Editordude: On Thursday, August 7, local attorney Cory Briggs commented on the post “Mission Bay Park Committee Votes Against ‘Surplus Land’ Proposal” and we thought it was too important for a comment so here’s it is elevated to a full on ‘rant.’
By Cory Briggs
Yesterday [August 6] the mayor’s czar on this issue called me and tried to persuade me that both of them really want a hotel on the site but just can’t seem to figure out how to get around the Surplus Lands Act. This is gonna be their public-relations mantra — “we don’t want to build housing in Mission Bay Park (MBP) but the law forces us to give housing developers first dibs” — even though the mayor and city council are not following the Surplus Land Act (SLA) process for other city-owned property outside Mission Bay Park.
So it’s even more clear to me than it was before the call that the mayor is pushing to build high-end housing on the site. Yes, a minority fraction of it will have to be affordable” under the SLA, but the overwhelming majority will be high-end housing if the city goes down the SLA road.
At the meeting, Councilmember Joe La Cava tried to make it sound like the city could start down the SLA path but then take the city off the path after a 90-day period of trying to negotiate with a developer in good faith. He surely knew that was a lie when he said it because he has dealt with the SLA plenty during his pre-politician career.
If the city can back out of the process mid-stream and could be counted on to do so in order to prevent housing in MBP, then why start the process in the first place? If the city starts the process knowing that it’s gonna pull out before finishing it, then by definition the city would not be engaging in good-faith negotiations with the developer. And if the city is negotiating in good faith, the public has every reason to expect that build-baby-build politicians like Todd Gloria, Joe La Cava, and their ilk on the city council will transfer the property to a developer, blame Sacramento for it, and tell the public that their hands were tied (all while collecting developer donations for their next campaign).
People should not feel comfortable about the outcome of the MBP Committee’s vote. Note that there were two votes in favor of giving Todd and Joe what they want. If the mayor can persuade two people on a non-binding vote to side with him, what do you think he’ll do to a majority of politicians on the city council? He’s already got council president LaCava in his corner. The mayor and the council president can cause a lot of headaches for the seven other politicians whose districts do not contain MBP. How confident do you feel that politicians whose districts don’t include MBP are gonna vote to maintain MBP for recreation rather than turning it into the next available land for housing?
The city’s politicians are never afraid to do X or Y — things that break the law — when the politicians want X or Y, no matter how much public resistance there is. That Todd and Joe are suddenly afraid the city might get sued tells us all we need to know about their true intentions.
Thank you Cory Briggs. 1.4 million mahalos for decades of blood, sweat, tears, and dedication to protecting San Diegans from predatory policies doled out by the politico-corporate real estate complex politicians posing as elected leaders!
Thank you Cory Briggs for breaking it down so the average taxpayer can understand how deep the swamp is. I’m sure Whitburn in D3 will do whatever Todd tells him to do, like always. He’s another one that is not at all concerned about his constituents in D3. Too bad the gullible and naive voters re-elected the dictator and his sheeple. The tax payers and renters are in for Mr. Todd’s Wild Ride for another 3.5 yrs. of increases in taxes and fees, and as much further destruction of the City of SD, as he can do, before he runs for what’s next Guv? He doesn’t know how to do anything but talk out of both sides of his mouth in politics.
Yes, thank you for the warning. But is unsettling. This needs to be nipped in the bud. Bad faith, back room deals, lack of transparency. Park land, Mission Bay Park, is for the public – commercial areas are for the general public. A hotel will be owned by somebody restricting access on the property, restricting access to their guests, for a price – TOURISTS. Mayor Gloria makes me ill with his demonstrated hatred of the City and its citizens. Something is wrong with him.
I would think MBP must remain intact for public use.
Any plan to sell or lease portions for financial/fiscal reasons should require direct approval by the voters.