Construction on Clairemont Drive Near I-5

There is significant demolition work going on at the site of the old JR's California Cafe on Clairemont Dr. here in San Diego.  No one seems to know what is going on, or what will be put in place.  I contacted Lorie Zapf's office about the work, and they don't know either.  Shirley Owen, the Clairemont Community Representative for District 6 replied in part:

Regarding your email on the Bay View Plaza property. No, we do not know what is being constructed on the old JR's California Café on Clairemont Drive. You are correct as the new owners have not filed for any building permits as of yet. Our office did meet with the group of investors when they first purchased the property a couple of months ago as they wanted us to have an introduction to them. Our office has received so many emails, phone calls and letters on this "eyesore to the community" that I was able to give them all of the input from the Community. At this time they have informed me they are working with an Architect to draw up plans to develop the property. They have not publicly disclosed what that is. . . . 

They are presently doing some demolition work . . .
. . . [also] there is a gentleman who has started a Facebook page on Bay Park and is always writing about this site. It is called Bay Park Connection.

Hopefully this helps some of the folks looking for news on this site.

San Diego City Council Votes for Increased Ambulance Fees for Ethically Challenged Company

H/T @LorieZapfD6. From the U-T:

The City Council voted 5-3 Monday to have private partner Rural/Metro Corp. buy out the city’s share in San Diego Medical Services for $5.5 million but allow it to remain the city’s ambulance operator for the next two years. During that period, city officials would launch a competitive bidding process to possibly find a new provider and strike a better deal for taxpayers.

We have Republicans on the losing end of a 5-3 vote that seems to harm the poor and uninsured. How do Democrats explain themselves? Here are the objections one can glean from the article.

• Both a whistle blower, former executive Robert Heffner, and the City Auditor, Eduardo Luna have accused Rural/Metro of cheating the city of millions of dollars.
• Average costs for ambulance service will increase well above state wide averages.

“We’re talking about a significant increase. ... It falls on the backs of people who don’t have insurance and then those who do have insurance, guess what, their rates are going to go up,” Zapf said. “I don’t understand why we’re looking at such a huge increase.”

Lorie Zapf, Kevin Faulconer, and Carl DeMaio all voted against the buy out.

Help For Small Businesses in San Diego?

Lorie Zapf and Tony Young have released a Small Business Assistance Package designed to help small businesses cut through the red tape of city government and get the local economy growing. The effort is in part the result of an outreach effort by Zapf to small businesses. Some key provisions.

1. Code Compliance Amnesty
2. Small Business Liaison / Code Compliance Representative
3. Reinstitute Regulatory Relief Days
4. Business Improvement District Enhancement/Small Business Policy Innovation Zones
5. Implement Sunset Clauses in Business Regulations

I am not a business owner, but the details sound good. Helping business expand is just what we need. Driving around this district, I see too many vacant storefronts and lots. Had some questions as well.

1. Why can't small businesses always be granted time to correct code violations? Why just an amnesty period?

2. The Innovation Zone proposal states in part: ". . .expediting permits within the zone, lifting sign ordinance restrictions within the zone and creating specific programmatic EIRs (or some variation) for the zone." It is a sad state of affairs that permit expediting is needed at all. Since tax revenue accrues to growing businesses, one would think that hiring more staff to expedite permits would pay for itself through increased tax revenue. Is there a flaw in my thinking?

3. Sunset clauses are one of the best ways to prevent regulatory creep, because it keeps the regulators on the defensive defending the need to regulate. Why couldn't this be a California amendment?

This is good work from our council member, good to see her fighting the good fight.

Thought I had the scoop on this item, but it looks like the U-T beat me to the punch. News 8 as well.

Cross-posted to sdrostra.

Odds and Ends

Lorie Zapf makes good on another campaign promise to focus on ways to strengthen public safety without increasing spending. She calls for changing the working hours of firefighters in recognition of the fact that there are almost no calls for firefighting between midnight and 7:00 a.m.

As the City wrestles with ending the brownouts at two engine stations, the City should consider staffing one engine with normal 3/24 hour shifts and the second engine should be alternatively staffed with firefighters who are on 4/10 hour shifts or some similar type of alternative staffing. The city could leave the second engine idle from the hours of midnight to 6 a.m. on weekdays and 2 a.m. to 8 a.m. on weekends.

