See also Redevelopment Midnight Deal.
Redevelopment bill passes, threatens local funding
Downtown effort could lose $50 million
By Roger Showley
SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE
June 15, 2011 http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif
Downtown's continued redevelopment could come to halt if the Legislature's measure passed June 15 goes into effect, shifting much of the downtown property tax base to local schools...
San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders called the votes "an extortion attempt" in the face of attempts by pro-redevelopment cities to work out a compromise that would have yielded funds for the state without killing redevelopment programs.
However, private property rights advocates who make up a coalition called "Stop the Money Pit," hailed the Legislature's action, although it promised "much work to do" in ending redevelopment because of the school-funding option that passed.
The measure was passed after months of consideration of an alternate reform sought by Gov. Jerry Brown, who proposed to dissolve the state's roughly 400 redevelopment agencies.
That measure, not passed by either the Assembly or Senate, would have shifted the redevelopment money to schools, cities, counties and special districts after taking into account existing debt obligations and other contracts.
Brown also hoped the measure would shift $1.7 billion to help close the state's budget gap, now standing at about $10 billion...
Saturday, June 18, 2011
Monday, May 16, 2011
An echo of San Diego redevelopment agencies in Washington D.C.?
Million-Dollar Wasteland: A Washington Post Investigation
Speculators score, District loses in affordable-housing deal
By Debbie Cenziper
May 15, 2011
Washington Post
It sure looked like a good deal at the time.
A nonprofit developer promised to spend millions renovating three rotting apartment complexes in some of the most blighted neighborhoods of Southeast Washington. It would be one of the largest redevelopment projects in years east of the Anacostia River, helping dozens of low-income renters suffering through roof leaks and winters without heat.
In late 2007, then-Mayor Adrian Fenty sent a letter to the D.C. Council touting the developer’s experience, construction team and financing. The council swiftly approved the deal, lending $3.5 million in federal funds to help pay for the renovation of 98 units priced for the poor.
But the project died before a shovel ever hit dirt.
East of the River Community Development Corp. had taken on nearly $8 million in mortgages to buy complexes riddled with leaks, sewer backups, and buckling stairwells, roofs and floors.
Soon after the city delivered the federal money, the group declared bankruptcy and shut down. The District lost millions of dollars while the project was delayed for years.
But one group reaped millions. A handful of real estate speculators, including three previously convicted in a sweeping housing fraud scandal, had sold the complexes to East of the River based on adjusted appraisals written by one of the sellers’ associates, The Washington Post found.
The project is a case study of the breakdowns in the nation’s $2 billion-a-year affordable-housing program, in which extensive construction delays have derailed the development of thousands of homes.
The District’s East of the River project involved an inexperienced developer that cut an ill-fated deal with savvy speculators under the watch of a local housing agency that failed to protect the government’s investment.
Waste and weak oversight are endemic at housing agencies nationwide. A Post investigation found that about $400 million in affordable-housing funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development is tied up in hundreds of troubled construction projects, including the one proposed by East of the River...
Speculators score, District loses in affordable-housing deal
By Debbie Cenziper
May 15, 2011
Washington Post
It sure looked like a good deal at the time.
A nonprofit developer promised to spend millions renovating three rotting apartment complexes in some of the most blighted neighborhoods of Southeast Washington. It would be one of the largest redevelopment projects in years east of the Anacostia River, helping dozens of low-income renters suffering through roof leaks and winters without heat.
In late 2007, then-Mayor Adrian Fenty sent a letter to the D.C. Council touting the developer’s experience, construction team and financing. The council swiftly approved the deal, lending $3.5 million in federal funds to help pay for the renovation of 98 units priced for the poor.
But the project died before a shovel ever hit dirt.
East of the River Community Development Corp. had taken on nearly $8 million in mortgages to buy complexes riddled with leaks, sewer backups, and buckling stairwells, roofs and floors.
Soon after the city delivered the federal money, the group declared bankruptcy and shut down. The District lost millions of dollars while the project was delayed for years.
But one group reaped millions. A handful of real estate speculators, including three previously convicted in a sweeping housing fraud scandal, had sold the complexes to East of the River based on adjusted appraisals written by one of the sellers’ associates, The Washington Post found.
The project is a case study of the breakdowns in the nation’s $2 billion-a-year affordable-housing program, in which extensive construction delays have derailed the development of thousands of homes.
The District’s East of the River project involved an inexperienced developer that cut an ill-fated deal with savvy speculators under the watch of a local housing agency that failed to protect the government’s investment.
Waste and weak oversight are endemic at housing agencies nationwide. A Post investigation found that about $400 million in affordable-housing funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development is tied up in hundreds of troubled construction projects, including the one proposed by East of the River...
DA Absent from SEDC Embezzlement Case
DA Absent from SEDC Embezzlement Case
May 9, 2011
by Will Carless
Voice of San Diego
We've been asked one question a lot in the days since former Southeastern Economic Development Corp. officials Carolyn Y. Smith and Dante Dayacap were charged with embezzlement and misappropriation of public funds: Why didn't San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis prosecute this case?
Back in 2008, when the SEDC scandal was first breaking, Mayor Jerry Sanders announced at a press conference that he had asked Dumanis to investigate the alleged wrongdoing at the agency. Sanders' move came after a city commissioned audit found SEDC's compensation practices had risen "to the level of fraud."
As I pointed out recently, Dumanis has a special Public Integrity Unit that she created back in 2007, before the SEDC scandal broke.
I put the question to Dumanis' spokesman, Steve Walker, in an email.
His response:
The Attorney General's Office is the appropriate agency to handle this prosecution. Since this is a pending case, the District Attorney's Office will have no further comment at this time.
The California Attorney General's Office does prosecute plenty of people accused of misusing public funds. The state AG investigated the wrongdoing at the city of Bell, for example.
Gary Schons, who heads up the local office of the attorney general, wouldn't go into the matter when I called him. He simply said that his office also has a specialty in prosecuting these sorts of cases.
But, while the AG is an appropriate agency to do the prosecution, it's unclear why Walker would categorize the AG as the appropriate agency. In other words, why is the AG more appropriate than the DA's Public Integrity Unit?
The case, which focuses on a clandestine system of bonuses we uncovered in this story back in 2008, fits the stated scope of the unit, which Dumanis created specifically to root out misuse of public funds and corruption by public and elected officials.
Smith and Dayacap were highly paid, high ranking public officials. (Both made far more than the mayor in 2007.)
Why the AG brought the case instead of Dumanis is unlikely to become public.
As a rule, prosecutors don't discuss pending cases because they don't want to give the impression that they're attempting to try the case in the media, said Professor Heidi Rummel, a former prosecutor and expert in criminal law at the University of Southern California.
Prosecutors want "to avoid any potential unfairness or prejudices to the defendant before he has his day in court," Rummel said.
That Dumanis' office isn't prosecuting the case is irrelevant because, as a public prosecutor, she represents the government as much as her colleagues at the Attorney General's Office, Rummel said. As such, she should be as wary of prejudicing the case by what she says publicly as she would be if her office was prosecuting it.
The precaution of not talking about a case extends not just to the case itself, but also to the reasons why a prosecutor did or didn't take the case on, Rummel said.
Complicating the SEDC matter is the fact that the original investigation wasn't done by the DA or the AG or even any state agency. It was done by the FBI, which usually teams with U.S. Attorney's Office to prosecute the subjects of its investigations.
I learned in court on Wednesday that Dayacap had received a "target letter" from the U.S. Attorney's Office more than a year ago. But at some point between then and now, the federal government decided not to prosecute and instead the case ended up at the state level.
(FBI spokesman Darryl Foxworth wouldn't comment on the case either.)
Certainly, the passing-around of the Smith/Dayacap prosecution has confused the two defendant's lawyers. Jerry Coughlan, who is defending Smith, and Marc Carlos, who's representing Dayacap, both told me on Wednesday that they had no idea the Attorney General's Office was involved in the case before their clients were served with arrest warrants.
If I find out any more about why Schons, not Dumanis, brought the case, I'll pass it along.
May 9, 2011
by Will Carless
Voice of San Diego
We've been asked one question a lot in the days since former Southeastern Economic Development Corp. officials Carolyn Y. Smith and Dante Dayacap were charged with embezzlement and misappropriation of public funds: Why didn't San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis prosecute this case?
Back in 2008, when the SEDC scandal was first breaking, Mayor Jerry Sanders announced at a press conference that he had asked Dumanis to investigate the alleged wrongdoing at the agency. Sanders' move came after a city commissioned audit found SEDC's compensation practices had risen "to the level of fraud."
As I pointed out recently, Dumanis has a special Public Integrity Unit that she created back in 2007, before the SEDC scandal broke.
I put the question to Dumanis' spokesman, Steve Walker, in an email.
His response:
The Attorney General's Office is the appropriate agency to handle this prosecution. Since this is a pending case, the District Attorney's Office will have no further comment at this time.
The California Attorney General's Office does prosecute plenty of people accused of misusing public funds. The state AG investigated the wrongdoing at the city of Bell, for example.
Gary Schons, who heads up the local office of the attorney general, wouldn't go into the matter when I called him. He simply said that his office also has a specialty in prosecuting these sorts of cases.
But, while the AG is an appropriate agency to do the prosecution, it's unclear why Walker would categorize the AG as the appropriate agency. In other words, why is the AG more appropriate than the DA's Public Integrity Unit?
The case, which focuses on a clandestine system of bonuses we uncovered in this story back in 2008, fits the stated scope of the unit, which Dumanis created specifically to root out misuse of public funds and corruption by public and elected officials.
Smith and Dayacap were highly paid, high ranking public officials. (Both made far more than the mayor in 2007.)
Why the AG brought the case instead of Dumanis is unlikely to become public.
As a rule, prosecutors don't discuss pending cases because they don't want to give the impression that they're attempting to try the case in the media, said Professor Heidi Rummel, a former prosecutor and expert in criminal law at the University of Southern California.
Prosecutors want "to avoid any potential unfairness or prejudices to the defendant before he has his day in court," Rummel said.
That Dumanis' office isn't prosecuting the case is irrelevant because, as a public prosecutor, she represents the government as much as her colleagues at the Attorney General's Office, Rummel said. As such, she should be as wary of prejudicing the case by what she says publicly as she would be if her office was prosecuting it.
The precaution of not talking about a case extends not just to the case itself, but also to the reasons why a prosecutor did or didn't take the case on, Rummel said.
Complicating the SEDC matter is the fact that the original investigation wasn't done by the DA or the AG or even any state agency. It was done by the FBI, which usually teams with U.S. Attorney's Office to prosecute the subjects of its investigations.
I learned in court on Wednesday that Dayacap had received a "target letter" from the U.S. Attorney's Office more than a year ago. But at some point between then and now, the federal government decided not to prosecute and instead the case ended up at the state level.
(FBI spokesman Darryl Foxworth wouldn't comment on the case either.)
Certainly, the passing-around of the Smith/Dayacap prosecution has confused the two defendant's lawyers. Jerry Coughlan, who is defending Smith, and Marc Carlos, who's representing Dayacap, both told me on Wednesday that they had no idea the Attorney General's Office was involved in the case before their clients were served with arrest warrants.
If I find out any more about why Schons, not Dumanis, brought the case, I'll pass it along.
