By Paul Krueger
The Voice of San Diego recently shared its paywall-protected wisdom that District 4 challenger Martha Abraham “…seems to have built something of a coalition between conservatives, anti-development folks and southeastern San Diego residents that believe the area has never gotten its fair and equitable share of resources.”
I vehemently disagree with VOSD’s assertion that any of Abraham’s credible supporters (myself and all my colleagues included) are “anti-development,” and shared my reasoning in an email to Voice editor Scott Lewis and assistant editor Will Huntsberry.
Will’s response, which I’ll share at the end of this column, was disappointing in its brevity and reasoning. But, hey, it’s totally his (and Lewis’s) prerogative to reject audience input and double-down on their chosen narrative. In fact, these civil editorial disagreements are what we should most cherish and defend in a (still hopefully) free and open society that respects the First Amendment (despite — and perhaps because of — Donald Trump’s latest attacks on the media).
Here’s the portion of my email that responded to VOSD’s comment about “anti-development folks” and their support for Abraham:
“Calling any of Abraham’s supporters ‘anti-development’ is intellectually lazy and just plain wrong. In my six years of studying and speaking out on this issue as an activist freed from my obligations as a neutral journalist and observer, I have not encountered even one credible activist who can accurately be described as ‘anti-development’.
Even the harshest critics of the state’s extremely aggressive approach to local land-use and housing development and its wholesale overriding of local control acknowledge — and even embrace — the need for more housing, and thus, more ‘development’.
The issues are always: How much development, where, what kind, at what density, with what involvement of existing residents, and to whose benefit.
For six years, Neighbors For A Better San Diego has, for example, lobbied for high-density development along El Cajon Blvd and other major corridors, while urging policy makers to reasonably minimize the negative impact of multi-unit, high-density apartments with no parking that extend deeper into our residential districts.
These debates have played out week-after-week at City Council and Planning Commission meetings, and have resulted in significant acknowledgements by an otherwise very ‘pro-development’ council majority that some high-density programs, including SB 10 and the ‘Bonus ADU’ program, should be restrained.
These are reasonable policy debates and decisions, and are not ‘anti-development.’
When groups like NFABSD and residents from Encanto to Linda Vista and the College Area to Pacific Beach demand reasonable revisions to the Mayor’s ‘Complete Communities
Housing Solutions’ program and the extensive — and very controversial — upzoning imposed in most Community Plan Updates, they are not being ‘anti-development.’
They are demanding more limited development, transparency about the limits of public transit and the realistic need for more parking, more advance notice to neighbors about these projects, fewer ‘ministerial approvals,’ a bigger role for Community Planning Groups, and a much stronger focus on — and commitment to — building truly affordable units and more for-sale housing.
None of this is ‘anti-development,’ and your continued use of that term denies the reality of this complex debate over our city’s future. It also denigrates the effort so many of us have made to change city policies to better reflect what we would call ‘smart-growth’ guidelines that better serve the wants and needs of a majority of San Diego residents.
I suppose it’s easy to label the two sides to this debate (though in reality, it’s not a neat, two-sided debate), as ‘pro-development’ and ‘anti-development.’ And perhaps the term ‘pro-development’ is accurate. But please stop referring to those of us who challenge the Mayor and Governor’s policies as ‘anti-development,’ because we’re not.”
Here’s VOSD assistant editor Will Huntsberry’s response to my email:
“Thank you for your input, Paul. Always appreciate the conversation. I highly doubt I will stop using the term anti-development any time soon as a description of some folks’ politics. I think it’s a perfectly reasonable and accurate description — and I believe I’ve laid out to you the reasons why. But I welcome the feedback.”
I’ll have another post soon about their characterization of Martha’s other supporters as “conservative”… whatever that label means in today’s political discourse.
P.S. I urge all of you to subscribe to VOSD, as I do, for access to it’s “premium content” and to support its reporting. We need more voices, providing more information, especially local news, which includes everything from the Union-Tribune, to VOSD, Times of SD, and, of course, the OB Rag. Quality reporting and commentary costs money, and is worth supporting.
It appears that more people by the day are aware that those who serve the Yimby agenda, are degrading our communities. The original State ADU law from almost ten years ago had it right. Adding a small to medium sized unit to an existing SFR is the least intrusive type of density, while being effective. When the Yimbys scream that someone is anti-development, that should be code for “perhaps the target of their venom has some common sense”. Something that is sorely lacking in local and State politics these days.