Stand by for major gas from the firefighters union, as this would cut into overtime pay, as I understand it. (Looking for anyone with more knowledge of union staffing rules to correct me, if necessary.)

Darrell Issa is the new bête noire for liberals, because he, gasp, wants to investigate wrongdoing by government officials. The left's response, full on smear attack, of course, with professional smearers. We should expect nothing less.

Walmart is a global force for good, so how do you explain Boston Mayor Tom Menino's unrelenting hatred of an organization that deserves the Nobel Peace Prize (it's been awarded for far less than Walmart has accomplished.) From Michael Graham:

Effete Boston liberals hate Wal-Mart, the unions hate Wal-Mart, and so Menino does, too. And if that means poor families struggle to find work or buy food, well .  .  .

Zapf, Sanders and a Shiny New City Hall

Last Friday, I received an email in response to my question about the a City Hall from Job Nelson, identifying himself as Lorie Zapf's Chief of Staff. (None of her staffers names are yet up on the City Council Web Site for the District 6.) I must say that I am still not impressed that the council member's staff took this long to respond (from December 27), did not issue a public statement (as far as I can tell) and is not actually responding to my inquiry "Please address the rumors published in the U-T that you might support building a new city hall without a vote of the people." Read the response for yourself and decide.

The question of whether to put a new civic center on the ballot is beyond premature. We should not even be asking the question of council versus ballot for a new city hall, instead the Council and Mayor should be focusing on fixing our budget and pension problems. I heard loud and clear on the campaign trail that voters are distrustful of local government to spend their tax dollars wisely. Until we restore their basic confidence in local government- that we can fill their potholes, patrol their streets and keep their libraries open- we cannot even begin to think about building a new home for city workers. While the City is facing potentially significant costs to maintain city hall, we have higher priorities that we must focus on in the months to come. Until the city eliminates its structural deficit, resolves its pension problems and restores basic services the question about whether or not to place a new city hall on the ballot is a moot one.

Job Nelson

Chief of Staff

Office of Councilmember Lorie Zapf

So far, so good, as far is it goes, but there was wiggle room for a change in her position down the line, and nothing to preclude bypassing a vote of the people. Also, the discussion of how much it costs to run the old city hall has been part of Mayor Sanders standard line on the subject for some time. From yesterday's U-T editorial pages, Q&A, Sanders responding:

Q: There’s been talk again about moving forward again on a new City Hall. What is your view of that?

A: I think we need a new City Hall. I think it saves us money every year, but I can’t educate the public. They’re not looking at it saving money. They’re looking at it as being some new monument.

Of course that's how we are looking at it, Your Honor, because the savings for such projects always seem to evaporate. As an experienced manager, I would like to see the "return on investment" with hard numbers. Here is what the mayor was summarized as saying last July (from KPBS):

He has argued that building a new City Hall will save San Diego money by avoiding significant maintenance expenses at the existing 1960s-era building, and because the city would not have to continue leasing office space for workers at locations around downtown.

My problem is that the gleaming structure pictured in the artist's rendition looks much more expensive than necessary to achieve the savings desired. The failure to educate the public is the mayor's own fault. Put out the numbers and let informed members of the public take a good look at them. Given the track record of our city government, just don't ask us to take this on faith.


Cross posted to sdrostra.com

Odds and Ends

Nancy Pelosi blames Democrat Congressional election losses on George Bush.

Road Dawg asked me to comment on the firing of the C.O. of the Enterprise, Captain Owen Honors. At first, I didn't pay much attention to the issue, figuring that he had made a major screw up and the Navy wasn't going to leave someone in command under those circumstances. However, after reading up on the issue, now I am not so sure. He was XO four years ago when those videos were made. Many officers who are now admirals were aware of the videos, including his then Commanding Officer. Not a peep from any of them, shameful. CDRSalamander comments more extensively.

The Tea Party has repeatedly pointed out that if spending goes up, taxes are eventually going up. Illinois, on the brink of default, proves the case. Democrat legislators and the governor are working up a great plan:

The Democratic leaders in the Illinois General Assembly believe this income tax increase, a corporate tax hike, and a $1-per-pack tax increase on cigarettes would erase the state’s $15 billion budget deficit.

Good luck with that. Income tax increases never generate the revenue predicted, nor cigarette taxes for that matter.

Still no response from Lorie Zapf on the City Hall issue. No mention of the issue during Zapf's interview with LaDona Harvey on KOGO today. (I checked the podcast.)

