By Kate Callen
The City Council’s March 4 hearing on Bonus ADUs was riveting. It didn’t deliver concrete action — at City Hall, the can never stops skittering down the road — but it did alter the political landscape. Some takeaways:
Henry Foster III Is In the House. After just 10 months representing District 4, Foster is the Council’s most powerful voice and its resident status-quo disrupter. Councilmembers who catch flak about ADUs typically bob and weave. Foster went into the Encanto community, saw the blight himself, and returned with a righteous anger and an audacious plan. If he stays on this path, he could be a formidable contender for mayor in 2028.
Todd Gloria Begins His Descent. Remember when the Council was Gloria’s sock puppet? Those days are gone. Foster called out Gloria’s intransigence: “We are here today because of the mayor’s unwillingness to pause the ADU Bonus program to address unintended consequences.” And he questioned Gloria’s veracity: “The mayor’s social media campaign [that] he was not aware of the Council’s concerns is dismissive and unacceptable.” Gloria will need to attend in person when the Council revisits this. He must be dreading it.
The State Might Get Mad at Us! Refusing to act because you’re afraid seems weak. But that was a big reason why Raul Campillo (D7) and Marni von Wilpert (D5) opposed Bonus ADU repeal. They painted Sacramento as a bogeyman ready to rain fire if San Diego changes its ADU Bonus program. But the program is an extreme outlier that exceeds the state’s ADU measures. Why not align San Diego’s ADU policies with state policies, as many speakers urged?
Wait! We’re Ready for Reform! The audience was surprised to learn that Planning Director Heidi Vonblum had sent the Council an 11th-hour internal memo about the 2025 Land Development Update. Another surprise: The memo had a list of ADU “reforms” that gave the Council an off-ramp from outright repeal. Gee, why did Vonblum wait until the last minute to present sensible measures?
They Divided, But Will They Conquer? The 6-3 vote created two factions. Three councilmembers — Campillo, von Wilpert, and Jen Campbell (D2) — fought to eliminate Bonus ADUS in all 11 RS (Residential-Single Unit) Zones. The six “Yes” votes gave respite to eight zones but left out three, notably RS 1-7, which covers 80 percent of residential neighborhoods. This brings quick relief to Southeastern San Diego and other vulnerable areas. It also could cram more density into RS 1-7 areas. But that will now be a hard sell.
Community Planning Groups Are Resurgent: This upheaval was set in motion by one member of one community planning group (CPG). Rob Campbell of the Chollas Valley CPG dove into the city’s Land Development Code and dug out Footnote 7, a mysterious cram-in that reduced minimum lot sizes but only in Southeastern San Diego. City Hall’s war on CPGs may be over. Even Vonblum made a great show of seeking CPG help with the 2025 Update.
A Citywide Coalition Is Born: Speakers against Bonus ADUs swamped speakers supporting them. Written comments were 1,067 for repeal and 289 against. Activists wearing yellow t-shirts in solidarity with Encanto came from every corner of the city: coastal (Pacific Beach, La Jolla, University City) mid-city (Hillcrest, Talmadge, Clairemont) and Southeastern (Emerald Hills, Chollas View, Skyline).
At long last, communities across San Diego are joining forces to thwart for-sale politicians and their greedy backers. This could be fun.
Thank you for this detailed report. The SDUT article includes none of these specifics. The VOSD article was even worse.
Thank you! I have been waiting for someone to start pulling the neighborhoods together since I moved here in 2004. That is the only way we’ll ever have self determination separate from outside developer rule. The war on neighborhoods must stop. I believe we are willing to accept reasonable growth but the insanity that the city and state reign upon us is unacceptable. I look forward to seeing if this trend at pulling us together continues–I may even join (yea, I know, big deal).
Great reading Kate. Job well done to explain the nuts and bolts of it all.
Thanks for hanging with us, Pats, I agree with your views about local stuff.
I’m starting to like this guy. First few meetings I saw him at he didn’t speak or even look at the public speakers.
Why is it so hard to stand up for your constituents? You’ve got 4 years to impress them. Standing up to Gloria and his henchmen is a good start.
Why do developers have so much money? They will have to move to Commercial zoning, and Ocean Beach is full of prime candidates. The City announced today a revisit of “Historical” regulations. Newport, Voltaire, and Point Loma Ave, be very afraid!
Thanks, Kate! Note that Vonblum’s email regarding recommended changes for the Bonus ADU Program wasn’t actually 11th hour. It was dated Friday, 2/28/25 and it should have been included in the materials posted with the Agenda for the 3/4/25 City Council meeting so that it would have been available to the public. Whether it was a violation of the Brown Act to exclude the memo that was a central part of the Council’s discussion and decision-making on 3/4/25 remains to be seen.
Making this memo unavailable to the public until the meeting, with only limited copies available at that time, could be construed as a deliberate act on the part of the Mayor and his Planning Department to ensure the public and speakers could not respond to the points raised in the memo. This action reinforces the public’s distrust of City government and the City’s reputation for a lack of transparency.
It is unfortunate that the Mayor and his Planning Department are unwilling to address the significant unintended consequences of the Bonus ADU Program in constructive dialogue with the public instead of resorting to behind-the-scenes memos threatening the builder’s remedy.
There are parts of the Planning Department’s memo that are subject to differing opinions and approaches that would not necessarily threaten decertification of San Diego’s Housing Element. However, by not publicizing the memo in advance, the public could not introduce those alternate opinions and considerations and share them with the City Council. An open, transparent city government would have included the 2/28/25 Planning Department memo on the 3/4/25 City Council Agenda so the public could have seen it in advance and responded to it at the meeting…a city government that is not afraid to operate on a level playing field.
I was pleased to learn that our Jen Campbell voted against the repeal because it did not include the RS-1 zoned areas which is most of her district including Point Loma. I had always thought that she just did whatever Todd told her to do.
Or maybe she voted against the repeal because she wants to maintain the status quo, and this happened to be a plausible excuse ???
Yup
Thanks to the Rag and to Kate for keeping us up to speed.
When the Floor Area Ratio is calculated using the entire lot size, rather than the buildable size, we get these situations where multiple units are crammed onto tiny plots of land. How didn’t anyone involved with drafting this legislation see this loophole? It reminds me of the STVR regulations allowing one property owner to amass dozens of licenses using imposter applicants. Where is the oversight? Or was this passed on with a wink and a nod?
Todd Gloria where is the money for the ob lifeguard tower? You have it stashed somewhere? We want it now! Then we remove you and Mrs. Cambell too! See you Todd!