Monday, May 02, 2011
San Diego budget plan: more prosecutors after library and recreation cuts
From Libraries to Lawyers: Shifting Budget Priorities
May 1, 2011
by Liam Dillon
Voice of San Diego
San Diego's library system has eroded over the past six years. Mayor Jerry Sanders freely admits it.
"We've taken them down to a very small percentage of what they used to be," Sanders said at a recent budget forum.
Libraries used to be a greater budget priority. While nearly every city department has seen cuts during a decade of San Diego budget deficits, reductions to libraries have been deeper. Its budget has decreased from $38.7 million in Sanders' first budget in 2007 to $30.1 million under the mayor's proposal for next year. Its percentage of the city's day-to-day operating budget will have g0ne down by more than 1 percent, too.
As libraries have lost, others have gained.
In 2007, the City Attorney's Office received $36.2 million, or $2.5 million less than libraries. Its proposed 2012 allocation will be $42.4 million, or $12 million more than libraries. The percentage the attorney's office receives of the city budget has gone up by 0.3 percent since 2007 as well.
City Attorney Jan Goldsmith argues his department's budget has increased because of costs outside his control, such as paying for a share of the city's growing retirement obligations. Beyond the vagaries of the city budgeting, Sanders, City Council members and even a key library supporter defended the city attorney for keeping the city out of trouble and from racking up outside legal costs.
The downside of cutting libraries is clear. They'll be closed. For attorneys, the effects are less obvious. A smaller legal department could mean lost lawsuits, missed opportunities or bigger bills for outside contracts. But as the mayor and council stress the need to protect public safety and other front line city services in a time of continued budget pressure, they'll have to come to terms with the realization that the city's team of lawyers costs increasingly more than its team of librarians.
The City Attorney's Office files or defends lawsuits involving the city, provides legal advice to the mayor, council and all departments, and prosecutes about 35,000 misdemeanor cases a year. Good lawyers cost money, Goldsmith said in an interview. The fact that they have cost more in the past six years, he said, has little to do with him.
Nearly the entire $4 million hike in his budget this year came from costs associated with rising pension and other retirement obligations, an increase he couldn't do anything about. Further, Goldsmith contended his office took that hit more than others because its costs are almost all personnel.
Goldsmith's office has spent less than its budget the last two years. He's left some positions empty and replaced higher paid jobs with lower level ones. Goldsmith also said he decreased costs for outside attorneys, but those savings primarily appear in other department's budgets.
"Each year we've come in with a plan on how we're going to do our fair share," Goldsmith said.
But for some, it's not fair enough. At a recent community budget forum, Sanders answered a written question about a chart that showed the city attorney's budget larger than the library's.
"Please explain how this is shared pain," the question asked.
Sanders responded that attorneys are expensive, and it costs more to hire outside counsel than do legal work in-house...
May 1, 2011
by Liam Dillon
Voice of San Diego
San Diego's library system has eroded over the past six years. Mayor Jerry Sanders freely admits it.
"We've taken them down to a very small percentage of what they used to be," Sanders said at a recent budget forum.
Libraries used to be a greater budget priority. While nearly every city department has seen cuts during a decade of San Diego budget deficits, reductions to libraries have been deeper. Its budget has decreased from $38.7 million in Sanders' first budget in 2007 to $30.1 million under the mayor's proposal for next year. Its percentage of the city's day-to-day operating budget will have g0ne down by more than 1 percent, too.
As libraries have lost, others have gained.
In 2007, the City Attorney's Office received $36.2 million, or $2.5 million less than libraries. Its proposed 2012 allocation will be $42.4 million, or $12 million more than libraries. The percentage the attorney's office receives of the city budget has gone up by 0.3 percent since 2007 as well.
City Attorney Jan Goldsmith argues his department's budget has increased because of costs outside his control, such as paying for a share of the city's growing retirement obligations. Beyond the vagaries of the city budgeting, Sanders, City Council members and even a key library supporter defended the city attorney for keeping the city out of trouble and from racking up outside legal costs.
The downside of cutting libraries is clear. They'll be closed. For attorneys, the effects are less obvious. A smaller legal department could mean lost lawsuits, missed opportunities or bigger bills for outside contracts. But as the mayor and council stress the need to protect public safety and other front line city services in a time of continued budget pressure, they'll have to come to terms with the realization that the city's team of lawyers costs increasingly more than its team of librarians.
The City Attorney's Office files or defends lawsuits involving the city, provides legal advice to the mayor, council and all departments, and prosecutes about 35,000 misdemeanor cases a year. Good lawyers cost money, Goldsmith said in an interview. The fact that they have cost more in the past six years, he said, has little to do with him.
Nearly the entire $4 million hike in his budget this year came from costs associated with rising pension and other retirement obligations, an increase he couldn't do anything about. Further, Goldsmith contended his office took that hit more than others because its costs are almost all personnel.
Goldsmith's office has spent less than its budget the last two years. He's left some positions empty and replaced higher paid jobs with lower level ones. Goldsmith also said he decreased costs for outside attorneys, but those savings primarily appear in other department's budgets.
"Each year we've come in with a plan on how we're going to do our fair share," Goldsmith said.
But for some, it's not fair enough. At a recent community budget forum, Sanders answered a written question about a chart that showed the city attorney's budget larger than the library's.
"Please explain how this is shared pain," the question asked.
Sanders responded that attorneys are expensive, and it costs more to hire outside counsel than do legal work in-house...
Monday, April 11, 2011
Bonnie Dumanis: D.A.'s Public Integrity Unit: Not So Public Lately
The prosecution of Kathleen Sterling is worrisome. Almost immediately after Sterling and other Tri-City Healthcare board members fired a group of administrators in December 2008, powerful friends of the fired individuals began asking Dumanis to file criminal charges against members of the board who voted in favor of the firings. Bonnie Dumanis did not respond to the first two attempts to involve the criminal justice system in the matter, preferring to allow the case to make its way through the civil courts. But apparently the third time is a charm. Does this have anything to do with the mayoral campaign and/or efforts to change the makeup of the Tri-City board?
D.A.'s Public Integrity Unit: Not So Public Lately
April 10, 2011
by Will Carless
Voice of San Diego
District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis' website for her recently announced mayoral campaign waxes lyrical about the prosecutor's protection of the public, high conviction rates and strong managerial and organizational skills.
Not mentioned in the list of accomplishments is the District Attorney's Public Integrity Unit, a crack team of lawyers Dumanis set up with much fanfare in the spring of 2007 as a weapon against San Diego's image as a den of political iniquity and corruption.
Indeed, four years after the unit was created, San Diegans would be forgiven for wondering whether it actually still exists. Since the controversial — and largely botched — prosecution of Chula Vista Councilman Steve Castaneda in 2008, Dumanis' team of anti-corruption lawyers has been remarkably low-profile.
Dumanis says the unit has hardly been slacking off. Her office provided a list of 88 public integrity prosecutions since 2007 as evidence that complaints are being investigated. And Dumanis and her public integrity czar Leon Schorr stressed that most of the work of the Public Integrity Unit is investigative and doesn't necessarily result in prosecutions.
But 85 of the 88 prosecutions listed by Dumanis involved rank-and-file public employees, not politicians or elected officials, who were the original stated targets of the Public Integrity Unit. Lumped into the successes of the unit are cases against police officers and city employees, and for attorney misconduct.
In four years, three elected officials have been prosecuted by Dumanis' office and, so far, only one of those prosecutions has resulted in punitive action: Earlier this year former Encinitas Mayor Dan Dalager was fined $1,000 for receiving discounted kitchen appliances from a resident he assisted while in office.
Dumanis proposed the Public Integrity Unit as a new and necessary weapon in the local prosecutorial arsenal, and warned crooked politicians that she would be watching them, and that they'd better behave.
Driving home the point that this was to be a unit that would specifically target politicians, Dumanis said at the same press conference that she would no longer be endorsing political candidates, and that her office would not be used as a political pawn. She later endorsed in several important races, including the 2008 city attorney's race, in which she backed Jan Goldsmith against Mike Aguirre...
In 2008, Chula Vista Councilman Steve Castaneda was also accused by the Public Integrity Unit of using his office for financial gain, but investigators found no wrongdoing by the councilman. Castaneda was then charged with perjury for allegedly lying to the grand jury that investigated him. A jury acquitted him of most of the charges and hung on two of them, which Dumanis chose not to pursue.
Castaneda accused Dumanis at the time of prosecuting him at the behest of his political rival, Chula Vista Mayor Cheryl Cox.
D.A.'s Public Integrity Unit: Not So Public Lately
April 10, 2011
by Will Carless
Voice of San Diego
District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis' website for her recently announced mayoral campaign waxes lyrical about the prosecutor's protection of the public, high conviction rates and strong managerial and organizational skills.
Not mentioned in the list of accomplishments is the District Attorney's Public Integrity Unit, a crack team of lawyers Dumanis set up with much fanfare in the spring of 2007 as a weapon against San Diego's image as a den of political iniquity and corruption.
Indeed, four years after the unit was created, San Diegans would be forgiven for wondering whether it actually still exists. Since the controversial — and largely botched — prosecution of Chula Vista Councilman Steve Castaneda in 2008, Dumanis' team of anti-corruption lawyers has been remarkably low-profile.
Dumanis says the unit has hardly been slacking off. Her office provided a list of 88 public integrity prosecutions since 2007 as evidence that complaints are being investigated. And Dumanis and her public integrity czar Leon Schorr stressed that most of the work of the Public Integrity Unit is investigative and doesn't necessarily result in prosecutions.
But 85 of the 88 prosecutions listed by Dumanis involved rank-and-file public employees, not politicians or elected officials, who were the original stated targets of the Public Integrity Unit. Lumped into the successes of the unit are cases against police officers and city employees, and for attorney misconduct.
In four years, three elected officials have been prosecuted by Dumanis' office and, so far, only one of those prosecutions has resulted in punitive action: Earlier this year former Encinitas Mayor Dan Dalager was fined $1,000 for receiving discounted kitchen appliances from a resident he assisted while in office.
Dumanis proposed the Public Integrity Unit as a new and necessary weapon in the local prosecutorial arsenal, and warned crooked politicians that she would be watching them, and that they'd better behave.
Driving home the point that this was to be a unit that would specifically target politicians, Dumanis said at the same press conference that she would no longer be endorsing political candidates, and that her office would not be used as a political pawn. She later endorsed in several important races, including the 2008 city attorney's race, in which she backed Jan Goldsmith against Mike Aguirre...
In 2008, Chula Vista Councilman Steve Castaneda was also accused by the Public Integrity Unit of using his office for financial gain, but investigators found no wrongdoing by the councilman. Castaneda was then charged with perjury for allegedly lying to the grand jury that investigated him. A jury acquitted him of most of the charges and hung on two of them, which Dumanis chose not to pursue.
Castaneda accused Dumanis at the time of prosecuting him at the behest of his political rival, Chula Vista Mayor Cheryl Cox.
Monday, March 14, 2011
Redevelopment: the well-meaning program for fixing urban ills greatly abused
Click on title to see links in the original story:
Going to Money Town
Voice of San Diego
March 14,2011
One of the arguments for killing redevelopment: That the well-meaning program for fixing urban ills has since been greatly abused for all sorts of luxuries that stray far from its original intent. In between doling out a couple of sharp elbows to local California politicians and state Republicans, journalist Steven Greenhut delivers a little history in the Wall Street Journal on California's endangered redevelopment and abuses he's witnessed through his career.
