42 thoughts on “‘Hey You! Get Up! We’ve Outlawed Sleeping in Public!’”

  1. Todd Gloria ran on the promise 4 years ago he would reduce the homeless population and balance the budget. Today he refuses to appear in public to defend his shameful 4 years of failure. Make San Diego better than it is today VOTE FOR LARRY TURNER and make San Diego a place we can be proud of.

    Reply

  2. he will bring down the cost of real estate in San Diego by no longer giving away City owned land. Building low income housing will be reduced by 25% with the removal of the cost of the land.

    Reply

      1. Twenty five percent of all real estate sales prices are land costs.

        The overall solution to the homeless problem is to bring down housing costs. There is a direct correlation between housing costs and the homeless.

        The cost of all real estate is the land and the sticks that are built on the land. Under the Turner plan San Diego leases the land to the stick builders. The stick builders have use of the land for a specified period and then the land reverts back to the city, who repeats the process of leasing and collecting rents.

        If our city government adopted this idea there would be no need to tax our citizens or sell bonds. Remove the sale of land and replace it with a lease and you reduce the cost of housing by 25%

        Reply

        1. Interesting concept. I would even say that 75% of the cost of a home is the land in SD. Where is all this city land that people could build on ? How would this impact housing prices all over SD ? Why would a developer go along with this idea, when he cannot transfer a deed to the prospective owner ?

          Reply

            1. Of course the land value % will vary within the city.
              I just had my home reassessed after some improvements, and since I know about what it is worth on the market, my land is 70% and my home 30%. Not uncommon in SD. Figure out what your home is worth on the market, and then use $250-300 per square foot for your building. The rest is land value.

              Reply

              1. Sounds like way more land then house based on your numbers. My assessor value tells me everything. Maybe the location differs which would explain some things, but simply saying the land is 75% of cost is a misnomer. The difference of a shack in La Jolla vs a huge house in El Cajon.

                Reply

                1. You are very correct that many sections of our city are outliers, like LaJolla and El Cajon. But, if your home is within a typical section of the city, I bet your land value far exceeds your home structure value, often by many times. Use $250-300 per square foot for your home structure value and the rest is land. Try it.

                  Reply

                  1. I just said my land was assessed at 38% of value. $300 x my sq footage puts me at appraised value for the entire property, which is in line with 60% house/ 40% land which is general market rate for my area. It doesn’t work.

                    Reply

                    1. OK. Not sure where you live, but the $250-300 square feet and value of most homes generates that land is worth more than the home. If you use a $1M home in Claremont at 1200 square feet, the house is worth $300K and the land $900K if you use the $250/square foot amount. Where do you live, if I may ask ?

                    2. I looked at Zillow for a typical home in Claremont. House is 1200 square feet and the price is $1 million. 1200 time $250 = $300,000 and the lot is therefore worth $700,000. I think Claremont is a fairly typical home in SD.

            2. Assessed value can be far from the true value unless you just purchased it. The land value of my property in OB is over 85% of the current property value.

              Reply

              1. Exactly, land gets more expensive the closer to the coast generally speaking. The same standard doesn’t apply everywhere.

                Reply

                1. Sure. And vary widely based on zoning as well. I just checked two recently sold homes in Mira Mesa, and what they were reassessed at. These looked like pretty average homes for the area, not renovated to the nines.

                  LAND IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL NEW ASSESSED VALUES $800,000.00 $180,000.00 $980,000.00

                  LAND IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL NEW ASSESSED VALUES $640,000.00 $185,000.00 $825,000.00

                  That land is 78% and 82% of total value respectively. These are probably 5,000 sf lots. I don’t know anywhere in SD where land would be only 40%.

                  Reply

  3. Getting back to the original comment, which was what Larry Turner would do to reduce homelessness, I am still not sure what he means or whether it’s even possible/reasonable.

    Reply

    1. Not making false pipedream promises would be a start. I wish I could locate that press release from Todd Gloria as a councilmember where he said he’d solve homelessness by 2015.

