Carlsbad Carmel Mountain Carmel Valley Chollas View Chula Vista City College City Heights Clairemont College Area Coronado CSU San Marcos Cuyamaca College Del Cerro Del Mar Descanso Downtown San Diego Eastlake East Village El Cajon Emerald Hills Encanto Encinitas Escondido Fallbrook Fletcher Hills Golden Hill Grant Hill Grantville Grossmont College Guatay Harbor Island Hillcrest Imperial Beach Imperial Valley Jacumba Jamacha-Lomita Jamul Julian Kearny Mesa Kensington La Jolla Lakeside La Mesa Lemon Grove Leucadia Liberty Station Lincoln Acres Lincoln Park Linda Vista Little Italy Logan Heights Mesa College Midway District MiraCosta College Miramar Miramar College Mira Mesa Mission Beach Mission Hills Mission Valley Mountain View Mount Hope Mount Laguna National City Nestor Normal Heights North Park Oak Park Ocean Beach Oceanside Old Town Otay Mesa Pacific Beach Pala Palomar College Palomar Mountain Paradise Hills Pauma Valley Pine Valley Point Loma Point Loma Nazarene Potrero Poway Rainbow Ramona Rancho Bernardo Rancho Penasquitos Rancho San Diego Rancho Santa Fe Rolando San Carlos San Marcos San Onofre Santa Ysabel Santee San Ysidro Scripps Ranch SDSU Serra Mesa Shelltown Shelter Island Sherman Heights Skyline Solana Beach Sorrento Valley Southcrest South Park Southwestern College Spring Valley Stockton Talmadge Temecula Tierrasanta Tijuana UCSD University City University Heights USD Valencia Park Valley Center Vista Warner Springs

Trash Pickup in Peril in Rancho Bernardo

David Kreitzer spoke during the public-comment portion of the November 30 San Diego City Council meeting to ask the council to review the sudden enforcement of an old ordinance that has affected the city-provided collection of trash at his Rancho Bernardo townhome residence, which is located on a private road.

Kreitzer says that his property is part of 87 townhome units built in 1971; 48 were built on a public street, and 39 on two short private drives. For the past 39 years, city trucks have entered the private roads and collected trash in the area, said Kreitzer. Now he has been informed that trash service will be stopped by the City because of a “hold-harmless” ordinance that was passed in 1986. (The ordinance was instituted to require that residents from the private roads agree not to hold the City responsible for any loss, damage, or legal liability related to the collection of trash in their area.)

“We knew nothing of this ordinance and none of the older members can remember it either,” said Kreitzer. According Kreitzer, the director of Environmental Services informed him via letter that properties developed before November 4, 1986, should have been informed through their developers that a hold-harmless agreement would be needed in order to continue to receive City-provided trash collection.

However, Kreitzer states that neither the City nor older residents in the neighborhood have any records of the mentioned agreement from 1986. “Those living on private roads throughout the city — including ours — pay the same taxes…as the 48 out [on the public street] but we will be denied a very fundamental service. We will also be denied…recycling,” he said.

Without the City’s services, Kreitzer says, the residents already have limited space around their townhouse and may be forced to use guest parking space to put in a dumpster. “I would like to see an effort [to] amend that ordinance, if it really exists,” added Kreitzer. “Amend it to allow people living on these private roads to go back and sign a [hold-]harmless agreement.”

Here's something you might be interested in.
Submit a free classified
or view all

Previous article

San Diego's deadliest parks

Baldarrama, Balboa, Chicano, Kate Sessions, Kelly, Lindbergh, Libby Lake, Linda Vista, Southcrest
Next Article

Vet Chris Mavry holds the line between protest and riot

“Hey brother, that’s not what we’re here for!”
Comments
12

For anyone interested in seeing the City's Budget and Finance Committee documents and actions, see Item-3 from Nov 10 2010: http://docs.sandiego.gov/ccaction_budgetfinance/Budget%252011-10-10_Actions.pdf

The report, dated Nov 1 2010, is here: http://docs.sandiego.gov/councilcomm_agendas_attach/2010/Budget_101110_3a.pdf

Dec. 5, 2010

I expect to see lots more of these situations exposed as the City starts to ID all the tiny things that it can do to save a buck by ruining our Quality of Life!

RB citizens are now starting to feel the prick of the fiscal needle that has been poking all those in MidCity now for quite a while since the City has reduced it's infrastructure and other repairs demanded by SD's much older neighborhoods; I wonder what folks in RB would say if the City turned off their street lights until their streets were illuminated poorly like many of those in MidCity?

Every time we hear about something this, we all should shout, "What about the Pension Debacle" and demand to know what our Leaders are doing about it, since that directly affects their own pocket book and future retirement!

