Author: Frank Gormlie

The following is a reposted letter to the Editor at the U-T by one of our writers, Paul Krueger.

Re: “$10-an-hour-parking comes to Petco Park next month” (Aug. 5): San Diego’s “surge pricing” at downtown parking meters for Padres’ games and special events will benefit city hall financially. But working people will shoulder the costs.

Sports fans and music lovers have a choice: pay $10 an hour for meter parking, use a public lot, or take a bus, trolley, or ride-share. But thousands of low-paid hospitality workers and night shift employees don’t have those options.

The Ocean Beach Planning Board Project Review Committee will meet on Tuesday, August 19 at 6pm at the Ocean Beach Rec Center.  There are two projects on the agenda.

4870 Voltaire St

Construction of a new detached 3-story building with commercial space on the 1st floor, office space on 2nd, and dwelling unit on the 3rd.

The Rag staff is proud to announce that our recent annual fundraiser has broken all of our records — and produced the largest one-time donation in our history.

Overall, the fundraiser that we began 2 weeks ago has exceeded our goal of $3,000 — over 3 times. At this moment, we have received $9,350 in contributions — we are closing the campaign but there may be some checks to our PO Box still to arrive.

By Frank Gormlie
Roughly a week and half ago, on Monday, August 4, dozens of Pacific Beach residents crowded onto a patch of sidewalk in a northeast portion of their community, holding signs and banners — all condemning a huge, mega-ADU project called Chalcifica — that called for over 100 units packed into two neighboring residential lots.

The PB residents and their supporters were there as their lawyer proclaimed a lawsuit against Chalcific’s developer, a man named Christian Spicer, and his firm SDRE.

SDRE wants to build six three-story apartment buildings with only 70 parking spaces for 116 units.The protesters — and the sponsoring group called Neighbors for a Better Pacific Beach – have a multitude of concerns; that the mega-project will pack street parking, endanger the environment and sit on the site of a culturally significant Kumeyaay village.

The lawyer filing the suit, Josh Chatten-Brown, spoke to the crowd. “Make no mistake: These are not simple granny flats. They are large investor apartment complexes masquerading as accessory units designed to exploit the ADU laws for profit and to sidestep the public oversight that such a development demands.”

So, just why were dozens of neighbors and Kumeyaay tribal members at that protest Monday and just who is the complex’s developer, Christian Spicer?

First of all, the neighbors’ chief concern is that the complex is too large for a residential neighborhood’s infrastructure, plus they’re worried the mega-project will overwhelm the neighborhood’s streets and fire evacuation routes, leading to traffic, packed parking and increased risk in an area designated as a very high fire hazard zone.

SDRE plans to build parking spaces for only about half of Chalcifica’s proposed units, for under current city law, developers aren’t required to build extra parking for backyard projects if they’re located within a half-mile of public transit, which includes Chalcifica. The area is already plagued by bottlenecks, congestion and few entrances — all things Chalcifica will worsen when it adds over 100 more residents.

Tribal members were there that day at the protest because they believe Spicer will develop Chalcifica upon untouched, sacred tribal lands. Jesse Pinto, an elder with the Jamul Indian Village, called for the land to be preserved so Kumeyaay people can perform ceremonies and preserve any human remains there. “The city’s approval process is an insult to history and gravely offensive to Kumeyaay descendants,” said tribal law attorney Courtney Ann Coyle.

Secondly, Christian Spicer has made a name for himself recently in San Diego: “the King of ADUs”. Spicer and his investors are responsible for scores of large-scale projects that defy common understandings of what an accessory dwelling unit, or ADU, is supposed to be. His development team has spearheaded two separate projects that each put more than 100 ADUs on a single site, plus they’re responsible for several others with more than 20 ADUs each.

By Cesar F Hernandez / Op-Ed – San Diego Union-Tribune / August 14, 2025 

When my family was separated by U.S immigration policy in the late 1990s, we were overtaken by unimaginable grief and unrelenting pain. This experience grounds me as the organizing director at the ACLU of San Diego and Imperial Counties, working alongside others to build collective strength in the face of injustice. Lately, this pain has surged back, rekindled by the Trump administration’s cruel attacks on immigrant communities.

