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
Two new lawsuits against Pacific Beach marijuana dispensaries
"Interesting how the City Attorney is willing to apply the "Municipal Code" in this case, but was not willing to do so in the case of the North Park Jack in the Box." Apples and oranges, bwersie. The JBX in North Park gamed the system by buying a permit, then going through the dog-and-pony process of getting support from community groups. They promised certain things to those groups...all the while simply going ahead with their plant. This is SOP for the city; write a check to the Development Services Department, and you are granted a permit virtually immediately. Violations of a community plan or a muni code don't really matter to DSD; it's up to neighbors or other aggrieved parties to appeal the permit process. If a business, with permit in hand, builds something, the city's not gonna force 'em to take it down, because the city granted a permit. The notable exception to this practice was the building that stuck up into federally-designated airspace near an airport. Turns out even if you pay la mordida to the local permit vendor, it doesn't pre-empt federal regulations. Curse those pesky Feds! What has happened in the past is that the potshops got permits by claiming to be gift shops or whatever. Or they simply opened without any permits. Bottom line is, there is no city permit for pot shops, so they are illegally operating; this article kinda missed that crucial point. If you distribute pot to "patients" as prescribed under state law, the feds and local cops don't care. If you open a store to sell drugs, you're running a business, which is subject to regulation by the city or county. And you're selling pot, which is illegal under state and federal law. There is no permit required to be a caregiver, and to provide pot to sick people. If you do that, the cops and prosecutors, local and federal, won't touch you. When you get greedy and open a store, you're fair game. The ultimate irony of bwersie's comment is that he seems to be anti-JBX and pro pot....and JBX is the only company that has run TWO national ad campaigns aimed at pot smokers. Heck, they even designed a "munchie menu" for that market. Go on youtube and watch their ads; total pothead demographic.— October 29, 2013 12:25 p.m.
Why the Yukon will continue to kill divers
Good story, as a "look back." I remember seeing the Yukon off the beach, and thought it was a pretty cool thing to do with it. And I remember that things didn't exactly go as planned, but I didn't really understand the nuances. This story put all the pieces together. But Captain Obvious kinda missed the point. There's no dannger, no threat to anyone, except those who choose to go into it. And as the story points out, diving on wrecks is dangerous business. Dunno whether an artificial reef's worth a quarter-million bucks, but it wasn't tax dollars that paid for it. But it attracts more than fish...tourists who dive aren't exactly low-rent folks; when they come to dive on Wreck Alley, it's good for our economy. One final note: I seem to remember that one of the deaths was from a medical problem, not necessarily from the diver being lost inside the wreck. That person might have died just being at that depth, and kicking around an open, sandy bottom. Again, that's the way it was reported in the news. I think.— December 20, 2012 10:20 a.m.
That's Why They Call It Pee B
Yes, urine receptacles are the answer. Because there are no restrooms in PB. None of the bars have restrooms, nor do the restaurants. Yep. We need funnels and buckets. Remember when they put in all the ashtrays in PB? It worked great! Now, there are NO cigarette butts anywhere. Not in the gutters, nor on the sidewalks, nor in the street, nor in the planters, nor on the sand. Not one single cigarette butt can be found in PB. If we put in some whiz-barrels on every street corner, people will stop relieving themselves in doorways, planters, behind signs, and in the landscaping. I am absolutely certain of it. 100%. Yessireebob.— July 5, 2012 6:20 p.m.
North Park Residents Plan Rally In Protest of High Number of Alcohol Licenses
Yupper. Just watched the Channel 10 report on the walk. It ended with the ABC saying it's up to the city to say when "enough is enough." The ABC's not going to stop issuing licenses, and our local ABC office doesn't have the resources to regulate all of them. The ball's in your court, city council.— January 20, 2012 11:24 p.m.
North Park Residents Plan Rally In Protest of High Number of Alcohol Licenses
"Almost the entire report consists of direct quotes" ALMOST...The next-to-last paragraph looks like a quote, but didn't come from anyone associated with this event, or from the event flyer. Overall, an informative blog post except for that random paragraph. Without attribution, it looks like the statement came from the walk organizers...but it did not.— January 20, 2012 11:21 p.m.
