Month: August 2025

By Lynne Clark Miller

My granddaughter, Petra, just graduated from Point Loma High School. Watching the ceremony, I remembered my mother, who graduated from PLHS in 1936. I didn’t expect to get a lump in my throat or tears in my eyes when I heard the Point Loma School Song.  But it happened.  Memories surfaced as I watched the 2025 graduation. Four generations walked to Pomp and Circumstance across the football field. Dorothy Gage, Jon, Lynne, and June Clark, and my children, Mark and Cory Miller walked in my memories this June, 2025.

I lived in OB, spent my summers at the beach with friends, and walked home with a sandy towel, and a chocolate bar from Paras Shop. Those days of sun and salt air rest in my DNA and ignite memories of youth.  I rode my bike to OB Elementary, car-pooled and walked to Collier, and took a bus or walked to PLHS. When I went to Collier there was no Nimitz Blvd.  There was just a canyon ribboned with dirt pathways that we explored after the final bell. I remember the excitement of seeing guys who we knew cruise by in their very cool cars.  Sometimes my friends and I would get a ride home with Tim or Curt.  Getting to and from school was part of the whole adventure, wasn’t it?

When Petra Lynne reached out and got her diploma this year, all of the family hands who were PLHS grads were there, reaching across time– at least from my vantage point. Maybe that lump in my throat was encouraged by my Pointer memories!  The first day at PLHS, my way too blue contact lens looked into the mirror at my very tan face with white lipstick, sunbleached hair and an anxious smile.  Walking through the halls over the years was a hormone high.

By Donna Frye

Below are  my comments to the Mission Bay Park Committee for the August 5 Meeting.

RE:  Oppose Item 202, Recommendation to City Council to Declare City-Owned Real Property within Mission Bay Park as Surplus Land

Dear Chair Johnson and Honorable Committee Members,

I am writing to ask this committee to oppose the mayor’s recommendation to declare City-Owned Real Property within Mission Bay Park as Surplus Land.

Last month, when I first learned that the mayor was asking the city council to declare three properties in Mission Bay Park “surplus land” I could not believe what I was reading. After lots of research, it became clear that a “surplus land” declaration would allow developers to submit proposals to the city to build affordable housing in Mission Bay Park.

How could state-granted Tidelands on dedicated public parkland (that was codified by the voters as parkland in perpetuity by San Diego City Charter Section 55 ) be declared “surplus” and made available for developers to submit proposals to build affordable housing?

It made no sense to me then and it still doesn’t.

August 4, 2025

PRESS ADVISORY

City Council Attempts To Give Away Mission Bay Park Land  – Committee Meeting Tuesday, 6 pm., at Paradise Point.

The Mission Bay Park Committee (MBPC) will meet at 6:00 p.m., on Tuesday, August 5, 2025. The meeting will be at Paradise Point (Mission Bay Room)
It is reported that multiple City Councilmembers will be appearing in an effort to explain why the City is trying to sell parklands (potentially for upscale condominiums). The meeting will be held in Paradise Point’s Mission Bay Room.

Without input from the MBPC or San Diego Park Board, the Council attempted to move forward to declare three separate parcels in Mission Bay Park as “surplus land,” under State law, in order to put them out to bid. Under State law, once land becomes surplus, priority has to be given to low income housing projects. Most likely, any “low income” project would simply put expensive condominiums in Mission Bay Park, with the developer building low income housing elsewhere as a credit to get the long-
term lease.

This would be first time that the City of San Diego has sold off park land for residential development.

Dozens of Pacific Beach residents and supporters gathered Monday, August 4th, at the site of a controversial large-scale ADU development planned for the corner of Pacifica and Bluffside as an attorney announced a lawsuit against the City of San Diego.

The neighborhood group Neighbors for a Better Pacific Beach is the chief plaintiff in the suit, designed to halt the planned Chalcifica project, with more than 100 units.

