Category: Civil Rights

By Blake Nelson / The San Diego Union-Tribune / August 26, 2025 

Several residents of San Diego’s designated camping areas for homeless people are suing to overhaul the program, alleging that both lots are dirty, lack quality food and remain unequipped to aid those with disabilities.

The safe sleeping sites hold hundreds of two-person tents near Balboa Park. Each location is “rodent infested” and a “fire hazard,” according to the lawsuit filed Monday in U.S. District Court. They are also host to “excessive and dangerous heat” during part of the year as well as “cold and flooding in the winter,” weather that often leaves belongings “saturated with mold.”

All in all, “living conditions in the Camps” are “untenable, seriously threatening and aggravating mental and physical health,” the filing says.

The lawsuit asks a court to force reforms on the effort.

by Kyle Krahel / Times of San Diego / Aug. 22, 2025

I don’t like the game Trump Republicans are forcing us to play, but I refuse to let them play it unopposed. The path to protecting democracy runs right through San Diego County.

Redrawing congressional districts mid-decade feels uncomfortable. But what’s worse would be watching Democrats roll over while Republicans change the rules of the game, calling foul to referees who do nothing.

Last week, Gov. Gavin Newsom launched the Election Rigging Response Act, setting a special election for Nov. 4. Triggered only if Texas or another GOP-run state enacts partisan map changes, the measure allows California’s Legislature to draw temporary congressional maps through 2030.

After that, power reverts to the Citizens Redistricting Commission. So this isn’t a unilateral power grab; it’s a transparent proposal going directly to the people for their vote of approval.

Contrast that with Texas, where Republican lawmakers are redrawing maps mid-decade behind closed doors, without voter approval, without oversight, without an independent commission. California’s path is fundamentally different: conditional, subject to a vote, and designed to reset the playing field, not entrench power.

Trump allegedly told the Texas governor to “find me five seats,” and Texas capitulated. California’s answer is very different: put the question to voters, debate it in public, and let the people decide. That’s not a power grab. That’s democracy in action.

ALL DETAILS ARE INSIDE

Come Labor Day in San Diego County, September 1, there are 6 planned protests against the Trump regime, titled “Workers Over Billionaires.”

They’re in downtown San Diego, Chula Vista, La Jolla, Mira Mesa, Carlsbad and Escondido. (All details are herein.)

Downtown San Diego

It begins at 10am and runs to 12 noon at the Waterfront Park at 1600 Pacific Hwy. (That’s San Diego CA 92101)

About this event (Each event — except Escondido — starts at the same time, 10am, has the same demands and script, so we’re running just the downtown San Diego details, but with more info about each of the events.)

There are actually two events, one sponsored by the coalition that organized the No Kings event at Waterfront Park. The other, at the same place and time, is sponsored by San Diego & Imperial Counties Labor Council, No Kings and a host of other groups we list below.

Here’s their script:

This Labor Day we will continue to stand strong, fighting for public schools over private profits, healthcare over hedge funds, shared prosperity over corporate politics.

Working people built this nation and we know how to take care of each other. We won’t back down—we will never stop fighting for our families and the rights and freedoms that ensure access to opportunity and a better life for all Americans. The billionaire’s time is up.

On September 1st we will continue the movement we launched together on May 1st, standing in solidarity with all our communities under attack and fighting for real wins for all our people.

By Lu Rehling

Question for our elected representatives US Congressman Scott Peters and CA Senator Akilah Weber: Who does this sound like to you when it comes to advocating for changes to housing policy?

• Bypass environmental and safety protections.
• Blame regulations [not developer/corporate greed].
• Apply trickle-down economics [newly applied to the housing market].
• Promote gentrification [driving mid- to lower-income resident out of their homes].
• Encourage short-term rentals [discouraging starter home ownership].
• Off-site affordable housing [so only the entitled enjoy exclusive perks and only with each other].
• Disenfranchise community groups [by waiving reviews and defunding appeals].
• Ignore the needs of disabled and families [prioritizing transport options for the fit and unencumbered].

If your answer is “progressives,” then read your Orwell, because progressive policy instead asks government to tackle inequality and promote social justice. And yet you align with so-called progressive YIMBY Dems.