· We've been following closely as San Diego and other municipalities around the state have tried to tie up billions of dollars in redevelopment cash before the governor cuts it off. While most places have just carved out the money, some have already begun borrowing it, sometimes at quite a cost. Redevelopment agencies across the state borrowed $700 million in the first two months and a week of the year, compared to $1 billion in all of 2010, the LA Times says.
· It's not San Diego, but it's instructive: NPR's Planet Money recently profiled one Pennsylvania city that sold a lake to help fix its problems, threw in the towel and then got help from a state squad that travels around helping distressed governments.
At this point, it looks like California could use one of those, too, although they might end up spending all their time in Sacramento. (It'd still be cheaper than these guys.)
Going to Money Town
Voice of San Diego
March 14,2011
One of the arguments for killing redevelopment: That the well-meaning program for fixing urban ills has since been greatly abused for all sorts of luxuries that stray far from its original intent. In between doling out a couple of sharp elbows to local California politicians and state Republicans, journalist Steven Greenhut delivers a little history in the Wall Street Journal on California's endangered redevelopment and abuses he's witnessed through his career.
· We've been following closely as San Diego and other municipalities around the state have tried to tie up billions of dollars in redevelopment cash before the governor cuts it off. While most places have just carved out the money, some have already begun borrowing it, sometimes at quite a cost. Redevelopment agencies across the state borrowed $700 million in the first two months and a week of the year, compared to $1 billion in all of 2010, the LA Times says.
· It's not San Diego, but it's instructive: NPR's Planet Money recently profiled one Pennsylvania city that sold a lake to help fix its problems, threw in the towel and then got help from a state squad that travels around helping distressed governments.
At this point, it looks like California could use one of those, too, although they might end up spending all their time in Sacramento. (It'd still be cheaper than these guys.)
Friday, March 04, 2011
Former CCDC board member gets $464,750 for "technical assistance" [??] on plan to end homelessness downtown
Feb 28, 2011
Former CCDC board member gets lucrative consulting contract
Providing "technical assistance" on plan to end homelessness Downtown pays $464,750
By Kelly Davis
Today, the San Diego City Council (sitting as the Redevelopment Agency) will be asked to approve an amendment to a contract with LeSar Development Consultants (LDC) that will pay a total of $464,750 for 15 months of work. The contract, which began in July 2010 and lasts through September 2011, is for "technical assistance" on a plan to end homelessness Downtown within five years. LCD's already been paid $235,000 for work between July and the end of 2010. Today's contract amendment adds $229,750, bringing the total to $464,750.
LDC's president, Jennifer LeSar, sat on the Centre City Development Corp.'s board directors from 2002 to 2009. According to the staff report, LDC was the only respondent to a request for consulting services put out in January 2010. On Jan. 12, 2010, LeSar sent a letter asking the city's Ethics Commission if any conflict-of-interest provisions prohibited her from being paid to provide consulting services to CCDC. She was told it was OK as long as she didn't participate in making the contract.
The contract is being paid with money from CCDC's low- and moderate-income housing fund.
LeSar's hourly rate, according to the scope of services, is $225; Matthew Doherty, who's worked for the San Diego Housing Commission and Corporation for Supportive Housing, has a listed hourly rate of $175. Rachel Ralston, whose resume includes four years as associate editor at the Gay and Lesbian Times before joining LeSar Development in February 2007, is listed at $90 an hour.
LeSar defended the cost and said that her company's per-hour rates are competitive. When I pointed out that Ralston's per-hour rate would come out to $187,200 annually if it were a full-time job, LeSar said I wasn't taking into account the built-in costs of running a business.
LeSar said that LDC's work will create an infrastructure that previously didn't exist for collaboration on homeless services between the San Diego Housing Commission and the county. "We are getting people housing because of this partnership," she said.
Under the contract, LDC was responsible for coordinating last September's "Registry Week," for which 30 teams of volunteers went throughout Downtown to count and survey the street population and create a database that will help get the most vulnerable people into housing, starting with 75 veterans, for whom the Veterans Administration is providing 75 housing vouchers, and 50 mentally ill individuals who will receive Section 8 vouchers and case management services from county mental-health providers.
LDC's role, according to the scope of services, is to coordinate with the San Diego Housing Commission and the county's Health and Human Services Agency to develop a "five-year work plan" for ending homelessness Downtown. The plan includes developing financing strategies, setting annual targets for creating supportive housing Downtown and working on state- and federal-level policy. LDC will also look at the feasibility of holding another Registry Week in 2012, handle PR and community education and outreach and provide recommendations for developing a data system to track and measure the program's progress.
You can download the staff report and supporting documents here.
Former CCDC board member gets lucrative consulting contract
Providing "technical assistance" on plan to end homelessness Downtown pays $464,750
By Kelly Davis
Today, the San Diego City Council (sitting as the Redevelopment Agency) will be asked to approve an amendment to a contract with LeSar Development Consultants (LDC) that will pay a total of $464,750 for 15 months of work. The contract, which began in July 2010 and lasts through September 2011, is for "technical assistance" on a plan to end homelessness Downtown within five years. LCD's already been paid $235,000 for work between July and the end of 2010. Today's contract amendment adds $229,750, bringing the total to $464,750.
LDC's president, Jennifer LeSar, sat on the Centre City Development Corp.'s board directors from 2002 to 2009. According to the staff report, LDC was the only respondent to a request for consulting services put out in January 2010. On Jan. 12, 2010, LeSar sent a letter asking the city's Ethics Commission if any conflict-of-interest provisions prohibited her from being paid to provide consulting services to CCDC. She was told it was OK as long as she didn't participate in making the contract.
The contract is being paid with money from CCDC's low- and moderate-income housing fund.
LeSar's hourly rate, according to the scope of services, is $225; Matthew Doherty, who's worked for the San Diego Housing Commission and Corporation for Supportive Housing, has a listed hourly rate of $175. Rachel Ralston, whose resume includes four years as associate editor at the Gay and Lesbian Times before joining LeSar Development in February 2007, is listed at $90 an hour.
LeSar defended the cost and said that her company's per-hour rates are competitive. When I pointed out that Ralston's per-hour rate would come out to $187,200 annually if it were a full-time job, LeSar said I wasn't taking into account the built-in costs of running a business.
LeSar said that LDC's work will create an infrastructure that previously didn't exist for collaboration on homeless services between the San Diego Housing Commission and the county. "We are getting people housing because of this partnership," she said.
Under the contract, LDC was responsible for coordinating last September's "Registry Week," for which 30 teams of volunteers went throughout Downtown to count and survey the street population and create a database that will help get the most vulnerable people into housing, starting with 75 veterans, for whom the Veterans Administration is providing 75 housing vouchers, and 50 mentally ill individuals who will receive Section 8 vouchers and case management services from county mental-health providers.
LDC's role, according to the scope of services, is to coordinate with the San Diego Housing Commission and the county's Health and Human Services Agency to develop a "five-year work plan" for ending homelessness Downtown. The plan includes developing financing strategies, setting annual targets for creating supportive housing Downtown and working on state- and federal-level policy. LDC will also look at the feasibility of holding another Registry Week in 2012, handle PR and community education and outreach and provide recommendations for developing a data system to track and measure the program's progress.
You can download the staff report and supporting documents here.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Logan Jenkins: In a council meeting, what language is too foul? It's a fair question
I can't believe that District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis is getting involved in this case. Treasonous comments are okay, apparently, but don't say "wussies" with a "p".
Logan Jenkins: In a council meeting, what language is too foul? It's a fair question
By Logan Jenkins
February 28, 2011
“Any person making impertinent and slanderous remarks or who becomes boisterous while addressing the council shall be removed from the room.”
So declares the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
On Aug. 24, that genteel standard of decorum was put to a double test.
During the public-comment period, Neil Turner, a retired Army captain and member of the Minutemen, challenged the council to either present charges to the Grand Jury or “become complicit” in treason.
Throughout his three-minute address, Turner was calm, dignified, measured. Mayor Bud Lewis and council listened impassively to a gentleman accusing the president of breaking into and entering the White House. Turner implored the council to heed Lincoln’s words: “To sin by silence, when they should protest, makes cowards of men.”
In light of the irrefutable facts — President Obama was born in Hawaii; the so-called “birthers” are conspiracy fabulists — one can imagine a hotheaded, patriotic mayor ordering the removal of Turner from the chamber.
No need to worry. Turner’s right of free, even if wing-nut, speech was exercised despite his slanderous — and arguably seditious — message. (He called upon members of the armed forces to resist the “unlawful” commander in chief’s orders.)
Next up to the lectern was Richard Shapiro, a homeless 53-year-old man who believes it’s his mission to spread the raw word that the justice system is corrupt from top to bottom. While he concedes his public diatribes are “an exercise in futility,” Shapiro soldiers on. He’s spoken “a thousand times” before councils from the Bay Area to San Diego, he told me.
The problem is, Shapiro feels the need to use rough language in settings where decorum is highly valued.
On Aug. 24, Shapiro began his address by picking up on Turner’s point about silence. Most people, Shapiro said, are moral cowards, though he used an off-color word that’s often sanitized as “wussies.”
Mayor Lewis, who had been through this R-rated movie before, immediately ordered two officers to grab the speaker. As he was being led away, Shapiro asked off-camera if he could say “heck” or “darn.” (In a subsequent meeting, Shapiro got a rise out of Lewis when he articulated the word “pusillanimous,” a $10 word for cowardly.)
Shapiro will be tried in April for three Carlsbad violations, culminating in the Aug. 24 blowup. Somewhat surprisingly, the District Attorney’s Office is prosecuting the infraction-level case, an indication, one gathers, of the DA’s deep commitment to decorum.
I grant you, Shapiro is a street-wise provocateur, a gloating pain in the gluteus maximus, a homeless man’s George Carlin.
But in my etiquette book, it’s un-American to muzzle him, especially when more loathsome, if smoother, speech slides through like rancid butter.
Logan Jenkins: In a council meeting, what language is too foul? It's a fair question
By Logan Jenkins
February 28, 2011
“Any person making impertinent and slanderous remarks or who becomes boisterous while addressing the council shall be removed from the room.”
So declares the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
On Aug. 24, that genteel standard of decorum was put to a double test.
During the public-comment period, Neil Turner, a retired Army captain and member of the Minutemen, challenged the council to either present charges to the Grand Jury or “become complicit” in treason.
Throughout his three-minute address, Turner was calm, dignified, measured. Mayor Bud Lewis and council listened impassively to a gentleman accusing the president of breaking into and entering the White House. Turner implored the council to heed Lincoln’s words: “To sin by silence, when they should protest, makes cowards of men.”
In light of the irrefutable facts — President Obama was born in Hawaii; the so-called “birthers” are conspiracy fabulists — one can imagine a hotheaded, patriotic mayor ordering the removal of Turner from the chamber.
No need to worry. Turner’s right of free, even if wing-nut, speech was exercised despite his slanderous — and arguably seditious — message. (He called upon members of the armed forces to resist the “unlawful” commander in chief’s orders.)
Next up to the lectern was Richard Shapiro, a homeless 53-year-old man who believes it’s his mission to spread the raw word that the justice system is corrupt from top to bottom. While he concedes his public diatribes are “an exercise in futility,” Shapiro soldiers on. He’s spoken “a thousand times” before councils from the Bay Area to San Diego, he told me.
