After 2 Major Missteps, Jen Campbell Has Lost Support at the Beach

by on July 10, 2020 · 29 comments

in Ocean Beach, San Diego

Councilwoman Jen Campbell who represents District 2 on the San Diego City Council is in trouble at the beach. After two major missteps – the first being her design to get rid of the 30-foot height limit in the Midway District, and the second being her recent plan to legitimize short-term vacation rentals – the Councilwoman who bested then-incumbent and Republican Lori Zapf in 2018 has lost support from residents and activists in the beach neighborhoods of her district.

And the criticisms of Campbell on these two major issues has opened up other complaints about her practice of being a councilperson. Many of them center around her lack of presence at the beach and other minor issues that have stuck in the craws of those who have been observing her for the last two and half years.

It’s getting so bad that’s there open talk of putting together a recall effort against her. Recall efforts can be very divisive and ineffectual and usually don’t succeed in this town. But nevertheless, people who voted for Campbell and even worked on her campaign for election have been soured on her presence on council. And are now having second-thoughts.

Midway 30 Foot Height Limit

Readers of the OB Rag know we’ve been railing against any effort to dispose of the 30 feet limit on building heights west of I-5. And with Campbell leading the charge to have the Midway District “cleansed,” we’ve been particularly troubled. She and one of the last remaining Republicans on the City Council, Chris Cate, began last February to whip up the idea of reversing nearly a half century of urban planning in the coastal areas of San Diego.

Now the Campbell-Cate plan will be on the November ballot for voter “approval.” Getting the Midway planners on board was key – as it lent some legitimacy to the whole idea by displaying “grassroots support.” As we noted previously, 6 people with business conflicts of interest does not a mandate make. But, it still looks good. Campbell and Cate can now wave the Midway planners’ approval like a green flag for their train. And the consequences of this straight, above-board digging under the height limit can be seen today, as developers rush in and promote their dreams for the Sports Arena redevelopment.

Is wasn’t just the callous disregard of the people who raised the money and who did the walking to collect thousands of signatures back in the early 1970s in order to get Prop D – the height limit – on the ballot – which passed overwhelmingly by all sections of the city in 1972, it was the way it was done. In the middle of the pandemic without the public’s involvement. On such a key and important issue to people at the beach and coast.

Plus, Campbell has now gone back – way back – on campaign promises she made in 2018. Every person who ever runs for the District 2 council seat is asked about the 30-foot height limit and Campbell, like all the others, pledged to defend it. What happened?

Campbell was caught on a hot mic recently talking about her decision to pursue changes to the coastal height limit, long a third rail in San Diego politics. The fact that she didn’t know people could hear her was funny, sure. But one thing she said was downright rebellious: “I’m not chicken at all about it,” she said. “What have I got to lose, right?” The short, quick answer is – all.

When Campbell and Cate first came out with their Midway proposal, the OB Rag did a quick survey of community leaders and activists about how they felt about her move. Most of the responses were fairly negative, and we sat on them for months. But when Campbell came out with her latest boondoggle about STVRs, those responses were dusted off and reviewed again.

Geoff Page, an OB Rag reporter who has decades of experience in the construction industry and who reports on the various planning committees about the Peninsula, had this to say about Campbell:

What we have now is a council person who is in lock step with the mayor and the power establishment in San Diego. Her recent action was, not just support for changing the sacred 30-foot height limit, but initiating the move, leading the charge. This from the council member whose district includes the entire Prop D area.

Every person who ever runs for the District 2 council seat is asked about the 30-foot height limit and Campbell, like all the others, pledged to defend it. But, like politicians everywhere, once in office, all bets are off, even for something as serious as the 30-foot height limit. Campbell is not serving her constituency, she’s serving other interests.

Another Point Loma activist who has volunteered for years on one of the area’s planning committees echoed these sentiments.

There is no way we can participate in the process now as it seems City Council is using the pandemic to exclude us all and push through an attack on the sacrosanct 30 foot height limit. I can think of better ways to spend city money right now than this. I started my involvement with the [planning committees] over density. I acquiesced over time and began to accept it. However, this pandemic shows me that a conversation needs to be had about that density. Will the trade-off be health? Dr Jen?

