By Kate Callen
Ever see a German shepherd frightened by a barking terrier?
That was the vibe when the organizers of a convention of accessory dwelling unit (ADU) developers were thrown into a panic by a small band of civil protesters.
A September 17 demonstration against predatory ADU builders was organized by Pamela Begeal of Adubonus.org. Her tracking of industry activities found that an
events company called Informa Connect was hosting an ADU builders meeting that day at the San Diego Marriott Marquis.
Begeal identified two speakers on the agenda who have ravaged countless local neighborhoods: Christian Spicer of SDRE Homebuilders and Daniel Shkolnik of
Atlas West Group. And she saw an opportunity to send them a public message.
Some 20 community activists answered her invitation to gather on Harbor Drive outside the hotel. Upon arrival, they encountered a security force of men in dark
suits wearing sunglasses and carrying walkie-talkies.
Demonstrators who strayed from the sidewalk onto a stretch of lawn were told to move. Two people who walked into the hotel lobby were stopped, asked to show
picture IDs, and body screened by electronic wands for weapons.
But the real farce took place inside the convention area when Lisa Becerra and Kim Beck, who had paid $1,599 each to attend the event, were denied admission.
Yes, they were residents of Encanto and Point Loma who have been active in fighting gigantic ADU developments in their neighborhoods. But they had a legitimate purpose for being there: They wanted to learn more about how community leaders can raise enough capital to buy land and build truly affordable housing.
This is a new and effective strategy for fending off greedy developers who make stealthy purchases that cheat elderly homeowners. And it holds real promise for
sustainable development by non-profit cooperatives.
So how did event organizers zero in on these women and decide they had to be barred from participating? And what in God’s name were these ADU industry
people afraid of?
Shakespeare was right: Suspicion always haunts the guilty mind. Most ADU builders sleep well at night because they honor the original “granny flat” concept
of modest units for relatives or visitors.
The convention at the Marriott wasn’t meant for them. It was tailored for bad actors who are hell-bent on exploiting the ADU model. The speakers and topics were all about big projects, big profits, big capital, and buying influence with policymakers.
The protesters only sought to raise public awareness that abusive ADU practices still put communities at risk. San Diego’s Bonus ADU reform measure is not
retroactive. Aggressive developers were able to cram huge projects into the development pipeline before reform took hold.
Spicer’s SDRE company has bought over 66 properties in 15 different zip codes across the city. Many neighborhoods are unaware that a SDRE project is headed
their way, and they won’t know until the bulldozers rumble in.
One of Spicer’s most invasive projects is Chalcifica in Pacific Beach, which includes 136 units in six two-story buildings on two lots. A lawsuit by Neighbors
for a Better Pacific Beach is seeking to block it. Tribal leaders from the Jamul Indian Village have joined the fight because they believe the buildings will disturb
sacred Kumeyaay lands.
Here’s a message for the ADU convention organizers, Mr. Spicer, Mr. Shkolnik, and their ilk: Community activists are never going to let up on you.
Lax ADU laws gave you the right to inflict excessive density on families and communities. Those laws have been curtailed. The Constitution gives the people you’ve harmed the right to protest you at every turn. That law won’t change.
We’ll see you around.
See coverage by CBS8 here.
Editordude’s note: The protest was also sponsored and organized by the San Diego Community Coalition.
Here is the CBS8 report on the protest / convention:
A heated debate over San Diego’s backyard housing policies spilled onto the streets of downtown today, as protesters gathered outside a real estate conference focused on Accessory Dwelling Units, or ADUs.
The protest took place outside the Marriott Hotel, where the Information Management Network (IMN) is hosting a private convention for developers involved in building ADUs throughout the region. Demonstrators accused some developers of taking advantage of the city’s Bonus ADU program to build large-scale, high-density projects on single-family lots, a move they say threatens neighborhood character and strains local infrastructure.
“This is not granny flats. This is not helping people. This is developer greed,” one protester shouted through a megaphone.
Protesters Say Developers Are Exploiting Loopholes
Paul Krueger with the San Diego Community Coalition says what began as a well-intentioned city policy to increase affordable housing has morphed into something else entirely.
“What was supposed to be a plan by the City to increase the number of affordable apartments was totally abused by these major ADU developers,” said Krueger.
Protesters say some developers have submitted plans to build 10, 12, or even 17 or more units in the backyards of single-family homes. Many of these applications were filed before recent changes to the city’s housing policy, meaning they’re still eligible for approval under the older, more lenient rules.
“The fact that they can move ahead if they slipped in their paperwork before the second reading of the ordinance in its final approval is really a travesty,” Krueger added.