The problem is, Shapiro feels the need to use rough language in settings where decorum is highly valued.
On Aug. 24, Shapiro began his address by picking up on Turner’s point about silence. Most people, Shapiro said, are moral cowards, though he used an off-color word that’s often sanitized as “wussies.”
Mayor Lewis, who had been through this R-rated movie before, immediately ordered two officers to grab the speaker. As he was being led away, Shapiro asked off-camera if he could say “heck” or “darn.” (In a subsequent meeting, Shapiro got a rise out of Lewis when he articulated the word “pusillanimous,” a $10 word for cowardly.)
Shapiro will be tried in April for three Carlsbad violations, culminating in the Aug. 24 blowup. Somewhat surprisingly, the District Attorney’s Office is prosecuting the infraction-level case, an indication, one gathers, of the DA’s deep commitment to decorum.
I grant you, Shapiro is a street-wise provocateur, a gloating pain in the gluteus maximus, a homeless man’s George Carlin.
But in my etiquette book, it’s un-American to muzzle him, especially when more loathsome, if smoother, speech slides through like rancid butter.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
GOP is ready for Issa's "absolute right"
Chairman Issa: Oversight for whom?
By Rick Jacobs
February 24, 2011
In the weeks leading to Rep. Darrell Issa’s rise to chairman of the House Government Oversight Committee, publications ranging from U.S. News to The San Diego Union-Tribune expressed concerns over whether he was willing to fulfill his new responsibilities devoid of the partisan politics and special interest agendas that had so frequently undermined the efforts of his predecessors.
Having spent the months before his ascent building his media profile alongside the likes of Glenn Beck, and hurling unsubstantiated allegations of corruption and “impeachable” offenses at President Barack Obama, these concerns could hardly have been considered unfounded.
And that was before an article in The New Yorker chronicled the colorful past for which Issa has largely denied responsibility – including his arrests on felony car theft and weapons charges, allegations of embellishing his military resume and reports that he was “under criminal suspicion” for a mysterious fire at one of his businesses.
Still, many Americans were willing to give Issa the benefit of the doubt, to give him a chance to reinvent himself and live up to the standards of transparency, impartiality and accountability to which he has pledged allegiance.
Unfortunately, it’s looking like America would have been better served to go with its gut on this one.
As his first action, the new chairman asked not his constituents, but more than 150 Washington lobbyists – collective contributors of more than $80,000 to Issa’s various campaigns for office – for their investigative and regulatory wish lists. Issa then refused to share the responses with the public. While he eventually caved to pressure from citizen watchdog groups, he posted the letters as a single, unsearchable PDF on his committee website, omitting several responses...
GOP is ready for Issa's "absolute right"
Chairmanship gives the Vista Republican leeway to set the agenda leading to 2012
By Matthew T. Hall
February 19, 2011
It’s power that could go to a person’s head.
It made Republican Rep. Dan Burton issue 1,200 subpoenas and once vainly fire a pistol at a pumpkin (or melon or cantaloupe, accounts vary) to prove a White House aide’s suicide was a homicide and thus discredit President Bill Clinton.
Later, it led Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman to snarl at a colleague arguing a procedural point: “I will have you physically removed from this meeting if you don’t stop.”
That colleague? Issa.
After 10 years in office, Issa has now risen to a place of unprecedented prominence among San Diego County’s Congressional delegation.
The Vista Republican is the new chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. By deciding which areas of government to investigate for waste, fraud and abuse, he will help spearhead GOP opposition to President Barack Obama and help choose what the nation talks about as the 2012 presidential election nears.
Even as websites like issawatch.com and issafiles.com spring up to second-guess (and aides say smear) him, Issa bristles at any notion he might misuse his position...
By Rick Jacobs
February 24, 2011
In the weeks leading to Rep. Darrell Issa’s rise to chairman of the House Government Oversight Committee, publications ranging from U.S. News to The San Diego Union-Tribune expressed concerns over whether he was willing to fulfill his new responsibilities devoid of the partisan politics and special interest agendas that had so frequently undermined the efforts of his predecessors.
Having spent the months before his ascent building his media profile alongside the likes of Glenn Beck, and hurling unsubstantiated allegations of corruption and “impeachable” offenses at President Barack Obama, these concerns could hardly have been considered unfounded.
And that was before an article in The New Yorker chronicled the colorful past for which Issa has largely denied responsibility – including his arrests on felony car theft and weapons charges, allegations of embellishing his military resume and reports that he was “under criminal suspicion” for a mysterious fire at one of his businesses.
Still, many Americans were willing to give Issa the benefit of the doubt, to give him a chance to reinvent himself and live up to the standards of transparency, impartiality and accountability to which he has pledged allegiance.
Unfortunately, it’s looking like America would have been better served to go with its gut on this one.
As his first action, the new chairman asked not his constituents, but more than 150 Washington lobbyists – collective contributors of more than $80,000 to Issa’s various campaigns for office – for their investigative and regulatory wish lists. Issa then refused to share the responses with the public. While he eventually caved to pressure from citizen watchdog groups, he posted the letters as a single, unsearchable PDF on his committee website, omitting several responses...
GOP is ready for Issa's "absolute right"
Chairmanship gives the Vista Republican leeway to set the agenda leading to 2012
By Matthew T. Hall
February 19, 2011
It’s power that could go to a person’s head.
It made Republican Rep. Dan Burton issue 1,200 subpoenas and once vainly fire a pistol at a pumpkin (or melon or cantaloupe, accounts vary) to prove a White House aide’s suicide was a homicide and thus discredit President Bill Clinton.
Later, it led Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman to snarl at a colleague arguing a procedural point: “I will have you physically removed from this meeting if you don’t stop.”
That colleague? Issa.
After 10 years in office, Issa has now risen to a place of unprecedented prominence among San Diego County’s Congressional delegation.
The Vista Republican is the new chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. By deciding which areas of government to investigate for waste, fraud and abuse, he will help spearhead GOP opposition to President Barack Obama and help choose what the nation talks about as the 2012 presidential election nears.
Even as websites like issawatch.com and issafiles.com spring up to second-guess (and aides say smear) him, Issa bristles at any notion he might misuse his position...
Saturday, February 12, 2011
How the state got stuck with a bill of hundreds of millions of dollars during the secret negotiations before the redevelopment deal
Click to see links within the story:
Morning Report: So That's How It's Done
Art's Out, Money's In
by Randy Dotinga
Voice of San Diego
...Documents gave us - and you - a front-row seat to see how the state got stuck with a bill of hundreds of millions of dollars during the secret negotiations before the big downtown redevelopment deal.
In a new story posted later, Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher explains how this is actually a good thing for local schools. "I would have had great concern if there had been an argument that somehow education was going to lose out of this arrangement," he said. City Hall reporter Liam Dillon checked with the school district to see what they think and to provide some caveats.
Also: a former city councilwoman who's now a state senator wants to do away with state subsidies to support redevelopment.
How well have you been paying attention to all this? Check out our opinion section quiz about redevelopment and see how you score.
We've got more about redevelopment in our graphic illustration called the Downtown Money Tree: it shows how the downtown redevelopment agency - whose job is to promote urban renewal - will spend $462.5 million. The downtown library is getting a ton of funding, as is affordable housing. Smaller amounts - but still multi-million-dollar amounts each - go to public art, administration, marketing and consulting...
Morning Report: So That's How It's Done
Art's Out, Money's In
by Randy Dotinga
Voice of San Diego
...Documents gave us - and you - a front-row seat to see how the state got stuck with a bill of hundreds of millions of dollars during the secret negotiations before the big downtown redevelopment deal.
In a new story posted later, Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher explains how this is actually a good thing for local schools. "I would have had great concern if there had been an argument that somehow education was going to lose out of this arrangement," he said. City Hall reporter Liam Dillon checked with the school district to see what they think and to provide some caveats.
Also: a former city councilwoman who's now a state senator wants to do away with state subsidies to support redevelopment.
How well have you been paying attention to all this? Check out our opinion section quiz about redevelopment and see how you score.
We've got more about redevelopment in our graphic illustration called the Downtown Money Tree: it shows how the downtown redevelopment agency - whose job is to promote urban renewal - will spend $462.5 million. The downtown library is getting a ton of funding, as is affordable housing. Smaller amounts - but still multi-million-dollar amounts each - go to public art, administration, marketing and consulting...
Monday, February 07, 2011
Walmart PAC donated to vote-flippers’ favored charities
Walmart PAC donated to vote-flippers’ favored charities
February 4, 2011
by Dave Maass
City Beat
Walmart’s political action committee, San Diego Consumers for Choice, donated to charities supported by San Diego City Council members Todd Gloria and Tony Young, who on Tuesday changed their vote and repealed an ordinance opposed by the mega-corporation.
According to campaign-finance statements filed on Jan. 31, the PAC donated $7,500 to the Jackie Robinson YMCA, where Young participated in a Toys for Tots drive and was a special guest at the annual “Christmas with Character” party on Dec. 18. The Alpha Project, an organization for which Gloria regularly fundraises, picked up $10,000 from the PAC. Gloria volunteered at the city’s winter homeless shelter, which is run by the Alpha Project, on Dec. 15.
The PAC also donated $10,000 to San Diego Earthworks, an environmental organization; Gloria will be hosting Earthworks’ annual awards ceremony in May.
Initially Young and Gloria voted to require that any retailer wishing to build a store 90,000 square feet or larger in San Diego first study the potential economic and environmental impact on the surrounding community. After Walmart produced enough signatures to force an election on the ordinance, Young and Gloria voted with five other councilmembers on Tuesday to repeal it, citing the cost—roughly $2.5 million—of holding the election.
Young and Gloria’s offices say neither had knowledge of Walmart’s contribution. Walmart did not disclose on its paperwork when the donations were made, but the reports indicate most were made between Oct. 1 and Dec. 31. The PAC’s treasurer has not yet returned calls.
The PAC also made a $200 civic donation to the Barrio Logan College Institute, where newly elected council member David Alvarez has worked as an after-school teacher and mentor. The lone dissenting vote on the repeal, Marti Emerald, has also been involved in fundraising for the Alpha Project and served as grand marshall of Earthworks’ Earth Day parade in 2007.
To be clear, we are not alleging that Young, Gloria or Alvarez were influenced by these donations—knowing the city council members and their reputations, we doubt they were. However, we cannot help but note that the donations were made with campaign funds, while Walmart has other vehicles for philanthropy. The contributions may have been an attempt by Walmart to improve its public profile in the community or to access or influence the city council members directly or through their supporters and causes. Of course, the PAC could have been giving purely out of the goodness of its heart, but the fact remains the donations went to these groups specifically rather than other worthy non-profit organizations.
All told, the PAC spent $1.2 million in 2010 using contributions exclusively from Walmart Stores, Inc. These expenditures included $25,000 passed to the Republican Party of San Diego County, and civic donations of $22,500 to the San Diego County Taxpayers’ Association, $20,000 to the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce and $1,500 to the San Diego North Chamber of Commerce—all of which are pro-business and have historically supported Walmart...
February 4, 2011
by Dave Maass
City Beat
Walmart’s political action committee, San Diego Consumers for Choice, donated to charities supported by San Diego City Council members Todd Gloria and Tony Young, who on Tuesday changed their vote and repealed an ordinance opposed by the mega-corporation.
