The word has been out since this morning that there will be an attempted recall of 4th District councilmember Tony Young for supporting the mayor in his call for Carolyn Smith's resignation as head of the Southeastern Economic Development Corporation (SEDC).

No word yet on how much fundraising has been done at the Catfish Club to promote the recall. Right now, the guess is that it'll be somewhat less than the cost of SEDC's full-color postcards sent to area residents every few months...

My take: unless the backers of this "movement" want to see it backfire on the existing Southeast San Diego political machine, there needs to be some honesty about precisely why SEDC paid Smith and other SEDC insiders too much compared to the City-approved budget. The honesty is necessary because if memory serves, the City Council was busy freezing all city employee pay at the time, and was also arguing that all redevelopment agencies in town do the same for executive compensation.

YUCK UPDATE: Pat Flannery has posted a blog "More to SEDC scandal than Carolyn Smith's bonus" at

I just found this info while checking out Don Bauder's blog here on CCDC and Nancy Graham. I haven't had a look a Flannery's source documents yet, but there seems to be plenty of links to them, so I have some reading to do!


hood2u July 30, 2008 @ 2:57 p.m.

It is clear that everyone has fallen for the story which is probably not the real story. It is not a coincidence that 2 weeks after Mr. Madaffer called for the SEDC's President resignation that the city council voted in favor of providing the funds necessary to settle the ill-fated Grantville Redevelopment Adoption - $31.36 million. What other deals were cut to get the heads of CCDC and SEDC out of the way? Is it a land grab; a money grab; a place for Madaffer to land as the head of a new redevelopment group? Let's look at what is really happening.

I can say the that whatever happens, we in the hood will continue to be the losers.


a2zresource July 30, 2008 @ 3:26 p.m.

Response to #1:

Anything political will always have layers and layers of stories, some real, some not so real. Also, politicians are by nature either opportunistic or voted out of office...

Regardless of what the "real" story is, there is some real truth in the fact that SEDC apparently reported two different sets of accounting numbers to to different political jurisdictions, the city that approved SEDC's budget as written, and the state that received some different set of "real" numbers.

As someone who once had a job giving the "smell test" to bankruptcy petitions that looked somewhat "cooked", all I can say is that ALL of the red flags went up anytime any business owner had two sets of books to show.

The fact that a public agency such as SEDC had two sets of books to show seems almost like some sort of treason.

Buying an accounting professor a cup of coffee might be a good way to start a conversation on people in executive positions and professional responsibility...

I don't see us as losers. Victims maybe, even marginal survivors, but not necessarily losers.


Sign in to comment

Get $5 off any Reader event

Sign up for our email list to get your promo code