One of the leaders of a group called Save Everyone’s Access has recently been mobilized to resist the push to demolish the height limits, Scott Andrews said:

Campbell needs to stop pretending that cramming 20,000 new people next to the coast without parks will not further jam up roads to the beach. Everybody knows if they remove half of the 30’ height limit area, they will soon be back for the coast part.  Campbell is not representing the public that owns the beach, but the developers that want to wall it off.

Others who have been pushed out of the woodwork because of Campbell’s moves are totally opposed to removing the height limit. Roy said:

We’re going to hear a lot of folks saying the 30 foot height limit exists to protect rich folks views (which is nonsense). And that tall residential view towers are the only way to combat climate change. There clearly is a talking point memo going around. Of course the height limit in many ways is about the opposite of preserving views, its about preventing the monetizing of views at the price of communities. And of course preserving existing structures and building low to mid rise wooden structures is most likely is a way more environmentally smart way to add housing. And of course we could also just stop eating cows, or having fewer kids, etc. This is what the take over of the Dems by the money that used to go to the Republicans is going to feel like in SD. Bike riders yelling at and making fun of old people. Fun.

Frances O’Neill Zimmerman is a former member of the San Diego School Board. She believes Campbell “in trouble with all San Diegans who support the height limit, including and especially in areas like the Midway. Replacing one disaster with another is not a strategy: it’s folly. If it happens, Jen Campbell’s name will live in infamy.”

Another thoughtful observer of San Diego wrote the OB Rag:

I think that we can all look at the Midway area and feel that we could do better. The question, as always, revolves around what intensity of use results in “better.” I personally do not fear a proliferation of downtown or Miami Beach type high rise buildings. I think that what would be a more likely outcome of removing the height limit would be an extension of Mission Valley, with more buildings of mid-rise height with, perhaps, a few high rise buildings. I’m thinking of the recently constructed development along Hotel Circle North, or the christian theme park and hotel along Hotel Circle South. In any event, I don’t think any of us want a second Mission Valley rising up in Midway.

Short-Term Vacation Rentals

There’s also been plenty of push-back from people at the coast to Campbell’s most recent risky venture, her plan for short-term vacation rentals. Criticism of this proposal has come from the Pacific Beach Town Council and from the main group that has opposed STVRs, Save San Diego Neighborhoods.

One of the main criticism of this STVR plan was that it excluded the communities at the beach – as it was a deal between a huge travel platform, Expedia, and a hospitality union, UNITE HERE. In other words, one of the largest “stakeholders” in the discussions that have been going on in this city for the last half decade – the communities most affected by the “wild west” nature of short-term rentals – were not included in the package deal hammered together by Campbell. Plus, not to mention Airbnb – the “market leader” of STVRs in San Diego – was also not part of the deal.

One Ocean Beach community leader chided Campbell on the process, saying she ignored the wisdom gained by experiences at the beach with vacation rentals:

This latest “UNITE HERE” presser on STVRs, clumsily issued without input or notice from any community group is indicative of the lack of respect that we are all experiencing. This is most unfortunate especially considering the wealth of information that we collectively could provide for her consideration.

An OB neighborhood advocate conceded that Campbell’s office did reach out to representatives from several OB groups, but admitted to us, that, “The meeting I was part of seemed very productive but this press release that came out immediately after doesn’t seem to incorporate any changes we asked for.”

The Pacific Beach Town Council did not mince words in its scathing critique of the Campbell plan.

Prompted by corporate lobbyists, Councilmember Jen Campbell is working with Expedia to legalize visitor accommodations in our residential neighborhoods while ignoring key stakeholders. The announcement on July 1st about a “compromise” framework for STVR regulation came as a surprise to Pacific Beach residents and organizations as we have been seeking a solution since 2007. As stakeholders, we’ve been ignored.

Community town councils, planning groups, and residents were not consulted on this “compromise,” although many of us have reached out to the D2 council office since Councilmember Campbell was elected, and meeting requests have been consistently ignored.