According to campaign-finance statements filed on Jan. 31, the PAC donated $7,500 to the Jackie Robinson YMCA, where Young participated in a Toys for Tots drive and was a special guest at the annual “Christmas with Character” party on Dec. 18. The Alpha Project, an organization for which Gloria regularly fundraises, picked up $10,000 from the PAC. Gloria volunteered at the city’s winter homeless shelter, which is run by the Alpha Project, on Dec. 15.
The PAC also donated $10,000 to San Diego Earthworks, an environmental organization; Gloria will be hosting Earthworks’ annual awards ceremony in May.
Initially Young and Gloria voted to require that any retailer wishing to build a store 90,000 square feet or larger in San Diego first study the potential economic and environmental impact on the surrounding community. After Walmart produced enough signatures to force an election on the ordinance, Young and Gloria voted with five other councilmembers on Tuesday to repeal it, citing the cost—roughly $2.5 million—of holding the election.
Young and Gloria’s offices say neither had knowledge of Walmart’s contribution. Walmart did not disclose on its paperwork when the donations were made, but the reports indicate most were made between Oct. 1 and Dec. 31. The PAC’s treasurer has not yet returned calls.
The PAC also made a $200 civic donation to the Barrio Logan College Institute, where newly elected council member David Alvarez has worked as an after-school teacher and mentor. The lone dissenting vote on the repeal, Marti Emerald, has also been involved in fundraising for the Alpha Project and served as grand marshall of Earthworks’ Earth Day parade in 2007.
To be clear, we are not alleging that Young, Gloria or Alvarez were influenced by these donations—knowing the city council members and their reputations, we doubt they were. However, we cannot help but note that the donations were made with campaign funds, while Walmart has other vehicles for philanthropy. The contributions may have been an attempt by Walmart to improve its public profile in the community or to access or influence the city council members directly or through their supporters and causes. Of course, the PAC could have been giving purely out of the goodness of its heart, but the fact remains the donations went to these groups specifically rather than other worthy non-profit organizations.
All told, the PAC spent $1.2 million in 2010 using contributions exclusively from Walmart Stores, Inc. These expenditures included $25,000 passed to the Republican Party of San Diego County, and civic donations of $22,500 to the San Diego County Taxpayers’ Association, $20,000 to the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce and $1,500 to the San Diego North Chamber of Commerce—all of which are pro-business and have historically supported Walmart...
Tuesday, February 01, 2011
The Anatomy of a Botched Testimony
The Anatomy of a Botched Testimony
Voice of San Diego
February 1, 2011
by Liam Dillon
It was an idea without an author.
San Diego City Councilwoman Marti Emerald wanted to know who had gone around the council's back to breathe 20 more years of life into downtown redevelopment.
The guy at the Oct. 12 City Council meeting who had answers was Frank Alessi, the executive vice president and chief financial officer of the city's downtown redevelopment agency, the Centre City Development Corp.
Except Alessi wasn't saying much.
Here's a breakdown of Alessi's testimony to the council now that we have the benefit of three months of reporting and the context from newly released emails. It shows that not only did Alessi fail to respond to many of Emerald's questions, but that a key answer was false.
Emerald started her questioning by wondering if she could trust Alessi.
Emerald: If you were monitoring my comments from before you know how very upset I am about what I believe is a gross breach of trust. Going forward, I'm going to have a very difficult time believing anything that you and your staff have to tell us as a board.
Then she launched into him.
Emerald: Who actually hatched this idea?
Alessi: Well.
Emerald: Whose idea was it? To go behind this council's back and go to Sacramento?
Alessi: I don't have an answer to that. Other than (Assemblyman) Nathan Fletcher was the author of it.
Emerald: He just in the middle of the night came up with the idea? Who did he talk to about crafting this idea to bury it in the budget bill? Was it you? Was it the mayor?
Alessi: I can't speak for the mayor.
Alessi now is CCDC's highest ranking official following the resignation of former interim head Fred Maas in December. Alessi has been with the agency since 1979 and makes $176,800 a year. Ultimately the City Council, as the board of directors for the city's Redevelopment Agency, is his boss.
Emerald continued asking whose idea it was.
Emerald: Fred (Maas)? Who?
Alessi: Unfortunately, Fred, our chairman, is unavailable today. He's back East on personal matters. And he ...
Emerald: So who was involved, once the mystery person came up with the idea, who sat down and came up with the plan?
Alessi: There were several people involved. It's ...
Emerald: They were who?
Alessi: I defer, I would like to defer the answer to that question.
Emerald: Why?
Alessi didn't answer. He just stared straight ahead.
Emerald turned next to Alessi's personal involvement.
Emerald: C'mon I mean it's out here on the table here, you did this, you didn't talk to us, but at least let us know who was involved.
Alessi: Well, I personally was knowledgeable of the information.
Emerald: Were you involved in it?
Alessi: To a degree.
Emerald then began asking him how long he had been discussing the deal. His answer, the most significant he gave to any of Emerald's questions, was wrong.
Emerald: Can you tell us when this idea fell out of the sky or what?
Alessi: There was probably a week or, two weeks ago that was.
Emerald: Two weeks ago, you think?
Alessi: I'm guessing. I mean I can only tell you from my perspective.
Emerald: When did you first learn of it?
Alessi: I believe it's been about two weeks. I don't have ...
But that's not what emails we obtained through a public records request show. Alessi was involved as far back as August, six weeks earlier than when he said he was.
Alessi's answer to council fit the deal's official narrative at the time — that it was only weeks in the making. But that narrative fell apart a few days after Alessi's testimony. The deal's formation began in August, around the same time Alessi got involved...
Voice of San Diego
February 1, 2011
by Liam Dillon
It was an idea without an author.
San Diego City Councilwoman Marti Emerald wanted to know who had gone around the council's back to breathe 20 more years of life into downtown redevelopment.
The guy at the Oct. 12 City Council meeting who had answers was Frank Alessi, the executive vice president and chief financial officer of the city's downtown redevelopment agency, the Centre City Development Corp.
Except Alessi wasn't saying much.
Here's a breakdown of Alessi's testimony to the council now that we have the benefit of three months of reporting and the context from newly released emails. It shows that not only did Alessi fail to respond to many of Emerald's questions, but that a key answer was false.
Emerald started her questioning by wondering if she could trust Alessi.
Emerald: If you were monitoring my comments from before you know how very upset I am about what I believe is a gross breach of trust. Going forward, I'm going to have a very difficult time believing anything that you and your staff have to tell us as a board.
Then she launched into him.
Emerald: Who actually hatched this idea?
Alessi: Well.
Emerald: Whose idea was it? To go behind this council's back and go to Sacramento?
Alessi: I don't have an answer to that. Other than (Assemblyman) Nathan Fletcher was the author of it.
Emerald: He just in the middle of the night came up with the idea? Who did he talk to about crafting this idea to bury it in the budget bill? Was it you? Was it the mayor?
Alessi: I can't speak for the mayor.
Alessi now is CCDC's highest ranking official following the resignation of former interim head Fred Maas in December. Alessi has been with the agency since 1979 and makes $176,800 a year. Ultimately the City Council, as the board of directors for the city's Redevelopment Agency, is his boss.
Emerald continued asking whose idea it was.
Emerald: Fred (Maas)? Who?
Alessi: Unfortunately, Fred, our chairman, is unavailable today. He's back East on personal matters. And he ...
Emerald: So who was involved, once the mystery person came up with the idea, who sat down and came up with the plan?
Alessi: There were several people involved. It's ...
Emerald: They were who?
Alessi: I defer, I would like to defer the answer to that question.
Emerald: Why?
Alessi didn't answer. He just stared straight ahead.
Emerald turned next to Alessi's personal involvement.
Emerald: C'mon I mean it's out here on the table here, you did this, you didn't talk to us, but at least let us know who was involved.
Alessi: Well, I personally was knowledgeable of the information.
Emerald: Were you involved in it?
Alessi: To a degree.
Emerald then began asking him how long he had been discussing the deal. His answer, the most significant he gave to any of Emerald's questions, was wrong.
Emerald: Can you tell us when this idea fell out of the sky or what?
Alessi: There was probably a week or, two weeks ago that was.
Emerald: Two weeks ago, you think?
Alessi: I'm guessing. I mean I can only tell you from my perspective.
Emerald: When did you first learn of it?
Alessi: I believe it's been about two weeks. I don't have ...
But that's not what emails we obtained through a public records request show. Alessi was involved as far back as August, six weeks earlier than when he said he was.
Alessi's answer to council fit the deal's official narrative at the time — that it was only weeks in the making. But that narrative fell apart a few days after Alessi's testimony. The deal's formation began in August, around the same time Alessi got involved...
Thursday, January 27, 2011
GOP headquarters abandoned, left in 'mind-boggling' disarray, landlord says
Jan 26, 2011
Whine and chocolates
GOP headquarters abandoned, left in 'mind-boggling' disarray, landlord says
By John R. Lamb
City Beat
“No one wants to quit when he’s losing and no one wants to quit when he’s winning.” —Richard Strauss
These are shaky times for our beloved friends over at San Diego Republican headquarters, wherever that might be now...
“You wouldn’t believe what they ditched in the trash bin!” said Antoine Georges, who’s owned the building for 20 years. “Thousands of things. Office supplies, staplers— maybe 30 or 40 staplers, the big kind for campaign work—pots and pans, boxes and boxes of stuff, even brand-new live plants! It was just mind-boggling.”
A lively 62-year-old Lebanese man who considers himself fiscally conservative but socially liberal (he says he’s friends with Republican Congressmember Darrell Issa and a cousin of Ralph Nader), Georges told Spin Cycle that he had grown suspicious of his tenants in Suite 107 for some time.
He’d heard rumors that the tenant had wanted to break the lease. Georges said the head honcho of the local GOP, Tony Krvaric, had asked him on several occasions if he’d consider donating the rent as a party gift. Georges said he declined.
Rent checks of roughly $4,500, he said, started coming later and later in the month. The December lease payment, for example, while due Dec. 1, arrived more than three weeks late on Christmas Eve.
SHARE PRINT COMMENT FONT SIZE
Related content
Lovable loserTea leaves 1, Fig leaf 0
Related to:San Diego Republican headquartersRepublican Party of San Diego CountyTony Krvaric
But the week between Christmas and New Year’s Day, activity in the suite seemed to pick up, despite it being a typically down time for campaign events. Over previous weeks, Georges said the local GOP “made up some story” that they were going to remodel the 2,700-square-foot office space. Soon, trucks would show up to haul away office materials, Georges said.
Georges said a truck associated with a paper-shredding company appeared one day and hauled off what he described as “20 or 30 boxes of files.” Added Georges: “I have no idea what was in the boxes. I just know there were a lot of them.”
The final move came just before New Year’s Day, when a GOP employee removed a Republican sign that had been bolted to a wall, placed it in a truck and drove off.
A few days later, Georges said he got a letter from Krvaric, claiming the landlord had breached the lease and that the GOP would like its security deposit back.
Georges laughed. “The place is trashed!” he said. “It needs new carpet. The walls need to be repaired because they literally glued campaign signs to the wallpaper. And they still left a bunch of stuff behind! Empty file cabinets, furniture. And they never returned the keys, so now I have to have all the locks changed.”...