New Rules Aim to Limit Density, But Some Projects Are Grandfathered In
A couple months ago, San Diego’s City Council passed new limits on the number of ADUs that can be built on a single lot. The ordinance applies to properties located within one mile of a transit stop, and sets strict caps based on lot size:
Lots 8,000 sq ft or less: Maximum of 4 units
Lots 8,001 to 10,000 sq ft: Maximum of 5 units
Lots over 10,000 sq ft: Maximum of 6 units
However, those restrictions don’t apply to projects that were already submitted before the ordinance’s final vote, including the Chalcifica project in Pacific Beach, where SDRE Homebuyers plans to build 136 ADUs across just two lots.
Residents Say They Were Blindsided
Protester Pamela Begeal says many residents have no idea these mega-projects are still moving forward under the old rules.
“It’s devastating, especially to communities that already have high density, that already have very little parking on their streets,” Begeal said. “Now we’re going to crowd in more.”
While Begeal believes the new rules should apply retroactively to any unbuilt projects, some developers argue they’re providing much-needed housing in a city facing a severe shortage.
Still, Begeal says the process has left her disillusioned.
“It has really soured me on government when I thought they were here to safeguard our city,” she said.
Security Tight at Private Developer Event
As the protest continued, hotel security and event organizers kept demonstrators on the public sidewalk. IMN, the group organizing the ADU developer conference, declined to comment and denied CBS 8 access to the event.
“Listen to our neighborhoods!” one protester shouted, as cars passed by in support.
Among those protesting was Dave Nikolai, who lives next to several ADU developments under construction.
“My neighborhood’s ruined,” he said. “I just want to save someone else from going through the same stuff.”
Convention Continues Through Friday
The private convention is scheduled to run through Friday. While developers inside discuss future housing plans, protesters outside say they’ll continue pushing back against what they view as unchecked overdevelopment and calling for the city to make the new rules retroactive.
https://www.cbs8.com/article/news/local/protesters-rally-san-diego-adu-developer-convention/509-d6c20d2a-6372-4c87-a9c6-1a4d7886a796
Leaders in our communities must organize community members, and use every legal, nonviolent tool at their disposal, in the Courts, in the City Council Chambers, and the State Legislature, and in the media to fight the Developers who are exploiting well intentioned laws directed at the affordable housing crisis for their personal profit and enrichment.
The Marriot security men outside yesterday were extremely polite!
In fact they suggested that I wait on their grass in the shade by the tree. After which one security emplyee walked over and handed me a cold water bottle and a bowl to provide water for my certified service dog. At no point was I ever asked to move off their Marriot property.
The only rudeness I encountered from 9:45- until I left was from a protester rudely distracting and interfering with my service dog that was wearing his vest.
I attended the protest because of Opposition to the ADU Bonus project in the Jamacha Community on 1441 Woodrow Ave that has not received any mention by media.
Jamacha is a Community of Concern, that does not receive equity from the City of San Diego and is still awaiting improvements listed as needed in the 1987 Skyline- Paradise Hills Community Plan.
Any of us who showed up would’ve been denied entry. I wondered the same thing: what are they afraid of? THey got their SB79, they get all their destructive projects in, even though the guardrails went on. I don’t understand the continued lack of transparency. I guess that’s the only way they understand how to treat people. Their actions are “F them all”
One question I’d like to ask the participants of the ADU conference On the very front of the website, they had a cute little casita on the front, surrounded by lush greenery. With the developers who were attending, I don’t think ANY of them had such a project going on. What they’re showing is the original intent of the BONUS ADU PROGRAM. Helping homeowners create a “second small home” for their inlaws, children, making them multigenerational. It’s a good concept that got exploited by the likes of Shkolnik, Spicer, Hrdina, Rucker, Reuter, Aidi, Magy, Green, Feder, etc etc etc.
Or is an “ADU / granny flat” defined as that 17 unit project disaster going on at Almayo st in Clairemont? I don’t think it can be both.
I’ve seen some bigger projects that end up being defined as “multigenerational” (especially in Mira Mesa).
Certainly they can’t be talking about both, as the former is not going to make them any money, nor add money to the COSD’s tax coffers.
I have to disagree with the notion that much of the past 10 years of housing policy change was or is “well-intentioned.” The resulting exploitation to the hilt was predictable.
Anyone in a policy-making position who voted YES on unlimited density bonuses, zero parking requirements, or any of the many other neighborhood-busting trends, is either ignorant or malicious, neither of which is a component of “well-intentioned.”
I need to get over being naive about politics.
Before I vote I research issues and candidates as thoroughly as I can including any history that led up to where each particular issue currently stands. It seems more often than not, I find that I end up with what I don’t want! Amazing!
P.S. How did San Diego end up $250,000, 000 in debt?
Dorothy, good news: The Rag will offer investigative coverage of the 2026 primaries and elections. We will dive into campaign finance reports to discover where candidates got their money, and we will study the fine print on campaign mailers to reveal which powerbrokers and special interest groups funded them.
Let’s say you’re not a fan of Todd Gloria. If we print a list of the top 20 donors to Candidate X, and we identify many of them as players who have been close to Gloria, that means a vote for that candidate is a vote for Gloria’s politics. And that might be all you need to know. So hang in there — help is on the way!