The suit argues the planned project would harm the environment and public safety, and the group behind it points out it’s on the site of a well-known Kumeyaay coastal village.

In today’s San Diego Union-Tribune, writer Jemma Stephenson reports:

According to the plaintiffs, the city should have processed the project application on a discretionary basis but instead has handled them all on a ministerial basis, based on set standards rather than individual judgments. They also say the city never responded to the Kumeyaay Cultural Repatriation Committee’s request to meet about the issue.

By Donna Frye
The Mission Bay Park Committee will meet August 5 at 6 p.m. at the Paradise Point Resort to discuss Item 202 and hear public testimony on the mayor’s proposal to declare three properties in Mission Bay Park “surplus land” and make the properties available to affordable housing developers as part of the process.

This issue was heard and continued at the July 29 City Council meeting.

Below are links to view the Mission Bay Park Committee meeting agenda and also the mayor’s staff report. If you cannot attend the meeting in person, you can submit online comments using the link below.

Please let the committee know that you do NOT support declaring Mission Bay Park “surplus land” especially since no options for seeking an exemption to the Surplus Land Act have been provided to the city council, the Mission Bay Park Committee or to the public.

There is no urgency to declare the properties the mayor wants to lease as “surplus land” since they are all producing revenue for the city and the lease for the largest property, Marina Village, doesn’t expire until 2027.

On Monday, August 1, 2025 at 11:00 AM at the intersection of Pacifica Drive and Bluffside Avenue, Pacific Beach, members For a Better Pacific Beach will announce to the filing of its suit against the City to stop the processing of Christian Spicer’s 136 ADU project, “Chalcifica.”

The community group “Neighbors for a Better Pacific Beach” and dozens of supporters will announce the filing of the lawsuit to stop the proposed development on a parcel of land that sits atop the site of a significant historical Kumeyaay village in a Very High Fire Hazard Zone.

The project developer, Christian Spicer, is the subject of intense criticism by community groups. Spicer consistently ignores neighborhood concerns when he crams massive, multi-story ADUs with no parking in single-family areas.

“Christian Spicer’s proposed 136-unit ADU project is a poster child for bad planning, inadequate city review, the rejection of valid community concerns, and predatory practices,” said Merv Thompson, Chair of Neighbors for a Better Pacific Beach.

By Paul Krueger

More than 50 Middletown residents and their supporters waved signs, marched, and demonstrated their vehement opposition to a proposed high-rise in one of San Diego’s oldest residential districts.

The scene of Saturday, August 2nd’s demonstration was the 3600 block of Columbia Street, just up the hill from El Indio, the Shakespeare Pub, and other restaurants and businesses on India Street. It’s a quiet, densely populated neighborhood of single family homes and moderately-sized two- and three-story apartment buildings. The streets are narrow. Parking is scarce.

Scott Case, his Middletown neighbors, and business owners on India Street love their neighborhood, and are working tirelessly to stop a proposed 14-story, 161-unit apartment tower that would be crammed into two residential lots on Columbia Street.

Only 32% Approve of Israel military action in Gaza — Americans’ support for Israel in Gaza plummets to record low, new Gallup poll finds

Americans’ approval of Israel’s military action in Gaza has fallen 10 percentage points since the prior measurement in September, and it is now at 32%, the lowest reading since Gallup first asked the question in November 2023. Disapproval of the military action has now reached 60%.