Our Pacific Beach Town Council strongly opposes this approach by Councilmember Campbell to legalize short-term rentals in our neighborhoods. STVRs are visitor accommodations and these commercial uses are illegal under the city’s zoning code and have no place in our residential zones.

We’re appalled at the process in which STVR operators, a labor union, and a multi-billion dollar corporation were the only ones at the table producing a “compromise” that radically and completely alters our residential zoning laws only to their benefit at the expense of San Diego residents.

During an unprecedented affordable housing crisis, why is Expedia deciding our current and future housing supply? We oppose this back room deal driven by special interests.

Members of Save San Diego Neighborhoods had even stronger words. One member called Campbell’s plan – which she termed a “compromise” – was “nothing more than capitulation,” and “the beginning of the end of any thought that someday, we – San Diegans – might break the stranglehold corporations, big business and a few wealthy individuals have had on our City for – well, forever. Whether Republican or Democrat governing San Diego it’s always been pretty much the same. And this ‘compromise’ is just another example.”

During the 2018 campaign, the organization asked Campbell, “How many homes in your district would you support being used as entire-home short term rentals?” She answered, “Zero.” It’s true. During the campaign she told voters in District 2 that she was adamantly opposed to STVRs  in San Diego residential zones. Now the group views her plan as a way to “legalize short term vacation rentals in San Diego neighborhoods.”

SSDN asked some important questions. Why now is Campbell working with “one of the largest multinational short term vacation rental corporations in the world, Expedia, Inc. who touts itself as, ‘the parent company of leading short term rental brands, Vrbo and Homeaway.'”

Why, in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, which has so severely damaged San Diego’s economy – including hotels and motels – would Councilmember Campbell want to legalize short term vacation rentals in San Diego neighborhoods?

Why, when San Diego is suffering under the worst housing shortage – and homelessness crisis -in decades, would Councilmember Campbell advocate for the conversion of residential homes to short term vacation rentals for tourist accommodations?

And, why is Councilmember Campbell so anxious to have this proposed ordinance considered by the full Council this month – July? Why is she ramrodding this proposed ordinance which we have yet to even see?

And finally, if, as Councilmember Campbell says, she talked to all the “stakeholders” – which includes San Diego residents, Town Councils and Planning Groups – why then is it that the only community member present at the press conference was a short term vacation rental owner/operator?

There are also accusations that the Mission Beach community leader that Campbell did work with, “sold out to the STR industry long ago,” and depends on an owner of a beach rental firm for advice.

More in General

The thing about these two, major missteps by Campbell is that they have led people to be more critical of her other practices. Now, granted, complaints about her absence at the beach and being MIA have to be measured against what the pandemic has forced us into, and there is no precedence for councilmembers having to deal with being an elected representative and staying safe. But that’s only the last several months. What about before the plague hit us?

An OB community leader accused Campbell of “ghosting us.”

The big issue in all of this STVR crap is how Campbell’s office is handling the community groups in her district. There is a distinct air of arrogance and dismissal about how her office treats us all, which is more like a stench to be honest. She rarely spends any time listening to us and acts like we are not really that important to her decision making, which I believe is a huge mistake.

Another veteran of community planning, said: “When the Planning Board had an issue she did not pay any attention to us. We got more from Scott Sherman.  She is also on the wrong side of the 30 foot height limit for the Midway district.”

Another planner on the Peninsula tied Campbell’s absence with the pandemic.

Her lack of  presence and leadership during this crisis is particular disappointing since she ran on being a doctor. Claiming her knowledge and expertise would be a boon the next time San Diego faced a public health crisis. The community is accustomed to a certain level of engagement from our City Councilmembers, unfortunately her lack of presence and leadership is felt.

A member of one of the active Democratic clubs in the area, thought, Campbell “is seen as lazy and disinterested. She is going to make it hard for Dems to hold on to this City Council seat,” and felt if the Republicans ran someone who was popular, “they would win back the seat.” They also brought up the COVID situation.