Whine and chocolates
GOP headquarters abandoned, left in 'mind-boggling' disarray, landlord says
By John R. Lamb
City Beat
“No one wants to quit when he’s losing and no one wants to quit when he’s winning.” —Richard Strauss
These are shaky times for our beloved friends over at San Diego Republican headquarters, wherever that might be now...
“You wouldn’t believe what they ditched in the trash bin!” said Antoine Georges, who’s owned the building for 20 years. “Thousands of things. Office supplies, staplers— maybe 30 or 40 staplers, the big kind for campaign work—pots and pans, boxes and boxes of stuff, even brand-new live plants! It was just mind-boggling.”
A lively 62-year-old Lebanese man who considers himself fiscally conservative but socially liberal (he says he’s friends with Republican Congressmember Darrell Issa and a cousin of Ralph Nader), Georges told Spin Cycle that he had grown suspicious of his tenants in Suite 107 for some time.
He’d heard rumors that the tenant had wanted to break the lease. Georges said the head honcho of the local GOP, Tony Krvaric, had asked him on several occasions if he’d consider donating the rent as a party gift. Georges said he declined.
Rent checks of roughly $4,500, he said, started coming later and later in the month. The December lease payment, for example, while due Dec. 1, arrived more than three weeks late on Christmas Eve.
SHARE PRINT COMMENT FONT SIZE
Related content
Lovable loserTea leaves 1, Fig leaf 0
Related to:San Diego Republican headquartersRepublican Party of San Diego CountyTony Krvaric
But the week between Christmas and New Year’s Day, activity in the suite seemed to pick up, despite it being a typically down time for campaign events. Over previous weeks, Georges said the local GOP “made up some story” that they were going to remodel the 2,700-square-foot office space. Soon, trucks would show up to haul away office materials, Georges said.
Georges said a truck associated with a paper-shredding company appeared one day and hauled off what he described as “20 or 30 boxes of files.” Added Georges: “I have no idea what was in the boxes. I just know there were a lot of them.”
The final move came just before New Year’s Day, when a GOP employee removed a Republican sign that had been bolted to a wall, placed it in a truck and drove off.
A few days later, Georges said he got a letter from Krvaric, claiming the landlord had breached the lease and that the GOP would like its security deposit back.
Georges laughed. “The place is trashed!” he said. “It needs new carpet. The walls need to be repaired because they literally glued campaign signs to the wallpaper. And they still left a bunch of stuff behind! Empty file cabinets, furniture. And they never returned the keys, so now I have to have all the locks changed.”...
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
The Governor's Retort: Cities have an obligation to help fund schools
Click on this link to get the original article with lots of wonderful links: Morning Report: The Governor's Retort
January 25, 2011
Voice of San Diego
by Andrew Donohue
The San Diego leaders fighting Gov. Jerry Brown's plan to kill redevelopment have a simple, digestible argument: Sacramento should get its grubby hands off of our local money and solve its own problems.
Looks like Brown, though, might have just one-upped them.
He's framing the debate in a different way: His plan takes $1 billion away from redevelopment and gives it to the state's ailing schools. Scott Lewis takes that a step further and shows how education was originally supposed to be the very check and balance against redevelopment abuse, but Prop. 13 did away with that.
People like Mayor Jerry Sanders and Councilman Kevin Faulconer have big dreams for San Diego's redevelopment money - things like Convention Center expansions and football stadiums - and are fighting hard against the governor.
"But Brown has now illustrated better than ever before that the money for these dreams comes from education more than anything," Lewis writes. "The state will continue to plow money into education but it's time for downtown and other redevelopment areas to do their part.".
And the Blight Beat Goes On
• Faulconer got six of his colleagues to join him in waving their fists at the governor on Monday night, though they have yet to engage in the last-second redevelopment binges that other cities have enjoyed.
• Our Liam Dillon, meanwhile, is waving his fist right back at the city's downtown redevelopment agency. He's begun our latest public records battle — Blight Watch.
That agency, the Centre City Development Corp., has refused to turn over documents that go to the very core of the agency's continued existence. Agencies have 10 days to turn over documents after a public records request except in extraordinary circumstances. It's been than seven weeks and all we're hearing is that "it's complicated."
We'll be dialing up the pressure this week to ensure that the public records do indeed become public.
• There's another aspect of redevelopment suddenly getting attention now that it's in jeopardy: affordable housing.
One CCDC official recently made the bold claim that his agency had created more affordable housing units than all of Los Angeles' redevelopment areas combined. We fact checked it and here's what we found: A big fat "false."...
January 25, 2011
Voice of San Diego
by Andrew Donohue
The San Diego leaders fighting Gov. Jerry Brown's plan to kill redevelopment have a simple, digestible argument: Sacramento should get its grubby hands off of our local money and solve its own problems.
Looks like Brown, though, might have just one-upped them.
He's framing the debate in a different way: His plan takes $1 billion away from redevelopment and gives it to the state's ailing schools. Scott Lewis takes that a step further and shows how education was originally supposed to be the very check and balance against redevelopment abuse, but Prop. 13 did away with that.
People like Mayor Jerry Sanders and Councilman Kevin Faulconer have big dreams for San Diego's redevelopment money - things like Convention Center expansions and football stadiums - and are fighting hard against the governor.
"But Brown has now illustrated better than ever before that the money for these dreams comes from education more than anything," Lewis writes. "The state will continue to plow money into education but it's time for downtown and other redevelopment areas to do their part.".
And the Blight Beat Goes On
• Faulconer got six of his colleagues to join him in waving their fists at the governor on Monday night, though they have yet to engage in the last-second redevelopment binges that other cities have enjoyed.
• Our Liam Dillon, meanwhile, is waving his fist right back at the city's downtown redevelopment agency. He's begun our latest public records battle — Blight Watch.
That agency, the Centre City Development Corp., has refused to turn over documents that go to the very core of the agency's continued existence. Agencies have 10 days to turn over documents after a public records request except in extraordinary circumstances. It's been than seven weeks and all we're hearing is that "it's complicated."
We'll be dialing up the pressure this week to ensure that the public records do indeed become public.
• There's another aspect of redevelopment suddenly getting attention now that it's in jeopardy: affordable housing.
One CCDC official recently made the bold claim that his agency had created more affordable housing units than all of Los Angeles' redevelopment areas combined. We fact checked it and here's what we found: A big fat "false."...
Sunday, January 23, 2011
A Downtown Blight Out
A Downtown Blight Out
Voice of San Diego
January 16, 2011
by Liam Dillon
San Diego's downtown redevelopment agency and a consultant have not released their proof that downtown remains rundown despite a promise to do so more than five weeks ago and requirements in state public records laws to release the information within 10 days.
The documents in question are central to the legitimacy of late-night state legislation that removed a key limit on downtown redevelopment.
Under the legislation, the Centre City Development Corp. will grab a substantial share of billions of dollars in future downtown property taxes for public improvements and development subsides.
Downtown, backers of the legislation argue, continues to require those taxpayer subsidies for redevelopment's purpose: improving rundown neighborhoods.
But the state move meant that CCDC no longer had to prove that downtown was rundown, a public process that it had begun to undertake. Central in that effort was a $500,000 study that CCDC canceled after the controversial legislation passed.
The study and the information behind it are key to understanding if boosters would have been able to justify the need for downtown's continued tax subsidies through the standard process.
In its unfinished state, the study asserts that downtown remains rundown. But the document, written by lead consultant Keyser Marston Associates, had yet to include evidence to back up those findings beyond simple crime statistics...
Voice of San Diego
January 16, 2011
by Liam Dillon
San Diego's downtown redevelopment agency and a consultant have not released their proof that downtown remains rundown despite a promise to do so more than five weeks ago and requirements in state public records laws to release the information within 10 days.
The documents in question are central to the legitimacy of late-night state legislation that removed a key limit on downtown redevelopment.
Under the legislation, the Centre City Development Corp. will grab a substantial share of billions of dollars in future downtown property taxes for public improvements and development subsides.
Downtown, backers of the legislation argue, continues to require those taxpayer subsidies for redevelopment's purpose: improving rundown neighborhoods.
But the state move meant that CCDC no longer had to prove that downtown was rundown, a public process that it had begun to undertake. Central in that effort was a $500,000 study that CCDC canceled after the controversial legislation passed.
The study and the information behind it are key to understanding if boosters would have been able to justify the need for downtown's continued tax subsidies through the standard process.
In its unfinished state, the study asserts that downtown remains rundown. But the document, written by lead consultant Keyser Marston Associates, had yet to include evidence to back up those findings beyond simple crime statistics...
Monday, January 17, 2011
Googins, Faigin battle for first city attorney in Chula Vista
Googins, Faigin face tough battle for first city attorney
By Khari Johnson, SDNN
June 8, 2010
SDNN
Up to now, the city attorney in Chula Vista was appointed by the city council but Proposition Q — a 2008 ballot measure — changed city charter to make it an elected position and Chula Vistans will go to the polls Tuesday to choose between Glen Googins and Robert Faigin as their first elected city attorney.
With a salary of more than $200,000, the city attorney will be the highest paid position in Chula Vista city government.
Both Googins and Faigin promise to follow the rule of law, claim to be independent and accuse his opponent of being beholden to special interests trying to influence City Hall.
They see the position as an advisor, not policy maker, and share concerns expressed by members of the City Council and Proposition Q opponents that the office has the potential to become politicized and impact legal advice offered to the council and city departments.
But that’s also why both claim he should be elected, not his opponent.
“Obviously, now theoretically they’re more responsible to the people than the city council members,” said current City Attorney Bart Miesfeld, “but day to day responsibilities won’t change,” said
Faigin, a resident of Lakeside, has been the county sheriff’s chief counsel since 2002 and decided to run after members of the South County sheriff’s office told him no qualified candidates sought the position.
Googins opened his private practice handling real estate and development issues in 2004 after 11 years of similar work in the city attorney’s office. Disagreements with then City Attorney Ann Moore led Googins to resign, in the process receiving a $175,000 severance package.
Joseph Casas, the candidate endorsed by the San Diego County Democratic Party, dropped out of the race in March and is currently representing Police Chief David Bejarano against accusations of fraud by a former business partner.
“The downside to turning it into an elected position is that instantly the developers, Corky McMillan, all of those people start pumping money into campaigns because they want to influence city politics,” Faigin said.
By the May 27 financial filing deadline, Googins had raised $33,000 from 100 donors, including teachers, border patrol agents and city residents, but also several lawyers, real estate developers. In addition he raised nearly $1,000 from executives from The Corky McMillin Companies, including company president and CEO Mark McMillin.
Googins endorsers include the Chula Vista Police Officer and Firefighter Associations, former City Attorney John Kaheny, state assemblymember Mary Salas, County Supervisor Greg Cox and The Republican Party of San Diego County, though it is a non-partisan race.
About one-third of donors to Googin’s campaign are Chula Vista residents.
“I’m not promising anyone anything,” Googins said. “Just because I’ve represented developers doesn’t mean I’m going to favor any developers. When I’m with the city, the city’s my client.”...
By Khari Johnson, SDNN
June 8, 2010
SDNN
Up to now, the city attorney in Chula Vista was appointed by the city council but Proposition Q — a 2008 ballot measure — changed city charter to make it an elected position and Chula Vistans will go to the polls Tuesday to choose between Glen Googins and Robert Faigin as their first elected city attorney.
With a salary of more than $200,000, the city attorney will be the highest paid position in Chula Vista city government.