And in the "Why didn't I think of that?" department, this quote on Obama administration efforts to court business:

Mr. Obama has compelling reasons to repair relations with corporate America. Unemployment remains stubbornly high. There's little likelihood of significant new stimulus spending from Congress or big new moves by the Federal Reserve to pump money into the economy.

That means the key to economic growth—and Mr. Obama's re-election prospects—could lie in corporate treasuries. U.S. non-financial businesses are sitting on nearly $2 trillion in cash and liquid assets, the most since World War II, and Mr. Obama wants them to use it to create more U.S. jobs.

And why are they sitting on their cash, you magna cum laudes in the Administration? Because your policies have harmed the business climate in America and created huge uncertainty. The worst offender being Obamacare, which no one can figure out, and to quote Dean has this fabulousness granting Sebelius Viceroy like powers over health care in the obamacare bill:

700: the number of references to the secretary "shall".

200: the number of references to the secretary "may".

139: the number of references to the secretary "determines".

After he leaves the White House, Barack Obama should sue Columbia and Harvard for failing to provide adequate education in economics and management, hopefully early in 2013.

No Answer From Lorie Zapf

I gave Lorie Zapf a week to get back to me on the new City Hall issue. So far, no response. Here is what I said in my email:

Lorie,
I voted for you and endorsed your candidacy on my blog. Please address the rumors published in the U-T that you might support building a new city hall without a vote of the people. We met on October 6, before the election when you were walking the neighborhood; I know you met many voters, but you made an impression.
The article is linked here:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/dec/26/san-diego-city-hall-project-rises-from-the-ashes/

I also left a message with her office, with a live person, no less. Still no response.

Donna Frye's staff got back to me on a streets complaint in two days. Ms. Zapf is going to have to step up her game.

Quick Hitters

Today's headlines and comments offer such a broad range of topics, I can hardly focus on any one in particular.

Thoughtful commenter Steve, who often challenges me and Dean asks "What alternative plan would get more people to engage in end of life planning?" in response to my objection to government incentives to have this discussion. My response, nothing. The discussion shouldn't be the subject of government incentives because it pollutes the discussion. Further, medicare needs to be fundamentally changed because the government has an incentive for people to die early. If we are going to subsidize elderly health care, then we would be better off providing them a voucher to purchase their own health insurance, to which they could add their own funds. The health insurers could offer plans that include the counseling or not and the individual patients could make the decision.

According to the New York Post, union sanitation workers deliberately slowed the clearing of city streets to protest budget cuts, and the demotion of supervisors. There are indications that the demoted supervisors were culpable. Thanks for making the case for privatization gang. If private firms were contracted to do the work, this would not have happened if proper incentives were in the contract. (A big if, but I know of many ways to put proper incentives in contracts.)

I am worried about the economic recovery. The Wall Street Journal has some contradictory indicators. First, loan activity to businesses is increasing, usually something that is a lagging indicator for economic for recovery. Contrariwise, we see home prices stalling which could presage a double dip recession. My intuition is that housing prices were never allowed to fall far enough to allow for the economy to recovery. Peter Schiff makes that case today, but a picture is often worth a thousand words:


The efforts to prop up the housing market are going to come back to bite this administration, as falling prices and loss of equity choke off recovery.

Finally, more government action to help you die more quickly, at least if you have breast cancer. The FDA is forbidding the use of Avastin in the late treatment of breast cancer, on the basis that it is not "sufficiently" effective. Sufficiently in this case means that it costs too much. When did the FDA get into the business of deciding which drugs are too expensive? Avastin is good enough to treat other forms of cancer, and the FDA has not been aggressive in the past about off label use, so why the rush now? Does Obamacare have anything to do with it? Rivkin and Foley lay out the whole sordid tale.

However, there is some good local news. Walmart collected enough signatures to put the big box ordinance on the ballot. Now the City Council is going to have reconsider their folly. I hope they will repeal the ordinance and spare us the expense of an election. Another opportunity for new council member Lorie Zapf to shine.

New City Hall? Call Lorie Zapf

Will we get a shiny new City Hall without a public vote? It certainly seems to be an open question according to today's U-T.

The debate over whether to build a new San Diego City Hall is expected to begin anew early next year as city leaders weigh three choices: abandon the project, put it to a public vote or bypass voters and build it.

