By Donna Frye
An update to the 2025-2026 City of San Diego’s Legislative Platform will be heard Wednesday, November 5, 2025 at the Economic Development and Intergovernmental Relations Committee meeting. It is Item-5 on the agenda.
According to the city, “The 2025-2026 State and Federal Legislative Platform defines the City of San Diego’s Guiding Principles and Policy Priorities and provides a means to advance and protect the City’s interests on issues at the federal and state levels.”
The legislative platform has three guiding principles and seven policy priorities. The policy priorities include over 290 state policies and 270 federal policies dealing with issues such as homelessness, housing affordability and community services and sustainability, environmental quality and infrastructure.
The issues in the legislative platform are all important, however, the “preserve local control” principle and the state surplus land housing policy stand out due to recent experiences over housing development issues.
Local Control Guiding Principle
The following is the existing language in the city’s legislative platform shown on page 1:
“PRESERVE LOCAL CONTROL. Preserve and protect the City’s charter powers, duties, and prerogative to enact legislation, to provide policy direction concerning local affairs, and to oppose legislation that preempts local authority. Local agencies should preserve and enhance authority for revenues raised and services provided.” (My emphasis)
As we all know, the State has been passing legislation to allow the development of more housing at such a rapid pace that it undermines our adopted community plans and eliminates local control over local development.
Growth and development are local affairs and one size does not fit all. What works in Bakersfield or San Francisco may not work in San Diego and vice versa. But more and more we are seeing state legislation being passed that upends our local land use laws and prevents the community from participating in those decisions. And much of it is being done to allow increased housing density but not affordability.
If you recall back in July 2025 the “city” of San Diego sent a letter to the state signed by one of the city’s lobbyists in support of legislation that diminishes local land use control, known as SB 79. The city’s support of this legislation was a huge contradiction to the city council’s approved “preserve local control” guiding principle and it’s still not clear how it happened or what, if anything, was done about it.
I can’t say for sure whether San Diego’s opposition to SB 79 would have made a difference as far as the outcome, but I do know it would have made a big difference to the public by showing us that the city’s guiding principle about preserving local control actually meant something.
It also would be helpful to understand the process that was followed when the city’s lobbyist sent a support letter for SB 79, but I am not holding my breath waiting for that information. And while we can’t go back and push the do over button, we may be able to prevent this from happening in the future.
Action Requested
Include precise language in the “preserve local control” guiding principle that spells out what preserving local control means. At a minimum, it should include protection of voter-approved ballot measures such as the 30-foot coastal height limit and City Charter provisions such as Section 55. It also should include adopted community plans.
Require that the city council and public be notified when the city takes a formal position of support/opposition for legislation. This could be accomplished very simply by posting the information on the city’s website and updating it whenever the city takes a formal position on legislation.
State Policy Priority Number 15 on Homelessness, Housing Affordability, & Community Services – Surplus Land Act
The following is the existing language shown on page 4 of the city’s legislative platform:
“Support measures that promote the use of public land for housing, including affordable and middle-income housing, and streamline Surplus Land Act processes to enhance the viability of housing projects on public land.”
On July 9, the OB Rag published an article by Geoff Page that first alerted the public to a city staff report that linked surplus lands with Mission Bay Park.
In short, the proposal asked the city council to declare three properties in Mission Bay Park “surplus land” and make the properties available to affordable housing developers as part of the process.
The public outrage and opposition was immediate especially after it was disclosed (due to a Public Records Act request) that there was an unsolicited proposal to build 900 housing units on the Marina Village property.
The city council voted to continue the matter, the Mission Bay Park Committee voted to oppose the surplus land declaration and on September 3, 2025 the mayor sent a letter to the state to request a pre-existing exemption under the Surplus Land Act for Marina Village.
To the best of my knowledge, the state has not yet responded to the mayor’s letter.
Action Requested
Protect our public parklands by amending the state policy priority number 15 to include language that clarifies that not all public land is suitable for housing. This includes dedicated public parkland, such as Mission Bay Park, Balboa Park, and Mission Trails, regional parks, open space, canyons and land where building housing would conflict with the City Charter or voter-approved ballot measures.
It’s critical to our communities that the city council actively support the preservation of our public parklands, open space and canyons and not allow them to be used for housing, especially when that use conflicts with long established voter-approved ballot measures and City Charter provisions.
Support amending the State Surplus Land Act to exclude all public parkland, such as Mission Bay Park, from the legislation.
How to Participate and Provide Comments for Item-5
If you have some time, please let the council members know what you think about the updated Legislative Platform, not just on preserving local control and protecting our public parklands, canyons and open space but on any issues in the legislative platform that are important to you.
The meeting is November 5, 2025 at 2:00 P.M. in City Council Chambers.
Link to agenda here. https://sandiego.hylandcloud.com/211agendaonlinecomm/Meetings/ViewMeeting?id=6699&doctype=1&site=comm
The following information is from the committee’s meeting agenda.
You can attend in person or submit written comments using the webform indicating the agenda item number for which you wish to submit your comment. All webform comments are limited to 200 words.
If you have written materials for submission into the record or have an attachment to your comment, you may email it to CouncilCommittee@sandiego.gov or submit via U.S. Mail 202 C Street, MS3A San Diego, CA 92101.
Here is the link to join the Meeting Webinar by computer, tablet, or Smartphone
To join by telephone: Dial 1-669-254 5252
When prompted, input Webinar ID: 160 324 0614#
Thx much Donna for this important info and your persuasive “call to action”!
Donna, once again, you are pointing us in the right direction to put restraints on this renegade City Hall. I’m ashamed to admit I didn’t even know what the City’s “legislative platform” was until I stumbled across Gloria’s exploitation of it to slip the treacherous SB79 endorsement under the door. Now we all know about it, and now we can let the City Council know there will be hell to pay if they try to pimp our parkland. If they need more money, let them shrink their bloated workforce.
Has the city thought that they could save money by having fewer “Committees” to talk about they have all already decided anyhow? Economic Development and Intergovernmental Relations Committee Public Comment Form? Please, if you can’t go or Zoom, PLEASE use the Economic Development and Intergovernmental Relations Committee Public Comment, and say what you think from this article. Somebody, please enter the details to get the link to work for you.
I just submitted a comment by clicking on the blue “webform” link in Donna’s story. Required fields are: Name, City, State, Meeting Date (11/05/2025), Comment Type (Agenda Comment), Agenda Item Number (5), Comments. It also asks for your email address, but that is not required.