Both Googins and Faigin promise to follow the rule of law, claim to be independent and accuse his opponent of being beholden to special interests trying to influence City Hall.
They see the position as an advisor, not policy maker, and share concerns expressed by members of the City Council and Proposition Q opponents that the office has the potential to become politicized and impact legal advice offered to the council and city departments.
But that’s also why both claim he should be elected, not his opponent.
“Obviously, now theoretically they’re more responsible to the people than the city council members,” said current City Attorney Bart Miesfeld, “but day to day responsibilities won’t change,” said
Faigin, a resident of Lakeside, has been the county sheriff’s chief counsel since 2002 and decided to run after members of the South County sheriff’s office told him no qualified candidates sought the position.
Googins opened his private practice handling real estate and development issues in 2004 after 11 years of similar work in the city attorney’s office. Disagreements with then City Attorney Ann Moore led Googins to resign, in the process receiving a $175,000 severance package.
Joseph Casas, the candidate endorsed by the San Diego County Democratic Party, dropped out of the race in March and is currently representing Police Chief David Bejarano against accusations of fraud by a former business partner.
“The downside to turning it into an elected position is that instantly the developers, Corky McMillan, all of those people start pumping money into campaigns because they want to influence city politics,” Faigin said.
By the May 27 financial filing deadline, Googins had raised $33,000 from 100 donors, including teachers, border patrol agents and city residents, but also several lawyers, real estate developers. In addition he raised nearly $1,000 from executives from The Corky McMillin Companies, including company president and CEO Mark McMillin.
Googins endorsers include the Chula Vista Police Officer and Firefighter Associations, former City Attorney John Kaheny, state assemblymember Mary Salas, County Supervisor Greg Cox and The Republican Party of San Diego County, though it is a non-partisan race.
About one-third of donors to Googin’s campaign are Chula Vista residents.
“I’m not promising anyone anything,” Googins said. “Just because I’ve represented developers doesn’t mean I’m going to favor any developers. When I’m with the city, the city’s my client.”...
Sidelining of Chula Vista councilwoman questioned
Sidelining of Chula Vista councilwoman questioned
City attorney says she has a conflict on police contracts because her adult son is a lieutenant
SDUT
By Tanya Sierra
January 13, 2011
New Chula Vista Councilwoman Patricia Aguilar has a son on the police force, a relationship that has become a city issue amid tense labor negotiations.
Aguilar has been asked by the city’s attorney to stay on the sidelines for decisions involving the police union as her son is Lt. Phil Collum, 40, even though the two do not share a home or finances.
The city wants police to contribute nine percent of their salary to their pensions and forgo a six percent previously-agreed-upon raise. The move would save $2.5 million annually amid a budget crunch.
The city might have to lay off 24 low-seniority cops if police don’t give in. Most of the city’s other employees have agreed to contribute to their own pensions and adjust their pay.
Critics are concerned there may be political motivations for the legal advice concerning contract negotiations.
“I can understand how management would be concerned but the attorney should not be jaded by that kind of perspective,” Councilman Steve Castaneda said. “To come to that sort of harsh and extreme decision to disqualify an elected City Council member on facts that don’t seem to be germane to this situation, I think it is problematic.”
Three members of the council have reservations about the city attorney’s legal advice — Aguilar, Castaneda and Councilman Rudy Ramirez.
Ramirez notes that his brother is on the police force, and that’s never been deemed a legal or ethical issue because the two don’t live together or mix finances.
“I asked, ‘If Pat has a conflict, then why not me?’ and I was told that there was no conflict for me because he was my brother as opposed to being my son,” Ramirez said. “You don’t negotiate by concocting some legal position to affect the negotiations. Especially a labor negotiation where we’re going to have to live together and work together.”
City Attorney Glen Googins, also elected in November, issued the advice letter suggesting Aguilar abstain on police labor issues.
Googins acknowledges that Aguilar has no conflict under the state’s Government Code, but he relies instead on a 2009 Attorney General’s opinion that outlines slightly different rules under common law. That doctrine has a broader prohibition against participation in government decisions that might affect personal interests.
The 2009 opinion found a conflict of interest for a redevelopment agency board member whose son had a corporation seeking a contract with his mother’s agency. That mother and son shared an apartment.
Aguilar, who has so far abided by Googins’ recommendation, said her circumstances are different from those in the Attorney General’s opinion because she doesn’t live with her son and they don’t mix finances. Also, she noted, he is not a direct party to a city contract she would have to approve.
“In my case, my son is affected by the issue of contract negotiation only as a part of a larger class of people affected,” she said. “One is a very direct and the other is not.”
Googins, who ran on a campaign of government transparency, refused to release his legal opinion. Googins promised voters he would make his legal opinions public. But in this case, he said, he was not releasing the document because he has not developed a protocol by which to do that.
The Watchdog obtained the advice letter through another source. It notes that Lt. Collum is a board member for the police union.
“As a board member, he is in a position to influence whether or not negotiations will occur and what direction those negotiations should take,” the opinion says.
Googins would not discuss the opinion, saying it was legal advice between him and his client...
City attorney says she has a conflict on police contracts because her adult son is a lieutenant
SDUT
By Tanya Sierra
January 13, 2011
New Chula Vista Councilwoman Patricia Aguilar has a son on the police force, a relationship that has become a city issue amid tense labor negotiations.
Aguilar has been asked by the city’s attorney to stay on the sidelines for decisions involving the police union as her son is Lt. Phil Collum, 40, even though the two do not share a home or finances.
The city wants police to contribute nine percent of their salary to their pensions and forgo a six percent previously-agreed-upon raise. The move would save $2.5 million annually amid a budget crunch.
The city might have to lay off 24 low-seniority cops if police don’t give in. Most of the city’s other employees have agreed to contribute to their own pensions and adjust their pay.
Critics are concerned there may be political motivations for the legal advice concerning contract negotiations.
“I can understand how management would be concerned but the attorney should not be jaded by that kind of perspective,” Councilman Steve Castaneda said. “To come to that sort of harsh and extreme decision to disqualify an elected City Council member on facts that don’t seem to be germane to this situation, I think it is problematic.”
Three members of the council have reservations about the city attorney’s legal advice — Aguilar, Castaneda and Councilman Rudy Ramirez.
Ramirez notes that his brother is on the police force, and that’s never been deemed a legal or ethical issue because the two don’t live together or mix finances.
“I asked, ‘If Pat has a conflict, then why not me?’ and I was told that there was no conflict for me because he was my brother as opposed to being my son,” Ramirez said. “You don’t negotiate by concocting some legal position to affect the negotiations. Especially a labor negotiation where we’re going to have to live together and work together.”
City Attorney Glen Googins, also elected in November, issued the advice letter suggesting Aguilar abstain on police labor issues.
Googins acknowledges that Aguilar has no conflict under the state’s Government Code, but he relies instead on a 2009 Attorney General’s opinion that outlines slightly different rules under common law. That doctrine has a broader prohibition against participation in government decisions that might affect personal interests.
The 2009 opinion found a conflict of interest for a redevelopment agency board member whose son had a corporation seeking a contract with his mother’s agency. That mother and son shared an apartment.
Aguilar, who has so far abided by Googins’ recommendation, said her circumstances are different from those in the Attorney General’s opinion because she doesn’t live with her son and they don’t mix finances. Also, she noted, he is not a direct party to a city contract she would have to approve.
“In my case, my son is affected by the issue of contract negotiation only as a part of a larger class of people affected,” she said. “One is a very direct and the other is not.”
Googins, who ran on a campaign of government transparency, refused to release his legal opinion. Googins promised voters he would make his legal opinions public. But in this case, he said, he was not releasing the document because he has not developed a protocol by which to do that.
The Watchdog obtained the advice letter through another source. It notes that Lt. Collum is a board member for the police union.
“As a board member, he is in a position to influence whether or not negotiations will occur and what direction those negotiations should take,” the opinion says.
Googins would not discuss the opinion, saying it was legal advice between him and his client...
Board reform didn’t pan out for Schwarzenegger
Board reform didn’t pan out for Schwarzenegger
He appointed people to the very state panels that he had sought to eliminate
By Matthew T. Hall
SDUT
January 15, 2011
Arnold Schwarzenegger stormed into the governor’s office in late 2003 intending to “blow up the boxes” of state government and soon targeted 88 boards and commissions for termination.
He left this month, having eliminated only a few, and one of his last acts involved naming a series of political allies to commission seats with six-figure salaries, including several boards that he wanted abolished.
“Clearly, it was against what he said at the beginning,” said Joel Fox, former president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and an ally in Schwarzenegger’s reform efforts. “I’m disappointed he didn’t follow through and set the example at the end.”
Schwarzenegger spokesman Aaron McLear blamed the Legislature for blocking reforms. He said the call to eliminate certain boards was meant to streamline government, not save money, because much of the funding originates outside the state’s discretionary general fund.
He said all of Schwarzenegger’s appointments put “inherently qualified” people on boards that remain relevant.
“They serve a purpose so we have to keep them functioning as long as they exist,” he said.
California’s governor appoints 63 people to 12 boards and commissions that pay from $111,845 to $132,179 a year, according to a review by The Watchdog. They are collectively paid almost $8 million a year.
By month’s end, the list will have 18 vacancies for newly sworn-in Gov. Jerry Brown to fill. A Brown spokeswoman said the governor is closely considering each choice while looking for ways to cut costs.
In his final week, Schwarzenegger drew criticism by appointing six people to positions with six-figure salaries, three to boards he had tried to eliminate.
Two were to the Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, which pays members $128,000 a year to settle state unemployment insurance disputes. While each member handles hundreds of appeals a month, the board has met 44 times since 2008, or little more than monthly.
Schwarzenegger appointed departing Sens. Dennis Hollingsworth of San Diego and Ray Ashburn of Bakersfield to the unemployment board, and Vicki Marti of Fairfax to the Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board.
He also named Kari Miner, a Sacramento interior decorator and the wife of former Schwarzenegger aide Paul Miner, to the Public Employment Relations Board, which oversees collective bargaining for state public employee unions.
Paul Miner was the point person for Schwarzenegger’s proposal to eliminate hundreds of appointed positions and more broadly reorganize state government.
“No one paid by the state should make $100,000 a year for only meeting twice a month,” Schwarzenegger said in his 2005 State of the State address.
Schwarzenegger’s California Performance Review Commission, which included Fox, proposed scrapping 117 of the state’s 339 boards and commissions.
The governor’s follow-up effort was roundly criticized and abandoned within a month. Later, the state did eliminate a waste board and consolidated boards dealing with geologists and hearing aids...
He appointed people to the very state panels that he had sought to eliminate
By Matthew T. Hall
SDUT
January 15, 2011
Arnold Schwarzenegger stormed into the governor’s office in late 2003 intending to “blow up the boxes” of state government and soon targeted 88 boards and commissions for termination.
He left this month, having eliminated only a few, and one of his last acts involved naming a series of political allies to commission seats with six-figure salaries, including several boards that he wanted abolished.
“Clearly, it was against what he said at the beginning,” said Joel Fox, former president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and an ally in Schwarzenegger’s reform efforts. “I’m disappointed he didn’t follow through and set the example at the end.”
Schwarzenegger spokesman Aaron McLear blamed the Legislature for blocking reforms. He said the call to eliminate certain boards was meant to streamline government, not save money, because much of the funding originates outside the state’s discretionary general fund.
He said all of Schwarzenegger’s appointments put “inherently qualified” people on boards that remain relevant.