In fact, Congressman Peters, you co-sponsored and continue to smugly tout the “Build More Housing Near Transit Act” legislation that would enable all of the policies stated above, allowing “by-right” density development: the “right” being to waive height, parking, and safety review requirements.

Of course, being a politician, you also say that you favor “community input,” but that’s NOT in the law that you’ve proposed. And its affordability and building reuse inclusions are minimalist-to-toothless: options, not mandates that developers, laser-focused as usual on their own self-interested goals, can freely ignore.

And, in fact, Senator Weber, you approved passage from committee of SB 79 (“Housing Development: Transit Oriented Development”) that would do the much of the same as Peters’ proposal, similarly without urgently needed and appropriate safeguards.

Over 100 San Diego residents from all over the city rallied in Clairemont on Saturday, August 23, against Senate Bill 79 – a bill sponsored by State Senator Scott Wiener that targets the state’s neighborhoods. Opponents claim that the bill is worse than SB 9 and SB 10.

Its sponsors claim the bill is aimed at increasing housing density near train and rapid bus lines across California by mandating up-zoning within a quarter to half-mile of transit hubs, and allow developers to build large-scale apartment complexes near these transit stops.

Yet opponents like Neighbors for a Better California, the prime sponsor of Saturday’s protest, argue that SB 79’s language is vague around bus stops, and that the lack of precision could allow developers to exploit ambiguities, undermining the bill’s intent.

Marcella Bothwell, the chair of the sponsoring group, clarified to the demonstrators, many of whom lined Genessee Boulevard with signs for passing motorists:

“And that bus stop can be anything from just 15-minute frequency in the height of morning and evening. That will qualify as a bus stop. That 500 homes or a half a mile around that area, the height now can go up to six, to eight, even nine stories. These homes, there’s no affordability requirement. They’re not concerned about fire safety.”

There were also other anti-SB79 rallies up and down the state.

By Steven Harper / Common Dreams / Aug 19, 2025

US President Donald Trump and Republicans face a daunting challenge: How to preserve power in the wake of their wildly unpopular policies?

Their strategy is to intensify the GOP’s decades-long quest to limit voter participation. Selecting the voters likely to cast ballots for them is far better than letting all voters select their leaders.

Trump has taken the strategy to a whole new level. And he’s doing it out of fear and desperation.

Fighting History

During midterm elections, the president’s party loses seats in Congress. In Trump’s first term, Republicans lost 40 seats in the House in 2018. In 2010, President Barack Obama’s Democrats lost 63.

The exceptions are few and far between. In the aftermath of 9/11, President George W. Bush’s GOP gained eight House seats in 2002, but then lost 30 in 2006. In 1998, President Bill Clinton’s Democrats gained five seats, but that didn’t offset the 52 seats that they had lost in 1994. In all but three midterm elections from 1934 to 1994—from Franklin Roosevelt to Bill Clinton—the president’s party lost House seats. It did a little better in the Senate, gaining seats in only 6 of 23 midterm elections since 1934.

By Aaron Pellish / Politico / August 20, 2025

Former President Barack Obama is supporting California’s mid-cycle redistricting effort as a “responsible approach” to Republicans drawing new maps in Texas.

Obama praised California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s ballot measure proposal to redraw congressional districts and tilt at least five congressional districts in the state towards Democrats at a fundraiser on Tuesday for the National Democratic Redistricting Committee.

“I believe that Governor Newsom’s approach is a responsible approach,” he said, according to excerpts obtained by POLITICO. “I think that approach is a smart, measured approach, designed to address a very particular problem in a very particular moment in time.”

By Sara Jacobs / Op-Ed San Diego Union-Tribune / August 20, 2025

Last week, Gov. Gavin Newsom called for a special election this November in California. Our state isn’t supposed to have another statewide election until 2026, but Newsom recognizes the urgency of this moment.

Why? Because Donald Trump and Texas Republicans are making an unprecedented power grab to steal congressional seats and rig the 2026 election before a single vote is cast.