Painting D4 challenger’s supporters as conservative is accurate. She just doesn’t want you to know it. To begin with she hired a firm who specializes in opposition to progressives. Her campaign manager is Jared Sclar, a guy who raised $8000 for Todd Gloria, ran opposition campaigns in several Washington state counties with a very ugly campaign against a Mamdani-type to maintain the status quo. And now we find out that the Lincoln Club is endorsing and then unendorsing because the look was problematic. Jared has a terrible reputation for being quite petty and mealy mouthed but he is perfect for her campaign since she has no track record to tout, never having served in office, she can only run the opposition tricks Jared is known for. Now it has come to light that her calling of the police on her own neighbors ended in a TRO a judge had to invalidate because there was never a threat. It appears she used the police as weapons against BOTH her neighbors on each side. The more we find out about Jared and Martha the rose they look.
Didn’t the firefighters just come out and endorse Abraham?
Yes. They dropped their endorsement of Foster and endorsed Abraham.
This is a nonpartisan City Council race, and both candidates happen to be Democrats. So who exactly are Republican or conservative voters in District 4 supposed to vote for? They have the same two choices everyone else has: Henry Foster or Martha Abraham. If they’re unhappy with the incumbent, it’s hardly surprising that many would support the challenger. That doesn’t magically make Martha the “conservative candidate.”
I’d rather look at what each candidate actually says and does than try to define them by the political affiliation of some of the people supporting them.
Terrie,
Let’s be honest. You’ve contributed $250 to Henry Foster’s campaign.
Martha Abraham is a registered Democrat.
Jared Sclar has Raul Campillo and Kyle Krahel San Diego County Democratic Party Chair, as clients. Source: https://www.jaredsclar.com
Abraham has no known affiliation with Lincoln Club, as much as you want that to be true, it’s not. Voice of San Diego ran a correction in their reporting.
The truth is you are a white woman and Martha is a Black woman. You have vested interest in Foster winning to push your pro Cannabis agenda. https://www.cannabissciencetech.com/view/americans-for-safe-access-local-chapters-meet-the-san-diego-asa-chapter
Let’s call a spade a spade. Abraham has a list of locals as supporters, Foster has a list of CEO’s and special interests.
Your nonsense about policing is just that, nonsense. It’s baseless. Show the documents you have. You don’t have any. It’s a big nothing burger, like the rest of your baseless attacks.
You’re a hater. Here a Black education woman with a career in nursing is running to help her District and you stoop to slander. Look in the mirror.
Martha has gone high, you and the Foster supporters have gone low. You reflect the worst parts of politics.
The truth is Martha is the most honest Democrat in the race. You hate that. You can’t stand it. You’re used to your insider advantage. You hate that she’s not going to take any bullshit and it eats at you. You’re just a bully. Just noise.
I can’t wait for November. Soon the noise will be gone.
I once asked Donna Frye how she responds when someone calls her NIMBY. She said, in so many words, that people use such labels to stifle dissent and she does not tolerate that. Exactly! It is especially unfortunate when labels are used by journalists as shortcuts because they don’t want to take the time to be precise. In our business, precision is coin of the realm.
Here are more endorsements for Abraham:
• Sierra Club San Diego
• United Nurses Associations of California/Union of Health Care Professionals (UNAC/UHCP): The healthcare union representing nurses and health care professionals.
• Run Women Run: A local political action group dedicated to supporting women running for public office.
• Media & Community Outlets: Endorsements from local publications like The San Diego Voice and Viewpoint and La Prensa San Diego.
NIMBY has been around since the 70s and became relatively common in the 90s in relation to people not wanting something to exist in their neighborhood. Everyone, even self proclaimed YIMBYs have been NIMBYs at some point.
That VOSD article took San Diego journalism to a new low.
I am surprised anyone is supporting Foster after seeing the cringeworthy racist remarks his supporter, Herman Collins, has posted on social media. Collins doesn’t even live in D4. Add this to the evidence of Foster calling out a constituent, yelling in his face in public, wearing a City of San Diego jacket.
Let’s also not forget his latest vote regarding Footnote 7 and the Emerald Hills.
Herman Collins “La Prensa Endorsement in D4 Council race-I’ll say it: Mexicans need to stay out of Black folks politics.”
https://laprensa.org/sd-city-council-race-stokes-racial-tensions
People of diestrict need high quality grocery stiries not liquor stores food deeart plaves do either council candidate care at all about that
I suspect you have not seen this post from Abraham, food desert is one of her core issues:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/Dc2CasYPEq5/