North Park Residents Plan Rally In Protest of High Number of Alcohol Licenses
Ponzi, there are regular enforcement operations after sporting events at Qualcomm..and they net a tiny fraction of similar operations in PB. Police carefully examine the results of operations all over the city. The locations that produce the most DUI arrests per officer-hour are the ones where more resources are assigned in the future. The police brass doesn't just throw darts at a map. The PD picks a few locations at random..but mostly, the location of focused DUI enforcement operations is determined by the number of arrests made. The police are going to go where the most DUIs occur; these decisions are driven by data, not whimsy. The only exception was when bar owners in PB put pressure on city hall..and politicians told the cops not to do checkpoints in PB...and when it became public, the orders from city hall disappeared. It happened last summer..Google it to find out more, it was pretty well documented in the medial. BTW, East Village IS a hotspot for enforcement actions AND DUI arrests; #2 in the city, behind PB. East Village has about 150 duis a year..PB, more than 500. If you had a limited amount of money to get the most drunk drivers off the street...where you gonna do the bulk of your enforcement? And since many DUI enforcements are funded by grants...and the more drunks you catch, the better your chance of getting another grant....think about it.— January 20, 2012 10:56 p.m.
North Park Residents Plan Rally In Protest of High Number of Alcohol Licenses
"It would seem that irresponsible drinkers will just migrate to the remaining bars." Ponzi, this is how the alcohol industry thinks: It's up to each person to make sure we drink responsibly. They sorta skip right past the part where it's illegal to serve someone past the point of intoxication. The bar bears legal responsibility for that. Many bars do act responsibly, but it only takes a few bad businesses to wreak havoc on a community.— January 20, 2012 2:21 p.m.
North Park Residents Plan Rally In Protest of High Number of Alcohol Licenses
"Beer is good for San Diego tourism, and it is not going away." Right on both counts, sue... Please go back and read the blog again, though, because you missed the point. This isn't about beer, or wine, or cocktails. It's about crime. PB and North Park lead the city in violent crime. Much of that crime is perpertrated by or on drunks. The drunks are created when bars illegally overserve their patrons. The illegal overservice is at the heart of the matter; it's illegal, but no one is enforcing those laws. This isn't remotely about the San Diego's blossoming craft beer industry, which is good for tourism and for locals, too. This is about establishing control over irresponsible, parasitic businesses that break the law, creating law enforcement problems which in turn drive tourists away. You were probably misled by the opening line: "Call it an 'anti-pub crawl' or 'bar-stopping'." Not anti-pub, we're anti-crime. Nobody wants to shut down any bars, we just want existing laws enforced...because we have too much crime, due to non-existant enforcement. It's the state's job to regulate alcohol licenses, and until the ABC is capable of doing that, the ABC should stop issuing licenses in areas that, by law, already have too many.— January 20, 2012 1:46 p.m.
North Park Residents Plan Rally In Protest of High Number of Alcohol Licenses
"Driving intoxicated is a behavior that is not necessarily modified by fewer bars." Actually, it is. In San Diego, the areas with the most DUIs (PB, Gaslamp, other downtown areas) have the most DUIs. Further, research shows that areas that are saturated with bars generate more DUIs...not just here, but everywhere. Hence the state laws limiting the number of licenses that should be granted in a given area. Problem is, the ABC itself flouts the law, issuing more licenses than allowed, because issuing licenses is now the ABC generates revenue. On the back end, though, the enforcement arm of the ABC lacks the resources to regulate these licensees. Each investigator has more than 800 alcohol licenses to monitor, and even when they catch an irresponsible operator in the act, there is little or no punishment for it. Revoke a license for overservice? Hah. That virtually never happens. The real solution is for San Diego to do what other cities have done; use their powers to regulate land use (conditional use permit). If a bar is caught overserving, the city can yank its permit...and the ABC can then suspend or revoke the license.— January 20, 2012 1:28 p.m.
Dueling Ideologies in Pacific Beach
Nice blog...a fun read. I generally agree with what PB92109 posts, but not always. "Garnet developed the way it is now to cater mainly to tourists, not locals and trust me it wasn't always like this, and when the tattoo fad ends won't be." The kooks who fill the gutters with vomit and their own protrate forms aren't "tourists." They're drunks, who come from other parts of SD, for the most part. A few live in PB. It would be nice to dial-back the stupidity just a tad, so that tourists and regular San Diegans would be more comfortable shopping, dining, and hitting a few bars in PB. But as long as a handful of corporate-owned bars maintain their Jersey-Shore-meets-Arizona-State vibe, the 'schebags will prevail...and the laid-back beach bars and legit restaurants of PB will lose business.— December 20, 2011 2:48 p.m.