San Diego is being split into the haves and the have nots and our Leaders are making sure they all have plenty for themselves and their friends... SD voters are now being "pitted" against each other for City Services and that garbage is the result of our poor Leadership!

Who voted for that?

Dec. 6, 2010

Right, Founder. Privatization has been going on for several years in the MidCity-Downtown areas, in many ways, including the TMD. Privatization started really expanding in 2006, with the hiring of William Anderson (who was working for a company named Economic Research Associates) to direct CPCI; the heart of the privatization scheme rests within the Economic Development division in CPCI and in the BID Council. The business associations in MidCity have been allowed to move from taking/controlling assessments on businesses to taking/controlling assessments on properties within and beyond the business districts, in a completely illegal subversion of state law. Much of the thrust to assess people on their property tax bills and to give the money to the business associations/nonprofits came from a push by Marco LiMandri and Ben Hueso (neither of whom care much about the law!. LiMandri still has great influence. Have you followed the fight over the porta-potties downtown? The Little Italy maintenance assessment district, controlled by LiMandri, happily took on all maintenance costs for the loos purchased by CCDC, whereas the PBID assessment district is fighting that...because it is not legal. It's a mess. If you want to see what I mean about the porta-potties fight, watch the July 20 archived Council video, Item 332. Emerald and Hueso put on a show of contempt for and ignorance of the law.

Dec. 6, 2010

Once the BID's realized that they can "earn" the 20 to 30% of the administration fees that the City Park & Rec. is charging to administer the MAD's they want all the MAD money they can get a hold of!

North Park Main Street (NP's BID) is now currently seeking to have everyone within it's Boundaries pay into another Business Assessment District (BAD) which they are calling a "Community" something or other. This will only shift the problems into the nearby neighborhoods causing additional Blight!

Dec. 6, 2010

Interesting google search of sdreader.com site for "LiMandri" produces:

http://media.sdreader.com/pdf/kessler-suit.pdf

http://media.sdreader.com/pdf/kessler-sd-follow-up-report.pdf

LiMandri also figures heavily in articles and blog posts regarding the mayor's recent deposition in the KESSLER v. CITY OF SAN DIEGO matter... in fact, it's time for a blog post to catch everybody up on case status...

Dec. 6, 2010

That FBI/police report is very damning.

The complaint looks very strong also.

Dec. 6, 2010

Founder, if the new NP assessment plan is called a "Community Benefit District," that's LiMandri's hallmark name of choice for assessing property owners and turning the money over to a business group, preferably one he controls. Here is LiMandri's idea of how it all should work: http://newcityamerica.com/downloads/DIX0120106reprint.pdf LiMandri says, "We [meaning he, and his company with the scary name New City America] need to manage residential downtowns in totality just like a mall management company would manage a mall. Dogs, parking, schools, everything."

Welcome to your neighborhood LiMandri mallworld!

Dec. 6, 2010
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
Dec. 6, 2010

Helping those that seek to better the World: http://newcityamerica.com/downloads/DIX0120106reprint.pdf

Dec. 6, 2010

Helping those that seek to better the World: http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/20...

Dec. 6, 2010

The biggest problem with MAD's is that the makeup of the Board that controls the money. Far too often it is skewed toward Business and once in power a special interest fraction is very hard to get "out" of power!

Because the makeup of the Board is often the last thing to be decided, the control of the money which is most critical if the MAD is to be successful is glossed over and that leads to much of the money being spent on special interest projects that if listed at the beginning would have kept the MAD from being approved.

Beware wording and or promises like: We have to build in extra capacity for the future. We need to be flexible in our wording when describing projects to be done. The amount of yearly assessments should reflect our goals This will increase everyones future Property values

The best solution is to keep these MAD's as small as possible, controlled by those that will get 100% of the benefit and have the Board elected by "sub districts" of the area which insure one tiny group of voters will not get the majority of the benefits! Self management is possible if the majority of those voting approve of it and it will same the MAD many times the cost of establishing its own 501 c. 3 Corp to administer it, instead of allowing the City Dept. Of Park & Rec. to do it and also have them suck up 15-30% of the total amount collected!

Dec. 7, 2010

Sign in to comment

Sign in

David Kreitzer spoke during the public-comment portion of the November 30 San Diego City Council meeting to ask the council to review the sudden enforcement of an old ordinance that has affected the city-provided collection of trash at his Rancho Bernardo townhome residence, which is located on a private road.

Kreitzer says that his property is part of 87 townhome units built in 1971; 48 were built on a public street, and 39 on two short private drives. For the past 39 years, city trucks have entered the private roads and collected trash in the area, said Kreitzer. Now he has been informed that trash service will be stopped by the City because of a “hold-harmless” ordinance that was passed in 1986. (The ordinance was instituted to require that residents from the private roads agree not to hold the City responsible for any loss, damage, or legal liability related to the collection of trash in their area.)