These findings are from a July 7-21, 2025, Gallup poll, as Israel’s campaign against Hamas stretched into its 21st month. Americans supported Israel’s actions in Gaza in its initial reading in 2023, taken several weeks after the Oct. 7 Hamas attack. Since then, disapproval has outpaced approval in each survey, peaking at 55% in March 2024 before dipping to 48% in two readings later in the year. Gallup Poll

Immigration — Support for Deporting All Undocumented Migrants Dropped to 38%

Americans’ views of immigration have swung drastically upward in the past year, with a new poll showing record-high support for immigration amid President Donald Trump’s controversial mass deportation campaign. A record 79 percent of American adults think immigration is good for the country,

Every Saturday at 10:30 am. San Diego Climate Mobilization Coalition Meetings August 2nd, 9th, 16th, 23rd and 30th

Every Saturday 10 am – 12 pm Peace Vigil for Palestine:

The San Diego River Park Foundation has volunteer opportunities in Ocean Beach: Point Loma Native Plant Garden Club

August 2nd. Saturday  11:15 am – 2 pm Protest at Del Mar Racetrack #2  

August 2nd Saturday 8 pm – 9 pm Voice for Peace: A Call for Change film

August 3rd Sunday 4 pm Racial Justice Coalition General Body Meeting O

August 4th Monday 6 pm One Million Rising

August 4th Monday 12 pm – 1 pm Interfaith Vigil for Earth Justice

August 5th Tuesday 11am – 12:30 pm Environmental Justice, Extreme Heat, and the Future of Energy Assistance Programs

August 5th Tuesday and August 12th Tuesday 5 pm – 6 pm Solidarity & Rapid Response:

August 6th Wednesday 2pm – 4 pm  Copy of Rising Voices: Youth4Climate Fundraiser  Event by SanDiego350

By David Garrick / San Diego Union-Tribune / August 1, 2025 

A county watchdog panel is raising new concerns about how San Diego spends and keeps track of the many millions of dollars that developers contribute to help the city pay for parks, libraries, fire stations and other infrastructure projects.

The grand jury says San Diego has chronically violated the California law that allows cities to collect those developer impact fees — including with its longstanding practice of keeping fees beyond a five-year state limit.

In a 43-page report, the grand jury says San Diego should quickly refund $179 million it has kept beyond five years and make it a practice of refunding such fees in the future when it can’t justify holding money beyond that limit.

The report also says the city should be more transparent about how much money it has collected, how much it spends, which projects money is assigned to and how close those projects are to being fully funded.

In a tone that borders on exasperated, the report says city officials have been made aware their practices violate state law several times but have repeatedly ignored those warnings.

Voice of San Diego reporter MacKenzie Elmer explains that when pressed as to why SeaWorld’s summer fireworks are still with us after saying they had to go a year ago, City Council President Joe LaCava answers, “It’s complicated.” Here is Elmer’s full report:

After some nesting birds nearby died last year following back-to-back pyrotechnics for the Fourth of July, the most powerful person on the San Diego City Council said SeaWorld’s nightly summertime fireworks have got to go.

Almost a year later and Mission Bay is still booming night after night.

When asked what San Diego City Council President Joe LaCava’s done so far to make good on his promise, his office told me it’s complicated.

By Kate Callen / August 1, 2025

A year ago, after hearing countless stories about monstrous accessory dwelling units (ADUs), OB Rag staff wanted to find out how bad things were. So we launched a “Worst ADU in San Diego” contest on August 9. And we sat back and waited for entries.

By the August 23 contest deadline, the Rag received over 50 submissions from 20 communities across the city. Our panel of five judges drove around town looking at one eyesore after another. It was depressing work.

The three top prizewinners were announced September 12: Gold at 4578 Jicarillo Avenue in Bay Ho, Silver at 4974 54th Street in College, and Bronze at 5732-36 Dorothy Drive, also in College.

The combined awfulness of the projects prompted us to add 12 “Dishonorable Mentions.”

The 15 contest “winners” fell into two categories of greed. In the first, predatory developers crammed multiple units onto a single lot for maximum profit. In the second, selfish property owners built gigantic structures onto small lots for maximum living space.

The second category included the Bronze recipient. The judges commented, “This demonstrates how a single ADU can have an overwhelming neighborhood impact. Our first thought was: Could this be any uglier? Our second thought was: Is this an architectural middle finger to the surrounding neighborhood?”