      Reply

      1. Todd Gloria has been a pipe dream promising mayor, but for someone new to win the election for mayor, he/she must have concrete and believable ideas about homelessness and many more things that the city is failing to provide right now. So far, if the best Larry Turner has to offer is what Rich Riel identified at the top of this thread, Gloria, the known quantity, will win easily.

        Reply

        1. I agree. Sometimes, the best you can hope for is that this acts as a warning shot for electeds and that they’ll take it more seriously going forward.

          Reply

    2. Larry Turner for mayor website has an issues page that addresses homelessness as a topic. The people will get back to you on the contact page for your questions.

      Reply

  4. We need a new approach to government.

    It is a fact that almost 50% of the homeless in America live in California.

    The Homeless problem will never be solved by making campaign developers donors wealthy. Todd Gloria and Gavin Newsom don’t want to solve the problem they want to continue the funding of the fat cat builders.

    Until we take control of our government we will continue to have massive deficits and a continuation of the nightmare of our fellow citizens dying on streets because they are homeless.

    Todd Gloria is the problem, Larry Turner is the solution

    Reply

    2. What does it matter given the current political structure here failing this city? Too many degrees of separation.

      Reply

      1. Oh, what Larry Turner thinks about Trump does matter …. a lot.
        If you know, I would appreciate an answer.

        Reply

          1. His website says nothing about Trump.
            So, given that he is a Republican, one must assume he will support the nominee.
            I will try and investigate further.

            Reply

            2. I don’t think it’s very relevant. I think there are many politicians that despise him but are too afraid of alienating voters. So they keep their mouth shut.

              And frankly, is it that important? Sadly we live in a world where the average voter is too disengaged to think for themselves, so they pick a team and repeat what’s fed to them. But this doesn’t mean a worthwhile politican doesn’t deserve their votes. So if Turner stays silent on him, I would take that as a positive in this situation.

              Reply

        2. So if you disagree with something, it’s because of Trump??? If you get tired of blaming Trump, there’s always Mt. ST. Helen volcano eruption a few years ago.

          I’ve heard Larry Turner say he’s been a registered Independant for years. It’s not some recent registration.

          At least an Independant doesn’t have a hard core mind set to vote by a party no matter how lousy of a job their party leader does. People should be using their own heads, not being led, and vote for the person they think will do the best job. Now the City of SD has ALLLL Dem leaders, in the non-partisan last election, and look were SD is…. deep in debt. To vote for more of the same, just so they stay true to their party is not only ridiculous, but major stupid.

          Reply

          1. I concede. Larry Turner does appear to be a credible independent vs. a Republican who has got tired of losing with an R next to his name. This makes him much more appealing to me, but I still wonder what he thinks of Trump, which has become a legitimate question to ask any politician these days.

            Reply

              1. I would want to know what any politician running for office thinks of Trump, whether I lived in SD or Alabama. I assume that the DEMS do not support him, but worry about REPS and INDS who I may be considering voting for.

                Reply

                1. From the Turner webpage,

                  I am proud to be an Independent, all my life, not just for this election. San Diegans are tired of hearing politicians fight amongst each other in our country’s two-party system. I am not beholden to a political party. I am a problem solver.I am part of the San Diego Party.

                  This isn’t a statement of a Trump supporter. I’ve given you the website. You can contact the candidate. You can meet him at a gathering posted on the website. You can go make up your mind with this information. To keep making suggestions here is disingenuous. But this is the choice from mayor Todd and all his baggage. Good day.

                  Reply

                  2. Thank you Chris for your Independence.

                    To date there are 23 million registered voters in the U.S. shut out, unable to participate in the primary elections in states because party rules somehow became state law(s).

                    California election law changed in the 90’s requiring party registration to vote for party candidates in primaries. That has relaxed up over the years slightly, with a caveat in this county though.

                    Though any registered voter can vote NPP, No Party Preference, NPP ballots will be placed in a “provisional ballot” envelope. This policy has been and should be cause for concern for San Diego County voters since Michael Vu blew into town after the controversial Cuyahoga County Ohio Registrar of Voters had been run out of Ohio on a rail.

                    For those unfamiliar with our San Diego County Registrar of Voters Michael Vu, he has an extensive history of running “loose” audits. (Fun Fact, there is no record with our County as to whom it was that interviewed Michael Vu, nor a record of who actually hired him.)