Jen has not stepped up in this pandemic from what I’ve seen. She ran on being the Doctor on the city council. She hasn’t taken a stand on anything that would have been easy – not the Roundup use at Sunset Cliffs Natural Park, not helped the bayside residents with Port issues, where is she with all the mess on Sunset Cliffs, and now her proposal to eliminate the 30 foot height limit in the Midway development area? The 30 foot height limit has to be preserved or it will be nibbled to death until it is no longer viable.

A long-time Point Loma policy-wonk had several observations.

First, I continue to be puzzled by Dr. Jen. Did she deliberately mislead us on key issues like the height limit or is she essentially politically naive and being led down the path by the voices that are traditionally louder than those of the communities that she serves? I find myself thinking it is the latter, as I have heard her say things about the issues and the processes that are just not true, as though someone is feeding her talking points and she is blindly repeating them.

I remember a Peninsula planning board meaning where she got the process for handling initiatives completely wrong and stubbornly refused to acknowledge the corrections from the members of the audience. I thought that did not bode well for our community. I find that my misgivings were largely correct.

Both the Spawars and height limit decisions should be following a process that cannot be followed in the era of social distancing. The public has no meaningful way to participate in the decision making process. We really need to hit the reset or pause button. There is no time bound reason for rushing through the process, unless the opportunistic use of the pandemic to short circuit citizen participation is the reason.

Geoff Page had more thoughts on this.

Then, there is Midway. The Navy is working on a deal to redevelop the old SPAWARS property. Last year, the mayor and the new head of SANDAG announced they were pursuing a plan to obtain the property and build a “Grand Central Station” transportation hub there. The announcement was in the media, which was where the Midway-Pacific Highway Planning Group first heard about it, not from the city. They were not pleased. This project has been a source of anger and frustration for the group as they have been ignored.

Campbell came to one of the Midway groups regular monthly meetings. In the very beginning of her opening remarks, she exclaimed how excited she was about the plan to build the Grand Central Station. Kind of reminded of how an audience reacts when a rock band yells how happy they are to be in Cleveland when they are in Philadelphia. It was crystal clear that Campbell had no idea how the Midway group felt about the project, or more importantly, about how the city had completely ignored them.

Page had more to say.

What we have now is a council person who is in lock step with the mayor and the power establishment in San Diego.

Another one of her actions that hit close to home was her position on the ridiculous Dog Beach disabled sidewalk and ramp. The city was sued over the condition of the walkway. They settled for $50k and determined they needed to replace the whole walkway for over a million dollars. Lots of people spoke up saying this was a ridiculous expense and a flawed design. The OB Planning Board got very involved. People wanted the city to consider alternatives.

It came before the city council and people from OB came to speak, including the chair of the OB Planning Board, Andrea Schlageter. After public comments, the council discusses the matter and a motion is made. Discussion was brief, Campbell made the motion to approve and it passed. In moments.

Campbell stuck to the party line that the lawsuit required the walkway to be rebuilt, as is. That was a lie. The lawsuit did not contain any conditions at all, just $50k and they went away. Further evidence that the suit did not require this is the walkway itself, which remains untouched more than a year later. It has been a daily liability ever since. Campbell did not listen to anything the community had to say, she ignored them and has ignored the unchanged liability that could be the subject of another lawsuit.

The picture of Campbell that has emerged for me is person who is thoroughly enjoying the spotlight and eager to please the power structure to ensure she stays in that spotlight. She surely would never have stood a chance running for office with a proposal to change the 30-foot height limit. Part of the problem is that Campbell does not live in the 30-foot height limit area, she lives in Bay Ho on the east side of the 5 freeway. She has no history with coastal issues. But, even worse, she seems to have made no effort to learn about the coast or Midway for that matter.

The voters were hoodwinked, there is no other way to put it.

A keen observer of San Diego politics said:

Getting a second term, by an outsider, requires local performance. The voters must feel that she’s become their go to girl. Jen Campbell is a Citizens United funded candidate and she is feeding her funders. I have seen little bonding among voters and Campbell but there never was any. The first race was an anti republican vote. She was advantaged by competing in a large field.

And yes, there has been talk of a recall. Yet, how would that work in the middle of a pandemic? But, Democrats do have a problem if they continue to back Campbell, and could pave the way for a popular Republican to retake the District 2 seat.

But Campbell doesn’t have anyone else to blame. She’s lent her name to two controversial proposals, neither of which sits well with voters at the beach. Campbell does have a stronghold in western Clairemont – but is it a strong enough dam to hold back the deluge of complaints and mistrust flooding in from the coast?

{ 29 comments… read them below or add one }

Avatar Ol OB Hippie July 10, 2020 at 4:14 pm

Oh boy! Looks like the OBRAG has thrown down the gauntlet here. Say, if the 30 ft ht limit is the third rail of San Diego politics, what are the first two? I believe a “rail” is an issue that can’t be touched, and if you do, you’re electrified, toast. Maybe the other two are tourism and the Navy. Or maybe construction and white supremacy?

Reply

Avatar Geoff Page July 10, 2020 at 4:28 pm

The third rail refers to subway tracks. Two rails for the wheels and a third for the electrical power, that’s the one you don’t want to touch.

Reply

Avatar Ol OB Hippie July 10, 2020 at 4:34 pm

All right, that makes sense. So there aren’t 2 other rails, then. Thanks for the electrification, oh I mean elucidation.

Reply

Avatar Geoff Page July 10, 2020 at 4:29 pm

Very well said, editor dude. I think a recall should be done as a mater of principle so the next elected council member will think before double crossing the community.

Reply

Avatar John Thickstun July 10, 2020 at 9:40 pm

Great article, Frank. Well done.
And Geoff, I agree.

Reply

Avatar Roy McMakin July 10, 2020 at 10:15 pm

Sorry District 2. Campbell’s action are pretty much business-as-usual for us in District 3. Both Gloria and Ward will say anything to get elected, but once in power they do what Big Real Estate $ etc wants. My hunch is any Dem on City Council will more or less be the same at this point.

Reply

Avatar Carol Richter July 13, 2020 at 11:42 am

I think there’s a good chance that “business as usual” might not rear its ugly head if Barbara Bry gets elected. She is not now and has never been interested in, being a career politician. AND she is adamantly opposed to STVR – (No deals, they are illegal.) – eliminating the height limit and the truly ruinous plan from Sacramento, seconded by Faulkner’s Complete Communities fiasco, to destroy single family neighborhoods by allowing apartment buildings to be built next to any single family home throughout the city. We are being attacked from all sides. Toni Atkins, Todd Gloria, Chris Ward (wants Gloria’s seat), Chris Cate, etc.

Reply

Avatar Geoff Page July 13, 2020 at 12:58 pm

I’m with you, Carol, the best thing for this city would be to see Bry win in November. Gloria is just the same clown in a different suit.

Reply

Avatar Carolyn Chase July 11, 2020 at 12:20 pm

Let us also learn about the Mayor’s rush to pass the oddly named “Complete Communities” program that includes a Park Master Plan and reductions of Development Impacts Fees along with many more incentives to allow increased densities citywide “within a half-mile of intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods”. Then, the ONLY thing capping density will be the 30ft Coastal Overlay Zone. Search at SanDiego.gov for complete communities and prepare to be overwhelmed.

Reply

Avatar Carol Richter July 13, 2020 at 11:46 am

Then plan allows that the Coastal Zone has a 30′ height limit, but does not exclude the zone. Hoping to attack it in the future. But does eliminate single family zones by allowing apartment structures to be built everywhere that’s residential. Disastrous with no consideration for parking, providing additional city services )water, sewer, electric, gas) and as mentioned above, again being rushed through City Council with no public input. This plan would negatively impact this City in ways we cannot even conceive.

Reply

Avatar korla eaquinta July 14, 2020 at 8:03 am

The density being allowed near transit means: Existing or “planned” transit within the next 50 years!