. . . Now the project — and its projected taxpayer savings — could be revived by a new-look City Council that may be willing to forego a public vote and break ground.

Last November, when we defeated the half cent sales tax increase, we were told how essential city services were at risk if the tax increase was not passed. But somehow there is now hundreds of millions of dollars available for a new city hall? I don't put "Enron by the Bay" as my location on my blogger profile without cause.

But the worse news is that recently elected council member Lorie Zapf, who campaigned on a platform of fiscal responsibility to fund core services, is considering voting for this spending without putting it to a vote of the people. If she did so, it would be a repudiation of her campaign as well as proof that she is nothing but a tool of downtown business interests. To be fair, she has not officially marked out her position. From the same U-T article:

During the campaign, Zapf said she opposed the project but was open to a public vote. She was far less committal when her office was asked last week where she stood on the issue.

Zapf’s spokesman, Job Nelson, said the councilwoman thinks there is some merit to the project given potential savings in building maintenance and leased office space but understands why many are struggling with the notion of building a new City Hall while cuts are threatened to public safety and other services.

“We’re kind of stuck in the middle of this one,” Nelson said. “I would say we side with the community and we need to fix the strong distrust they have before we can try.”

The project’s fate likely hangs on Zapf’s final decision.

I urge my fellow Tea Partiers and all San Diegans, especially those in the 6th district to let Zapf's office know how we feel. To help everyone out, here's how we get in touch.

Email: loriezapf@sandiego.gov
Phone: (619) 236-6616
Mail:
Lorie Zapf
202 "C" Street, 10th Floor
San Diego, CA 92101

For the record, I endorsed Zapf in the primary and the general. I thought she was the candidate who had the most consistent voice speaking out against the domination of city hall by the unions. This is a chance for her to live up to her campaign promises.

Supporting Walmart - UPDATED

I love Walmart. Every time I shop there, which isn't that often because they don't have enough locations in San Diego convenient to me, I am surprised by some new low priced item. However, the San Diego City Council, by overriding the mayor's veto of the "Big Box" ordinance doesn't think I should be able to get the most for my shopping dollar. In brief, this ordinance is aimed directly at Walmart.

Walmart and other ordinance opponents said it would create a de facto ban on retailers that have are least 90,000 square feet and dedicate at least 10 percent of its floorspace to nontaxable items like groceries and prescription drugs.

Even supporters of the ordinance admit that this is the goal of the ordinance. Note too, that the primary supporters of preventing Walmart supercenters in San Diego are all Democrats. I also note that most African-Americans support Democrats. But here is what happened at the council hearing on the matter.

And then the tone in council chambers changed sharply as one after another black resident approached the microphone to appeal to the council, painting a drab, disheartening portrait of the dearth of opportunity that exists in one of the city's most economically struggling districts, the one represented by Councilman Tony Young, and the one they said could most benefit from the arrival of a supercenter like Walmart. They asked the council not to make it harder for the company to move in.

Dominic Littleton told the council he was the father of six children, and that he had lost his union job 3 years ago and been unemployed ever since.

Taesha McCall said she needed a job, and that she thought Walmart would help her community.

Note this fact as well:

In Los Angeles, no superstore applications have been submitted since the city adopted a similar ordinance in 2004.

Fortunately, it appears that there will be a petition drive to put a measure on the ballot to overturn this ordinance.

Walmart is going to the voters to get its supercenter stores in San Diego. A signature drive began this morning at Walmart's four stores in the city.
. . .
The signature gathering started at the Walmart store in Murphy Canyon this morning. Walmart has 30-days to collect 31-thousand signatures.

I will definitely be heading to Walmart to sign a petition. Maybe I'll wear that yellow T-shirt. Watch this video to hear more gory details.



I hope to also contact Lorie Zapf's office to ensure that she would be a vote to repeal the Walmart ban. She certainly campaigned hard against union special interests during the recent campaign.

UPDATE:

Commenter Scott notes that I misspelled ordinance as "ordnance" in the original post, which I have corrected. However, in my feeble defense, it seems that the law is actually "ordnance" aimed at Walmart.