“We knew nothing of this ordinance and none of the older members can remember it either,” said Kreitzer. According Kreitzer, the director of Environmental Services informed him via letter that properties developed before November 4, 1986, should have been informed through their developers that a hold-harmless agreement would be needed in order to continue to receive City-provided trash collection.

However, Kreitzer states that neither the City nor older residents in the neighborhood have any records of the mentioned agreement from 1986. “Those living on private roads throughout the city — including ours — pay the same taxes…as the 48 out [on the public street] but we will be denied a very fundamental service. We will also be denied…recycling,” he said.

Without the City’s services, Kreitzer says, the residents already have limited space around their townhouse and may be forced to use guest parking space to put in a dumpster. “I would like to see an effort [to] amend that ordinance, if it really exists,” added Kreitzer. “Amend it to allow people living on these private roads to go back and sign a [hold-]harmless agreement.”

Sponsored
Here's something you might be interested in.
Submit a free classified
or view all
Previous article

French breakfast at Zinqué Cafe

Such crunching, oozing goodness
Next Article

Covid-19 hits San Diego political rainmakers

General Atomics’ Blue brothers shun Trump money-giving
Comments
12

For anyone interested in seeing the City's Budget and Finance Committee documents and actions, see Item-3 from Nov 10 2010: http://docs.sandiego.gov/ccaction_budgetfinance/Budget%252011-10-10_Actions.pdf

The report, dated Nov 1 2010, is here: http://docs.sandiego.gov/councilcomm_agendas_attach/2010/Budget_101110_3a.pdf

Dec. 5, 2010

I expect to see lots more of these situations exposed as the City starts to ID all the tiny things that it can do to save a buck by ruining our Quality of Life!

RB citizens are now starting to feel the prick of the fiscal needle that has been poking all those in MidCity now for quite a while since the City has reduced it's infrastructure and other repairs demanded by SD's much older neighborhoods; I wonder what folks in RB would say if the City turned off their street lights until their streets were illuminated poorly like many of those in MidCity?

Every time we hear about something this, we all should shout, "What about the Pension Debacle" and demand to know what our Leaders are doing about it, since that directly affects their own pocket book and future retirement!

San Diego is being split into the haves and the have nots and our Leaders are making sure they all have plenty for themselves and their friends... SD voters are now being "pitted" against each other for City Services and that garbage is the result of our poor Leadership!

Who voted for that?

Dec. 6, 2010

Right, Founder. Privatization has been going on for several years in the MidCity-Downtown areas, in many ways, including the TMD. Privatization started really expanding in 2006, with the hiring of William Anderson (who was working for a company named Economic Research Associates) to direct CPCI; the heart of the privatization scheme rests within the Economic Development division in CPCI and in the BID Council. The business associations in MidCity have been allowed to move from taking/controlling assessments on businesses to taking/controlling assessments on properties within and beyond the business districts, in a completely illegal subversion of state law. Much of the thrust to assess people on their property tax bills and to give the money to the business associations/nonprofits came from a push by Marco LiMandri and Ben Hueso (neither of whom care much about the law!. LiMandri still has great influence. Have you followed the fight over the porta-potties downtown? The Little Italy maintenance assessment district, controlled by LiMandri, happily took on all maintenance costs for the loos purchased by CCDC, whereas the PBID assessment district is fighting that...because it is not legal. It's a mess. If you want to see what I mean about the porta-potties fight, watch the July 20 archived Council video, Item 332. Emerald and Hueso put on a show of contempt for and ignorance of the law.

Dec. 6, 2010

Once the BID's realized that they can "earn" the 20 to 30% of the administration fees that the City Park & Rec. is charging to administer the MAD's they want all the MAD money they can get a hold of!

North Park Main Street (NP's BID) is now currently seeking to have everyone within it's Boundaries pay into another Business Assessment District (BAD) which they are calling a "Community" something or other. This will only shift the problems into the nearby neighborhoods causing additional Blight!

Dec. 6, 2010

Interesting google search of sdreader.com site for "LiMandri" produces:

http://media.sdreader.com/pdf/kessler-suit.pdf

http://media.sdreader.com/pdf/kessler-sd-follow-up-report.pdf

LiMandri also figures heavily in articles and blog posts regarding the mayor's recent deposition in the KESSLER v. CITY OF SAN DIEGO matter... in fact, it's time for a blog post to catch everybody up on case status...

Dec. 6, 2010

That FBI/police report is very damning.

The complaint looks very strong also.

Dec. 6, 2010

Founder, if the new NP assessment plan is called a "Community Benefit District," that's LiMandri's hallmark name of choice for assessing property owners and turning the money over to a business group, preferably one he controls. Here is LiMandri's idea of how it all should work: http://newcityamerica.com/downloads/DIX0120106reprint.pdf LiMandri says, "We [meaning he, and his company with the scary name New City America] need to manage residential downtowns in totality just like a mall management company would manage a mall. Dogs, parking, schools, everything."