Reply

Avatar Nanci Kelly July 11, 2020 at 2:35 pm

I’m prepared for the criticism that may come, but find it imperative to address the overarching issue that is driving these controversies, particularly given the juxtaposition of this article followed by, “You Better Hike The Stowe Trail in Santee Before Fanita Ranch is Built…”. I have lived in OB since ’71. I then supported, and have always supported, the 30-foot-height limit (having visited the mess in Miami Beach etc). I have responded to density issues on the OBPB and other venues. I have also been a student of, and activist regarding, climate change and its impacts on ALL facets of life on our planet, for several years. And it has me facing the very painful realities that we will all face – and engaging in difficult rethinking. I was a college student when I moved here; I am now a grandmother of two young girls who will be inheriting the mistakes we have made – in great part due to the unwillingness of elected officials to respond to the experts testifying to congress in the ’80s. I, too, am very disappointed in Jen Campbell’s lack of community engagement and her proposal methods. But once we finish with our legitimate political fights, as well as our usual mud fights, we will still be left with this (non democratic/republican) fact: given that climate change deterioration (impacted by population growth) will continue to plague our children/grandchildren in the absence of immediate, extensive action, how will we contribute to the solutions? You can’t rail against the Fanita Ranch project AND the Midway project and not offer a solution that will mitigate the effects of climate change. This is why we are where we are.

Reply

Avatar Frank J July 11, 2020 at 6:43 pm

Hmmm. Makes campaign promises and gives the right answers, then reneges. Kowtows to money and special interests. Doesn’t represent the majority of constituents. Fed talking points and repeats them. Addresses groups oblivious to their real feeling and goals. Suppresses input from others. Hypocrisy, ignorance, limelight, lies. SOLD! Err… That would be you, Dr Jen, wherever you are.

Reply

Avatar nostalgic July 12, 2020 at 12:19 pm

Coronado: “As summer approaches, the city of Coronado would like to remind homeowners that renting a residential property in Coronado for less than 26 days at a time is prohibited. The purpose of the city’s prohibition of short-term rentals in a residential zone is to preserve the quality of life for full time residents and to maintain the residential character of local neighborhoods.”
https://patch.com/california/coronado/an–city-reminds-community-of-vacation-rental-law

Reply

Avatar John Thickstun July 12, 2020 at 6:51 pm

I wonder if she’s enjoying this spotlight, Geoff.
https://www.facebook.com/SaveSanDiegoNeighborhoods/videos/900623373780280/

Reply

Avatar cliffhanger July 12, 2020 at 9:21 pm

And … she voted for a budget with an INCREASE in funding for the police department.
Jordan would have been a dependable representative of his community.
For Jen, this is a hobby and a resume item.

Reply

Avatar Adam July 13, 2020 at 7:49 am

Jordan is a transplant and a less impressive version of Dr. Campbell. He too would get in there and ignore us… he ignores us now. Just FYI.

Reply

Avatar Pete R July 13, 2020 at 5:41 am

I disagree. Politics requires compromise. Don’t make the perfect the enemy of the good, or you’ll never get anything done. This is the first Democrat we’ve had representing our district in a long time, and you already want to recall her?? Sheesh. Good luck finding a politician who will do exactly what you want 100% of the time without having to compromise.

Reply

Avatar Paul Webb July 13, 2020 at 9:15 am

Pete R, I don’t think that anyone expects or demands that a politician do everything exactly as we would like to have done (although, admittedly, it would be nice). We do, however, expect that our elected representatives follow through on the positions that they advocated when running for office, such as opposing changes to the 30-foot height limit, opposing short term rentals, etc., positions which “Dr. Jen” has appeared to have drastically modified since the election. And, in the case of “Dr. Jen” it would also be nice to have an elected representative that actually responds to constituents with something other than an automatically generated reply, which is all I have ever received.

Reply

Avatar Geoff Page July 13, 2020 at 9:23 am

Compromise is one thing but doing the absolute opposite of what you said you would do to get elected, that is another matter. Yea, she is the first “Democrat” we’ve had in there but she ain’t behaving like one. Politician’s need to know there will be consequences for their actions. I think unemployment would be an excellent consequence for her.

Reply

Avatar Carol Richter July 13, 2020 at 11:51 am

And these issues are some of the most important issues in her District. This isn’t petty stuff. Right now, other than Covid where as a physician she’s chosen to be silent (odd), STVR, the 30′ height limit and density are tree of the Big 4. Homeless and mental illness with all of the attendant issues, is #4, I imagine.

Reply

Avatar Eric L DuVall July 13, 2020 at 9:59 am

People need to get over this Republican-Democrat thing pronto. I have never understood it. I’m sure Laurie Zapff had her detractors, but I really thought she was a pretty good councilperson. She seemed to care, worked hard and was accessible. She got voted out in favor of this Jen Campbell mainly because she was a Republican and Campbell was a Democrat. Wow. Particularly at a local level where issues are much easier to grasp, party affiliation of a candidate should not be a primary concern. Come on, everybody step back and wake up about that, please.

Reply

Frank Gormlie Frank Gormlie July 13, 2020 at 10:14 am

Lori Zapf was not a better councilperson than Campbell; she was voted out of office for plenty of reasons, see https://obrag.org/2018/11/the-sins-of-lorie-zapf-part-1/ and then see this https://obrag.org/2018/11/the-sins-of-councilwoman-lorie-zapf-part-2/;
Zapf also zig-zagged on the 30 foot height limit. Let’s not forget what her problems were. Those who are GOP’ers of course didn’t want to see her go and some were the first to call to get rid of Campbell before she had even been in office 6 months. Things have now changed.

Reply

Avatar Geoff Page July 13, 2020 at 10:16 am

Eric, I think you need to wake up about that. Affiliation does matter, especially when it comes to compassion. You thought Zapf was good? All she was good at was photo ops and empty gestures. Maybe you can tell us what she actually accomplished while on the council? She was not voted out because of party affiliation, she was voted out because she did nothing but exactly what the mayor wanted, which is unfortunately what Campbell is also doing.

Reply

Frank Gormlie Frank Gormlie July 13, 2020 at 10:32 am

Joe LeCava, who is running for city council in D1, had this to say about the new proposal:

The “most aggressive tier,” LaCava said, “is whole-house rentals, available as a mini-hotel. That’s clearly where most of the problems are.”

LaCava said, “they ignore the fact that those [rentals] are illegal today, and the city has no clue how to do enforcement about that. So if you’re not willing to shut down those illegal operations, why do we think that you’re going to successfully shut down these whole-house rentals when this ordinance goes into effect?”

Though the agreement purports to find common ground between the hospitality union and Expedia, LaCava said the proposal “is no proposal at all.”

https://www.lajollalight.com/news/story/2020-07-13/new-proposal-for-short-term-vacation-rental-regulation-draws-fire-in-la-jolla

Reply

Avatar Carol Richter July 13, 2020 at 11:59 am

Myth #1 being used by Campbell’s coalition as a threat of financial consequences in the future is: since the City has charged TOT fees and not enforced the law that STVR are illegal, the City will lose any lawsuit that challenges enforcement. Completely bogus. See Schaefer v. The City of LA plus the 53 subsequent cases that cited the ruling. The City can change enforcement if they so choose. (Full disclosure. I’m not a lawyer so the above is my opinion.)

Reply

Avatar Paul Webb July 13, 2020 at 1:38 pm

Although I am generally supportive of Joe LaCava and his bid for council District 1, it is important to remember that as the chair of the CPC, the committee comprised of the chairs of all the community planning groups, he stated that it might be time to revisit the 30-foot height limit as it may be outdated and keeping more housing opportunities for persons of low and moderate income from the coastal communities. My recollection, which I am not going to say is 100% accurate as this was a few years ago, is that he thought it was appropriate for La Jolla (which, of course, would be crucial for political self preservation in District 1) but perhaps not for other coastal communities. Someone correct me if I remember this incorrectly.

Reply

Judi Curry Judi Curry July 13, 2020 at 1:13 pm

Interesting that it is Campbell that gives the introduction to the proposals for the new Midway, 7000+ homes. She’s touting it all the way. How come no one talks about 7000 new homes and where they will get the water the new residents will need to survive? And the traffic? And the lack of schools; and…and…and….

Reply

Avatar DrTom July 17, 2020 at 9:26 pm

I M P E A C H Jen Campbell N O W.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Older Article:

Newer Article: