By Paul Krueger
Before City Councilmembers adjourned to Closed Session on November 17 to discuss and vote on the controversial 30-foot height limit in the Midway/Pacific Highway area, I asked them to disclose after that meeting why they voted as they did.
I told our representatives they owed the public an on-the-record explanation on this very important land use and housing density issue.
I didn’t ask — or expect them — to reveal any “privileged” information discussed in Closed Session, including legal strategies, the odds of winning or losing an appeal to the State Supreme Court, or the possible cost of that litigation.
But I told councilmembers that their constituents deserve to know if they agree with Mayor Todd Gloria and City Attorney Heather Ferber’s harsh criticism of the recent appellate court decision that reinstated the 30-foot height limit. And if so, did they support the Mayor and City Attorney’s strategy of asking the State Supreme Court to reverse the appeals court and allow high-rise construction without a more thorough review of the negative environmental impact of that density?
Councilmembers had another option: they could disregard the Mayor and City Attorney’s request and oppose an appeal to the State Supreme Court, which would require the City to perform a more complete assessment of the negative impact of dense, multi-story construction and give voters another opportunity to decide this contentious issue.
State law requires the Council to disclose in public how it voted in closed session. It did so that afternoon, disclosing that Council President La Cava and Councilmembers Campbell, Whitburn, Lee, von Wilpert, and Elo-Rivera supported an appeal to the State Supreme Court. Councilmembers Moreno and Campillo opposed the appeal, and Councilmember Foster was absent.
At the following day’s Council meeting, Campillo went further, and offered some detail about why he opposed the appeal.
Here’s my edited, non-lawyerly transcription of his comments: (you can hear them, verbatim, here (click on the November 18 agenda; Campillo’s comments are at 1:00:00)
“I simply want to state for the record that my analysis of the case law and the legal precedent related to the appellate court’s decision leads me to conclude there’s a low likelihood that the city would win an appeal to the State Supreme Court… Furthermore, given what we’re reading in the media from the Midway Rising (development team), there are other avenues for them to construct their project.
Therefore, given that (an appeal to the State Supreme Court) is likely not to succeed, and is unnecessary as it relates to the Midway Rising Project, I decided to vote ‘no’ on the appeal. And I appreciate (Council President LaCava) allowing me to put that on the record.”
LaCava and his colleagues had the opportunity to give a similar public explanation for their vote. None of them did. I’ve emailed those Councilmembers and asked them again to explain — briefly or at length — why they voted as they did. If and when any of them respond, I’ll add their verbatim comment to this post.
Editordude: San Diego City Council members on Monday voted 6 to 2 in closed session to authorize a petition for review to the Supreme Court of California.
Voting for this foolhardy appeal, then refusing to say why, is cowardice. These six Councilmembers have dishonored their offices. Their silence invites us to speculate that they caved in to the (lame duck) mayor, were coerced by a powerbroker, or had to pay back a favor to a donor. Or maybe all three. If the appeal fails, they will bear the shame of squandering even more of our tax dollars. Thank you, Councilmember Campillo, for being the only person at City Hall with a functioning moral compass.
Anyone want to make a bet? The voters in D2 will elect another candidate to carry Mr. Gloria’s lunch pail next year. When million-dollar consultants and mega donors including the Jacobs family and House member Peters say jump, the voters say how high. Yes, Dan Smiechowski is widely known as a crack pot, but he is crazy as a fox. Just look at his under-construction web site and READ everything! This is the guy we need. http://www.dannytri.org
The City Council’s behavior speaks volumes of their fear of exposing the actual environmental impacts of this humongous project. Just do a decent EIR and we can talk!
I guess that is encouraging. so many people claiming that the height limit is preventing us from rebuilding the sports Arena. Nevermind the fact that we didn’t need a new sports arena there, and that building is a teeny tiny portion of the midway planning area.
They could’ve followed the path of SeaWorld to obtain specific height limit exemptions, instead of this disingenuous corrupt effort.
Council President Joe LaCava is so far the only other councilmember to send us an explanation for his closed-session vote.
“I voted yes to appeal,” LaCava told us. “Why? Fiscal Responsibility and Democracy. The Council voted TWICE to place a measure on the ballot and to expend funds in doing so. The public voted TWICE to support the proposal. Shouldn’t the City protect that investment and the will of the voters? Further, as to the court’s actions on the second iteration, the City prevailed at the lower court; opponents prevailed on appeal. I believe the City should exhaust its options in protecting the Council’s policy decision, its investment, and the will of the voters.”
We’re still waiting for a response from Councilmembers Campbell, Whitburn, Lee, and von Wilpert. And we’ll ask Council member Elo-Rivera to reconsider his refusal to explain his vote. (Councilmember Foster was absent from that November 17 Closed Session vote.)