                    Vu was caught by Ray Lutz and group of volunteers from Citizens Oversight Project mishandling the 1% manual audits 2016 San Diego primaries by eliminating provisional ballots (in provisional ballot envelopes) from the 1% manual tally audit and sued in California Superior Court.

                    Professor of Statistics at UC Berkeley, Dr. Philip Stark testified in San Diego Superior Court, cautioning the court and the public that Vu’s actions and the actions by the Registrars for the State’s 8 most populous counties skew, if not completely invalidate any meaningful sampling for statistical election verification purposes.

                    Judge Wohfeil ruled against Vu and the Registrar for mishandling the audits.

                    Immediately following Wohfeil’s ruling in San Diego Superior Court, Alex Padilla, then Secretary of State, issued a letter to the 8 most populous California Counties Registrars instructing them to DEFY JUDGE WOHFEIL’S JUDGEMENT and handle the audits, the 1 % manual tallies, in the same manner that they and Vu had in the primaries, and knowingly dismiss the illegalities of their actions.

                    While Citizens Oversight Projects and Vu waited for the appeal court date, Assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez-Fletcher, San Diego County and Assemblymember Bill Quirk, Alameda County, feverishly crafted a bill legalizing what Vu and the 8 Registrars had done.

                    Miraculously, Fletcher and Quirk’s bill was expedited onto the floor, voted on and passed blowing through both Democratic controlled houses and flopped down on Gavin Newsom’s desk in what is the equivalent of light-speed, where Newsom nobly (sarcasm) rubber-stamped it and signed it into law.

                    A law restricting the use of audits for election efficacy.

                    All questionable ballots are placed in provisional ballot envelopes for various reasons, many of them mundane.

                    Basically, the law changed so that any questionable ballots received the days following the election, as in ballots mailed on-time, but actually on election day, are placed into provisional ballot envelopes. And all of these provisional ballot envelopes are NOT SUBJECT TO 1% MANUAL TALLY AUDIT, that had been required by California State Law for decades prior to 2016.

                    My point is that there exists a boatload of Independents registered as Dems in this state as well as a lot of other States, that have the D or R in order to participate in selecting the primary candidates, but it is a party construct.

                    So now the Democratic Central Committee selects our candidates for us based on their own personal insatiable greed, palpable contempt for the public, propensity to prostitute themselves with indifference to integrity or decency while it squashes and suffocates candidates that would best represent the constituents in their communities as intended by our forefathers. (Another fun fact: George Washington’s farewell address in 1796 outlined his greatest fear, devolving into a two party system, where party is put before country.)

                    Reply

                    1. I question your last paragraph. We have real primaries in CA and each party has nominees and some make it to the general election. The Democratic Central Committee does not vote in the primaries or any election. Independents remain often outside the primary voting at their choice.

                    2. Gilbert, true each party has it’s nominees. However it is in closed door meetings of the Central Democratic Committee that leadership decides which primary party candidate for which races that they will back financially. So if you are say an activist, an adjunct Professor of Law, regular Jane, wothout name cache that feels compelled to run for office as a Democrat to make a difference in your hometown; the Central Committee can cut you off at the knees to make sure you disappear into obscurity. And if you don’t, you can expect an ugly campaign to impugn your character to make sure you learn your lesson.

                      In the 2020 electionDems spent $110 million supporting actual bonified MAGA candidates over Dem candidates, as a strategy. BTW several of those MAGA candidates won their races. Yet for the party this “stategy”has idiotically become standard party operating protocol apparently. The Dems in this last primary financially backed Republican Steve Garvey and not Democrat Katie Porter, nor Democrat Barbara Lee. Wouldn’t a blue state populous, predominently Democrat, benefit more from political platform derived through rigorous debate and mindful compromise between the two contending Democratic candidate for Senator?
                      Did Real Life Smithers Steven Whitburn and Joe La Cava run unopposed? Ask yourself why that is. And why our current “elected leaders” routinely defy their constituents with impunity? The Central Democratic Committee.

Leave a Reply to Frank Gormlie Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *