OB Rag Answers U-T Editorial on Campbell Recall an ‘Unnecessary Distraction’

On the last day of 2020, the San Diego Union-Tribune ran an editorial, headlined, “Campbell Recall Is Unnecessary Distraction,” which castigated Campbell critics as “angry” and “disgruntled”. (The U-T online article used a different headline.)

The reasons the editorial gives for why people in and outside her District 2 are angry and disgruntled are Campbell’s “compromise on short-term vacation rentals” and because she was elected as Council President over fellow Democrat but more progressive Monica Montgomery Steppe.

Then the editorial makes this bold statement: “The notion of recalling her because critics think she is unfit is undemocratic.” The editorial assumes that most people are upset with Campbell because of her council prez election, and that Campbell critics should just wait and vote her out in the 2022 election.

It says that, “Given the time it takes to collect signatures, a recall election likely wouldn’t happen until late 2021 when her re-election campaign would be in full swing.” Otherwise, it says, because her leadership has not been tested yet, it’s all just “an unwarranted distraction.”

Basically, the editorial says, shut up and wait until June 2022 – which is, what, 18 months away. So, we’re just supposed to lobby for other things on our agenda in the meantime while Campbell sits in the council seat.

Several fallacies in this editorial immediately jump out.

One, the notion that all Campbell did to ignite the ire at the coast was her short-term rental “compromise” is short-sighted. That’s not what we call it when a candidate says one thing before the election, and then says the opposite after they’re elected. Campbell during her initial campaign told the group that is focused on opposing short-term rentals, Save San Diego Neighborhoods, that she was totally against them, that they were “illegal.” This is not a compromise.

Two, the editorial failed to even mention Campbell’s biggest failure: her unmitigated destruction of the 30-foot height limit in the Midway District with her Measure E – that was passed in November. Although we need to note, the measure failed in the coastal neighborhoods of District 2, including in the Midway and in western Clairemont. Again, Campbell went against her earlier pledges to uphold the  height limit passed in 1972.

So, on two very crucial issues for Campbell’s constituents, she has betrayed them. The editorial did not at all give these issues the importance they deserved. And by leaving perhaps the more critical issue out of its consideration, the editorial’s basis falls flat.

It also says we need to wait for Campbell’s leadership to be tested. Well, ask people in District 2 about her leadership and you’re get responses that are not printable. Her leadership has definitely been tested these last two years – and her communities have found it wanting. Her lack of leadership has been especially stark during the pandemic – even as she flouted her medical license during the campaign as a campaign slogan.

Many in District 2, particularly the leaderships of the different community town councils and planning committees, have found Campbell MIA and unresponsive to their issues and entreaties.

Finally, is it “undemocratic” to want to unseat a politician who has made democracy during the pandemic a mockery? Campbell’s assault on these two issues when public participation has been extremely limited, and her push to resolve them without hardly any public input, is what is undemocratic. It is undemocratic to use the virus as cover for a lack of transparency.

What is a distraction is this U-T editorial. It didn’t use all the facts and issues involved and it accused Campbell’s critics of being selfish, wasteful and undemocratic.

And here we thought, the “new” U-T was more than fish-wrap.

It is time for Campbell’s recall.

Here is the editorial from the Editorial Board on Dec. 31, 2020:

Two weeks ago, The San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial Board came out strongly against the effort to recall Gov. Gavin Newsom, whose organizers appear to have more than half of the 1,495,709 signatures needed to force a statewide vote on Newsom’s ouster. We said recalls “should be reserved for elected officials who are corrupt or extremely incompetent” and argued that while the governor had made mistakes, a recall simply wasn’t justified.

Now a push to recall City Council President Jennifer Campbell is gaining attention locally. Some proponents are angry that Campbell, who represents the coastal District 2, proposed a compromise on short-term vacation rentals that would scale them back but allow some to continue. Some are disgruntled that she became council president over more progressive council colleague and fellow Democrat Monica Montgomery Steppe, a prominent supporter of police reform, in a 5-4 vote. Some are predicting that Campbell will become a tool of labor and business interests as council leader.

The notion of recalling her because critics think she is unfit is undemocratic. They should let her serve as council president before presuming she is a poor leader, and instead of pursuing a recall that is an unwarranted distraction, Campbell critics should focus on opposing her rentals compromise and lobbying for other items on their agenda. Given the time it takes to collect signatures, a recall election likely wouldn’t happen until late 2021 when her re-election campaign would be in full swing. If she disappoints, vote her out in the 2022 election.