Trump knows that if the midterms are a fair fight, he and his friends in Congress will lose. The start of Trump’s second term has been an unmitigated disaster. He has imposed sweeping tariffs that have hurt California families and businesses, denied much-needed disaster aid to fire victims, and ordered inhumane immigration raids that have left families torn apart and businesses without a workforce. Across the board, his approval ratings are tanking. And he knows that if House Democrats retake the majority, we’ll put an end to his disastrous agenda.

by Noah Goldberg / LA Times / August 20, 2025 

After a tense and sharply divided debate Tuesday, the Los Angeles City Council voted to oppose a state bill that aims to vastly expand high-density housing near public transit hubs, arguing that the state should leave important planning decisions to local legislators.

The council voted 8 to 5 to oppose Senate Bill 79, which seeks to mitigate the state’s housing shortage by allowing buildings of up to nine stories near certain train stops and slightly smaller buildings near some bus stops throughout California.

“A one-size-fits-all mandate from Sacramento is not safe, and it’s not responsible,” said City Councilmember Traci Park at a news conference before the vote.

Park, who was joined at the news conference by Councilmembers Monica Rodriguez and John Lee, said the bill was an attempt by its sponsor, state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), and other state legislators to “hijack” local planning from the city.

Lee, who authored the resolution opposing the bill, called it “not planning” but “chaos.”

By Tanja Kropf / Explore Clairemont / August 19, 2025

If the City of San Diego has its way, the single-family home landscape that has been a part of the fabric of Clairemont for decades is about to dramatically change.

On August 4, city planners unveiled their proposed 30-year plan for Clairemont at the Clairemont Community Planning Group (CCPG) meeting. The 101-page document was released to the public less than two hours before the meeting.

The new Clairemont Community Plan proposes up to 17,100 additional residences and a more urbanized ‘City of Villages’ neighborhood design where commercial, retail, and residential units will share higher density spaces.

Additionally, the 30-foot height limit the City Council adopted in 1989 for most of Clairemont will go away. This will clear the way for, at a minimum, 65-foot height limits in certain areas.

The elimination of height limits aligns with California Senate Bill 79. SB 79 would override current single-family zoning restrictions in favor of multi-family residential developments (condos, apartments). The bill would allow buildings up to 95 feet high in areas with access to transit within a half mile (as the crow flies).

by Dave Schwab / Times of San Diego / Aug. 20, 2025

Some residents are pushing back at plans by AT&T to install a 30-foot “faux eucalyptus” cell tower with 12 antennas, 9 radio units and a large ground equipment box.

Those opposed to the proposal, at 2315 Soto St. on public land in Collier Park, have requested that the city deny a conditional use permit for it in its fenced-off area. They’re arguing that public land is inappropriate to build a new cell tower on, disguised or not, contending it should be used for another purpose.

Disguising cell towers as trees, often eucalyptus or other types, helps them blend into the landscape, making them less noticeable and reducing the feeling of visual clutter. Faux trees are primarily used to address public concerns about visual pollution and to make towers more acceptable in residential areas.

These disguises help mitigate the aesthetic impact of cell towers, which can be perceived as eyesores, especially in areas where they might clash with the surrounding environment.

Eric Law, chair of the Peninsula Community Planning Board, speaking for himself, said residents oppose the cell tower project for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that some view Collier Park as a sacrosanct recreational community resource.

Law noted AT&T, a publicly traded company, not a public utility, is seeking to upgrade its 5G telecommunications system in the area.

Washington DC, America’s bluest city, is building more homes per capita than Houston—not with bottom-up zoning reform but with top-down government action.

by Brian Shearer / Washington Monthly / August 14, 2025

Since Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson’s book Abundance was published, the policy world has debated the causes of our current housing supply drought. Abundance argued that zoning laws are the culprit, as part of its broader thesis calling for liberals to embrace a policy vision oriented around building more of what we need (i.e., “abundance”) primarily through targeted deregulation of private industry and de-proceduralization of government.

Other analysts believe that it is consolidation in the housing market that slows development. But both camps aim to expand housing supply, and solutions are not always derived from the causes of the problem. Cancer isn’t caused by the absence of chemo drugs or radiation, but that is often the treatment. Instead of debating causes, focusing on what policy solutions work best might be a better approach.