Congratulations to Lorie Zapf

The results this morning from the San Diego Country Registrar of Voters showed Lorie Zapf winning with 52.45% of the vote and all precincts reporting. I am sure there are more absentee and provisional ballots to be counted, but her current lead of about 1,500 should hold up. Although I endorsed her, I had been critical of her campaign. I have to give her credit for the last minute blitz of mailers, calls and advertising, including internet advertising, that painted her opponent as a tool of the government labor unions. I was very concerned at the end as I saw many more Howard Wayne lawn signs and the negative coverage that she received in the City Beat and other local news outlets.

Hopefully, she can join Carl DeMaio and Kevin Faulconer as voices of reason on the City Council and start by outsourcing jobs under managed competition.

City Beat Doesn't Get It - District 6

On Wednesday, the San Diego City Beat endorsed Howard Wayne for San Diego City Council, District 6. They claim he is more knowledgeable than Lorie Zapf and point to questions about her past business dealings and alleged homophobia. My reaction, so what? Who is going to lower my taxes? Their editorial board refuses to think through the tough questions like: "What is the source of our budget woes?" and "Who is best suited to tackle those issues?" Have two years of demonstrations by the Tea Party on the size and voraciousness of government passed them by?

If they had made an argument that it only Wayne, on the "only Nixon could go to China" theory, could tackle the pension problem, I might have had some respect. Instead they stick their heads in the sand, as if pensions and budgets are not serious issues. I agree that Howard Wayne is very knowledgeable, and I reported that earlier. It's not the point, how can he be trusted when he seeks out public employee endorsements and donations and has been inconsistent on outsourcing city services?

The U-T seems to get it, at least on this race. Here is a part of their endorsement:

Zapf, meanwhile, has faced deserved criticism over her personal finances and for some past remarks about gays for which she has apologized. But she displays an increasingly strong command of fiscal issues and far more of a willingness to demand the changes San Diego must make to end its budget nightmare.

Exactly.

The Meaning of our Choice in November

On this coming election day, there is a choice between an inexperienced new comer to politics who has had some explaining to do about her past, including personal debt against a more experienced Democrat. (I'm not talking about the Delaware Senate campaign either.) The new comer, a Republican, has come out for reducing union pension costs and for competitive bidding on city services. The Democrat has shown a detailed understanding of the pension problem and the inner workings of city government, and has promised to also tackle the pension problem. However, he is backed by the very unions that are at the root of the problems and his votes in the state assembly supported legislation that was part of creating the pension problem in California.

Of course, I am talking the San Diego District 6 Council race between Lorie Zapf and Howard Wayne. We have to decide if we are willing to accept Howard Wayne's word that he opposes Proposition D and will work to force the city employees to increase their pension contribution share, despite his record and endorsements. Or will we go with Lorie Zapf, who has been consistent in her statements on competitive bidding and union clout, but has been slow to respond to allegations.

B-Daddy's position is that this is the year that we toss out the old politicians who have gotten us into this mess and bring in new people to reform the process. I welcome your comments on the matter.

Programming Note - Interview With Lorie Zapf

In all the hubbub running up to last week's primaries, I lost an email from Lorie Zapf agreeing to be interviewed. I will attempt to make contact for a weekend interview. Other than her mortgage issues, which I promise to cover, any other suggestions for questions are welcome.

I have a pretty full plate with work, school and home obligations this week, so blogging might be light.

Even More On Zapf

My previous article on Lorie Zapf's difficulties was quoted in the San Diego CityBeat, an alternative newspaper. My comments were taken as a withdrawal of my endorsement of Lorie Zapf. I want to make clear that they were not. Lorie Zapf is walking a fine line and I am concerned that she doesn't understand that serving the people in elected office is a privilege that requires not only actual propriety but the appearance of propriety. There is no shortage of candidates for public office, she should understand that she is on a job interview and the public is the panel.

I was hoping my comments would get Zapf to clean up her act. I have serious issues with every candidate in the District 6 race; but electing someone with the fortitude to scale back pensions and outsource services is my number one issue, and Zapf appears to be the best positioned to do so. In more normal times, I might be endorsing Kim Tran, but I think that Kim is, by nature, just a little too nice of a human being, and someone with a little anger and edge is going to be needed to take on the unions. The budget crises faced by the city, state and nation are unprecedented because they are all happening simultaneously, not due to some catastrophic misfortune, but due to the lack of courage to take on the clamor for ever increasing spending. I am looking for candidates willing to make cuts in city government, even on firefighting and police, and willing to use every legal means available to scale back the costs of services, including outsourcing, raising employee pension contributions, and re-negotiating contracts and benefits.