Welcome to your neighborhood LiMandri mallworld!

Dec. 6, 2010
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
Dec. 6, 2010

Helping those that seek to better the World: http://newcityamerica.com/downloads/DIX0120106reprint.pdf

Dec. 6, 2010

Helping those that seek to better the World: http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/20...

Dec. 6, 2010

The biggest problem with MAD's is that the makeup of the Board that controls the money. Far too often it is skewed toward Business and once in power a special interest fraction is very hard to get "out" of power!

Because the makeup of the Board is often the last thing to be decided, the control of the money which is most critical if the MAD is to be successful is glossed over and that leads to much of the money being spent on special interest projects that if listed at the beginning would have kept the MAD from being approved.

Beware wording and or promises like: We have to build in extra capacity for the future. We need to be flexible in our wording when describing projects to be done. The amount of yearly assessments should reflect our goals This will increase everyones future Property values

The best solution is to keep these MAD's as small as possible, controlled by those that will get 100% of the benefit and have the Board elected by "sub districts" of the area which insure one tiny group of voters will not get the majority of the benefits! Self management is possible if the majority of those voting approve of it and it will same the MAD many times the cost of establishing its own 501 c. 3 Corp to administer it, instead of allowing the City Dept. Of Park & Rec. to do it and also have them suck up 15-30% of the total amount collected!

Dec. 7, 2010

Sign in to comment

Sign in

Art Reviews — W.S. Di Piero's eye on exhibits Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed Best Buys — San Diego shopping Big Screen — Movie commentary Blurt — Music's inside track Booze News — San Diego spirits City Lights — News and politics Classical Music — Immortal beauty Classifieds — Free and easy Cover Stories — Front-page features Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts Famous Former Neighbors — Next-door celebs Feast! — Food & drink reviews Feature Stories — Local news & stories From the Archives — Spotlight on the past Golden Dreams — Talk of the town Here's the Deal — Chad Deal's watering holes Just Announced — The scoop on shows Letters — Our inbox [email protected] — 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 Of Note — Concert picks Out & About — What's Happening Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated Poetry — The old and the new Pour Over — Grab a cup Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers Reading — The hunt for intellectuals Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails San Diego Beer News — Inside San Diego suds SD on the QT — Almost factual news Set 'em Up Joe — Bartenders' drink recipes Sheep and Goats — Places of worship Special Issues — The best of Sports — Athletics without gush Street Style — San Diego streets have style Suit Up — Fashion tips for dudes Theater Reviews — Local productions Theater antireviews — Narrow your search 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 Waterfront — All things ocean Your Week — Daily event picks
4S Ranch Allied Gardens Alpine Baja Balboa Park Bankers Hill Barrio Logan Bay Ho Bay Park Black Mountain Ranch Blossom Valley Bonita Bonsall Borrego Springs Boulevard Campo Cardiff-by-the-Sea Carlsbad Carmel Mountain Carmel Valley Chollas View Chula Vista City College City Heights Clairemont College Area Coronado CSU San Marcos Cuyamaca College Del Cerro Del Mar Descanso Downtown San Diego Eastlake East Village El Cajon Emerald Hills Encanto Encinitas Escondido Fallbrook Fletcher Hills Golden Hill Grant Hill Grantville Grossmont College Guatay Harbor Island Hillcrest Imperial Beach Imperial Valley Jacumba Jamacha-Lomita Jamul Julian Kearny Mesa Kensington La Jolla Lakeside La Mesa Lemon Grove Leucadia Liberty Station Lincoln Acres Lincoln Park Linda Vista Little Italy Logan Heights Mesa College Midway District MiraCosta College Miramar Miramar College Mira Mesa Mission Beach Mission Hills Mission Valley Mountain View Mount Hope Mount Laguna National City Nestor Normal Heights North Park Oak Park Ocean Beach Oceanside Old Town Otay Mesa Pacific Beach Pala Palomar College Palomar Mountain Paradise Hills Pauma Valley Pine Valley Point Loma Point Loma Nazarene Potrero Poway Rainbow Ramona Rancho Bernardo Rancho Penasquitos Rancho San Diego Rancho Santa Fe Rolando San Carlos San Marcos San Onofre Santa Ysabel Santee San Ysidro Scripps Ranch SDSU Serra Mesa Shelltown Shelter Island Sherman Heights Skyline Solana Beach Sorrento Valley Southcrest South Park Southwestern College Spring Valley Stockton Talmadge Temecula Tierrasanta Tijuana UCSD University City University Heights USD Valencia Park Valley Center Vista Warner Springs
Close