Politicians are pushing to end birthright citizenship and gut asylum protections. Due process, the cornerstone of justice, is cast aside. ICE storms workplaces and homes. It arrests parents outside courthouses, hospitals, even schools. Then there’s “Alligator Alcatraz,” an ICE detention center built in the Florida Everglades to dehumanize. Even the name carries the weight of lurking danger, a constant reminder that immigrants are being hunted.

I saw the reality of these vicious, inhumane policies and practices play out as I watched an interview of two Oceanside teenagers. At 6 a.m. on June 18, masked, heavily armed ICE agents shattered their windows, threw flashbangs into their home and pushed their way inside. The U.S.-born siblings were handcuffed. Both parents were arrested.

The trauma on the siblings’ faces was unmistakable. The 14-year-old daughter’s tears could have been mine. I felt her pain. It’s a pain that steals your voice and breaks your body.

The following is a letter addressed to Elyse Lowe, Director of Development Services Department, City of San Diego, by Ezgi Kuyumcu, attorney for the group Protect Point Loma regarding the 4-story, 56-unit project at 1004 Rosecrans St.

Re: 1004 Rosecrans St Project (PRJ-1120716)

Dear City of San Diego Development Services Department:

This letter is submitted on behalf of Protect Point Loma regarding a proposed project located at 1004 Rosecrans St. (“Project”).

The Project scope consists of the development of a 4-story mixed-use residential building with 56 residential units, a 1770 square foot commercial suite, and 45 parking
spaces in a basement parking garage (PRJ-1120716).

The Project proposes utilizing incentives under the Complete Communities Housing Solutions Program (“CCHS”). However, the Project site is not eligible for CCHS. In addition, even if the Project site was eligible, as proposed, the Project violates the relevant provisions of the Municipal Code. The City’s review of the Project is inconsistent with the Municipal Code permitting requirements and the City failed to provide the necessary public involvement in the decision-making processes.

I. The Project Is Not Eligible for CCHS

A. The Project Is Inconsistent with the Complete Communities Housing Solutions Regulations

The Project is not eligible for the application of Complete Communities Housing Solutions Regulations as the requirements under San Diego Municipal Code §143.1002
are not met. Municipal Code §143.1002(a) provides: “the regulations in this Division shall apply to any development within a Sustainable Development Area where any
portion of the premises contains zoning that is commercial, residential, or mixed-use ….” SDMC §143.1002(a). The zoning records indicate that the Project site is zoned CC-4-2, located within a Sustainable Development Area (“SDA”) and in Mobility Zone 2.

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.

Tuesday, the 29th of July, witnessed another vote by the San Diego City Council. This vote — a unanimous one — crystalized the city handing over, as Jennifer Van Grove at the UT, described as “its asbestos-plagued office tower at 101 Ash St.” for a 60-year lease to the development team headed by none other than Kelly Moden, the chair of the City’s Planning Commission. She heads MRK Partners and Create Dev LLC.

Moden gushed, “Today’s council approval gives us the green light to transform a city-owned liability into a legacy. We are honored to have the trust and confidence of the San Diego City Council as we turn our attention to meeting September’s state and federal affordable housing deadlines, which will keep our timeline and financing moving forward.”

As Van Grove reported:

The project presumably raises ethical concerns because of Moden’s involvement.

Michael Aguirre and Maria Severson, partners at Aguirre & Severson LLP who have sued the city over its past dealings with the building, threatened additional litigation. They alleged violations related to public noticing requirements and argued that Moden’s financial participation in the deal is illegal.

On Tuesday, July 29, the San Diego City Council voted overwhelmingly to continue the issue of Mission Bay “surplus land” into September. This was upon former councilmember Donna Frye’s request, as expressed both in her letter to the Council and in her statements in the OB Rag.

The issue was initially on the Consent Calendar of the council’s agenda for the day, which would have only called for a simple vote and no discussion of this important issue by councilmembers. Councilmember Marni von Wilpert pulled the item from the Consent Agenda and made the motion to deny the staff — the Mayor’s — recommendations.

After some discussion, the final vote was 7 for the continuance and one opposed. Councilmember Joe LaCava was the sole vote in opposition.

To their credit, councilmembers Jen Campbell, Stephen Whitburn, Henry Foster, von Wilpert, Kent Lee, Raul Campillo and Sean Elo-Rivera voted for the continuance. Councilmember Vivian Moreno was absent (again).

The reasoning of most of the Councilmembers and of the public speakers was that this was too important an issue for an immediate vote and that the public needed to be more informed and brought up to date on the matter; that a vote on it should be put off a couple of months.

LaCava’s argument for not supporting the continuance was a slap in the face to the public as he derided the idea that the city’s citizens needed to be more informed

“An Injury to one community is an injury to all.”

The San Diego Community Coalition– which has been in existence a little over 3 months — will hold its second public meeting on Saturday, July 26. Members will be meeting in the community room at the Pacific Beach Library at 4275 Cass Street, from 10 am to noon.

The network of community activists and leaders include people from 25 neighborhoods across San Diego, from Encanto to University City, from OB and Point Loma to Talmadge and Linda Vista. In addition, some members are from Neighbors for a Better San Diego and SOHO, Save Our Heritage Organization.

Initially spurred to action to fight against the city’s abusive Bonus ADU program, it is now focused on giving support to individual projects that are threatening neighborhoods, like the 23-story Turquoise Tower in PB and the 17-story tower proposed for Columbia Street in Middletown. In fact, the Coalition is helping to sponsor a protest rally against the Columbia Street project on Saturday, August 2. And at least 30 members of the Coalition attended the July 19th rally in Pacific Beach.

Hundreds of Pacific Beach and La Jolla residents turned out to protest the 22-storoy skyscraper known as the Turquoise Tower on Saturday, July 19. Critics say that developers are using loop holes to build the monstrosity in North PB. They were joined by allies from across San Diego. 30 members of the San Diego Community Coalition and aligned groups turned up in support of the protest.

Hosted by the local group Neighbors for a Better California, founded by Marcella Bothwell who is also on the PB Planning Group, the event began with a short march from Dunn-Edwards Paint parking lot on Mission Blvd east to the 970 Turquoise Street site.

Eric L. reported that there were, “Lots of support from passers-by on Turquoise and merchants along the street. The only ‘issue’ of note was the police — already present to handle a traffic accident — asked our throng to move out of the road so cars could safely pass.” Eric also commented, “I was told that there were counter-protesters — I never saw them — but that they turned out to be “also” protesters: they weren’t in favor of the tower either.

Erik B said he saw “5 yimbys observing from behind the wall by the street.”

Fox5 reported that the high-rise “has sparked fresh demands from residents to shut it down for good, and that the “developer, Kalonymus, faces growing pressure to address the community’s concerns about its plans.”

Todd Gloria, mayor of San Diego, appears to have won the recent round on the city budget with both the City Council and the Municipal Employees Association — who represents most of the city’s workforce. Gloria refused to fire any of the hundreds of so-called “middle managers” in order to fill in the $350 million deficit — something the Council and MEA — and public — wanted.

Voice of San Diego reported:

Mayor Todd Gloria and his office are making clear none of their employees are on the chopping block.

Mayoral spokesperson Rachel Laing stated:

“As noted by the City Attorney’s Office, the Mayor alone is responsible for making decisions for his office, which includes the City’s executive team and other mayoral departments.”

Laing “added that the mayor will continue to make staffing decisions based on what the mayor thinks is needed to run a responsive and effective city government,” says the Voice.

The plight of middle managers became an issue in discussions during “controversial budget negotiations this spring” — which “pitted Mayor Todd Gloria against city labor leaders — and eventually most of the City Council,” reports David Garrick of the San Diego U-T.

And we have to add that members of the public at large — city residents — also chimed in about doing away with the many managerial positions the city has,