“They serve a purpose so we have to keep them functioning as long as they exist,” he said.
California’s governor appoints 63 people to 12 boards and commissions that pay from $111,845 to $132,179 a year, according to a review by The Watchdog. They are collectively paid almost $8 million a year.
By month’s end, the list will have 18 vacancies for newly sworn-in Gov. Jerry Brown to fill. A Brown spokeswoman said the governor is closely considering each choice while looking for ways to cut costs.
In his final week, Schwarzenegger drew criticism by appointing six people to positions with six-figure salaries, three to boards he had tried to eliminate.
Two were to the Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, which pays members $128,000 a year to settle state unemployment insurance disputes. While each member handles hundreds of appeals a month, the board has met 44 times since 2008, or little more than monthly.
Schwarzenegger appointed departing Sens. Dennis Hollingsworth of San Diego and Ray Ashburn of Bakersfield to the unemployment board, and Vicki Marti of Fairfax to the Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board.
He also named Kari Miner, a Sacramento interior decorator and the wife of former Schwarzenegger aide Paul Miner, to the Public Employment Relations Board, which oversees collective bargaining for state public employee unions.
Paul Miner was the point person for Schwarzenegger’s proposal to eliminate hundreds of appointed positions and more broadly reorganize state government.
“No one paid by the state should make $100,000 a year for only meeting twice a month,” Schwarzenegger said in his 2005 State of the State address.
Schwarzenegger’s California Performance Review Commission, which included Fox, proposed scrapping 117 of the state’s 339 boards and commissions.
The governor’s follow-up effort was roundly criticized and abandoned within a month. Later, the state did eliminate a waste board and consolidated boards dealing with geologists and hearing aids...
Friday, January 14, 2011
Nathan and Mindy Fletcher Attend to Rail Transportation
Nathan and Mindy Fletcher Attend to Rail Transportation
By Matt Potter
Jan. 12, 2011
San Diego Reader
As the ultimate status of San Diego mayor Jerry Sanders continues to intrigue political onlookers, yet another rumored candidate to replace him has come to the forefront. GOP assemblyman Nathan Fletcher (whose official campaign biography, posted on his website, says that “before his election to the Legislature he served honorably in the military, the community and the political arena”) is said by some city hall insiders to have the inside track to collect the big money expected by some to come into the race from corporations seeking to benefit from a possible City bankruptcy and an ensuing orgy of outsourcing and asset sales. Fletcher’s bio, which also appears virtually verbatim on Wikipedia, touts his service as a Marine in Iraq and eastern Africa, where he was a “Counterintelligence/Human Intelligence Specialist.” Regarding his wife Mindy, it notes that the two “are members of Community Bible Church and proud parents of their son Zach.”
Nowhere does it mention that Nathan is the co-owner of a public affairs company, Arrow Advisers, and that Mindy, a hardened political pro who was an ex–PR aide to George W. Bush and Arnold Schwarzenegger, now is employed in Sacramento as a senior advisor by the lobbying outfit Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide. Fletcher’s most recent personal financial disclosure report, filed last March, says that in 2009 Mindy — whose hiring was announced November 17, 2008, shortly after her husband was elected to the assembly’s 75th District seat — was paid between $10,000 and $100,000. According to its most recent disclosure filing with the secretary of state, Ogilvy, a branch of the big national PR and lobbying firm, grossed $57,800 in fees for its Sacramento lobbying activities during the third quarter of last year, the most recent period on record.
Clients included the American Chemistry Council ($5800), the investment firm the Blackstone Group ($30,000), and California Strategies & Advocacy LLC, working on behalf of the Centinela Valley Union High School District ($6000). Previous Ogilvy lobbying clients have included Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California and California Strategies working on behalf of the Los Angeles Turf Club.
California Strategies & Advocacy is a sister firm of California Strategies, run by Bob White, longtime top aide to Pete Wilson when he was San Diego mayor, senator, and governor. A partner in the firm, which has performed consulting work for the City-controlled Centre City Development Corporation and Mayor Sanders regarding a new city hall, is Ben Haddad, another ex–Wilson aide and former staffer to Mayor Susan Golding. Last fall, Fletcher authored a controversial bill signed by then–Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger that lifted the cap on spending by San Diego’s redevelopment agency, a move widely seen as intended to assist Sanders and his allies in the downtown establishment build a new taxpayer-financed stadium for the Chargers.
Also of interest is the fact that Ogilvy’s most recent client is the California High-Speed Rail Authority, the troubled state agency tasked with building a taxpayer-subsidized bullet train across the length of the state. In November 2009, the authority gave the firm a $9 million contract to lobby for the project through 2014. Fletcher has been vice chairman of the Assembly Select Committee on Rail Transportation.
Fletcher reported that his Arrow Advisers, which has a mailing address in University City, had a fair market value of between $10,000 and $100,000. He listed one client, United Friends of the Children, as being the source of income greater than $10,000. The board of that Los Angeles–based charity includes L.A. Democratic mayor Anthony Villaraigosa. Both Fletcher and his wife contributed to Jerry Sanders’s 2007 reelection bid. He was listed as partner in Arrow; she was listed as president of the firm. Neither Fletcher nor his wife responded to questions left regarding the disclosures...
By Matt Potter
Jan. 12, 2011
San Diego Reader
As the ultimate status of San Diego mayor Jerry Sanders continues to intrigue political onlookers, yet another rumored candidate to replace him has come to the forefront. GOP assemblyman Nathan Fletcher (whose official campaign biography, posted on his website, says that “before his election to the Legislature he served honorably in the military, the community and the political arena”) is said by some city hall insiders to have the inside track to collect the big money expected by some to come into the race from corporations seeking to benefit from a possible City bankruptcy and an ensuing orgy of outsourcing and asset sales. Fletcher’s bio, which also appears virtually verbatim on Wikipedia, touts his service as a Marine in Iraq and eastern Africa, where he was a “Counterintelligence/Human Intelligence Specialist.” Regarding his wife Mindy, it notes that the two “are members of Community Bible Church and proud parents of their son Zach.”
Nowhere does it mention that Nathan is the co-owner of a public affairs company, Arrow Advisers, and that Mindy, a hardened political pro who was an ex–PR aide to George W. Bush and Arnold Schwarzenegger, now is employed in Sacramento as a senior advisor by the lobbying outfit Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide. Fletcher’s most recent personal financial disclosure report, filed last March, says that in 2009 Mindy — whose hiring was announced November 17, 2008, shortly after her husband was elected to the assembly’s 75th District seat — was paid between $10,000 and $100,000. According to its most recent disclosure filing with the secretary of state, Ogilvy, a branch of the big national PR and lobbying firm, grossed $57,800 in fees for its Sacramento lobbying activities during the third quarter of last year, the most recent period on record.
Clients included the American Chemistry Council ($5800), the investment firm the Blackstone Group ($30,000), and California Strategies & Advocacy LLC, working on behalf of the Centinela Valley Union High School District ($6000). Previous Ogilvy lobbying clients have included Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California and California Strategies working on behalf of the Los Angeles Turf Club.
California Strategies & Advocacy is a sister firm of California Strategies, run by Bob White, longtime top aide to Pete Wilson when he was San Diego mayor, senator, and governor. A partner in the firm, which has performed consulting work for the City-controlled Centre City Development Corporation and Mayor Sanders regarding a new city hall, is Ben Haddad, another ex–Wilson aide and former staffer to Mayor Susan Golding. Last fall, Fletcher authored a controversial bill signed by then–Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger that lifted the cap on spending by San Diego’s redevelopment agency, a move widely seen as intended to assist Sanders and his allies in the downtown establishment build a new taxpayer-financed stadium for the Chargers.
Also of interest is the fact that Ogilvy’s most recent client is the California High-Speed Rail Authority, the troubled state agency tasked with building a taxpayer-subsidized bullet train across the length of the state. In November 2009, the authority gave the firm a $9 million contract to lobby for the project through 2014. Fletcher has been vice chairman of the Assembly Select Committee on Rail Transportation.
Fletcher reported that his Arrow Advisers, which has a mailing address in University City, had a fair market value of between $10,000 and $100,000. He listed one client, United Friends of the Children, as being the source of income greater than $10,000. The board of that Los Angeles–based charity includes L.A. Democratic mayor Anthony Villaraigosa. Both Fletcher and his wife contributed to Jerry Sanders’s 2007 reelection bid. He was listed as partner in Arrow; she was listed as president of the firm. Neither Fletcher nor his wife responded to questions left regarding the disclosures...
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
The county board of supervisors hasn't had a new member since 1995
We have some off-the-wall school board members out here in East County (I'm thinking of Jim Kelly), but we have a fine representative on the County Board of Supervisors. I think Dianne Jacob is the most conscientious supervisor on the board.
On the other hand, I think Greg Cox is just one small step above Bill Horn. Why do candidates like these keep getting reelected?
Mary Salas, why don't you run?
Randy Dotinga at Voice of San Diego notes:
"...The county board of supervisors hasn't had a new member since 1995, and if three board members have their way, it'll stay like that for at least a few more years. The U-T says incumbents Pam Slater-Price, Dianne Jacob and Greg Cox are all sending signals that they'll run again in 2012..."
County supervisor races continue to take shape
By Christopher Cadelago
SDUT
January 10, 2011
Supervisor Pam Slater-Price has signaled her intention to seek re-election in 2012, joining an early slate of candidates that includes two board colleagues and a pair of familiar faces.
Slater-Price, who represents the county's District 3, was first elected in 1992. Steve Danon, chief of staff to Rep. Brian Bilbray, is also vying for the seat and has been actively running for several months.
The San Diego County Registrar of Voters office has also received initial paperwork from Supervisor Dianne Jacob, who represents the county’s District 2, and Santee’s Rudy Reyes.
Reyes mounted an unsuccessful campaign against Jacob in 2008 and lost bids for the Santee City Council in 2008 and 2010.
Supervisor Greg Cox, who represents the county's District 1, has made it clear he would run again. Jacob was first elected in 1992 and Cox joined the board of supervisors in 1995.
On the other hand, I think Greg Cox is just one small step above Bill Horn. Why do candidates like these keep getting reelected?
Mary Salas, why don't you run?
Randy Dotinga at Voice of San Diego notes:
"...The county board of supervisors hasn't had a new member since 1995, and if three board members have their way, it'll stay like that for at least a few more years. The U-T says incumbents Pam Slater-Price, Dianne Jacob and Greg Cox are all sending signals that they'll run again in 2012..."
County supervisor races continue to take shape
By Christopher Cadelago
SDUT
January 10, 2011
Supervisor Pam Slater-Price has signaled her intention to seek re-election in 2012, joining an early slate of candidates that includes two board colleagues and a pair of familiar faces.
Slater-Price, who represents the county's District 3, was first elected in 1992. Steve Danon, chief of staff to Rep. Brian Bilbray, is also vying for the seat and has been actively running for several months.
The San Diego County Registrar of Voters office has also received initial paperwork from Supervisor Dianne Jacob, who represents the county’s District 2, and Santee’s Rudy Reyes.
Reyes mounted an unsuccessful campaign against Jacob in 2008 and lost bids for the Santee City Council in 2008 and 2010.
Supervisor Greg Cox, who represents the county's District 1, has made it clear he would run again. Jacob was first elected in 1992 and Cox joined the board of supervisors in 1995.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)