First the Library, now these jurors want the City to sell its allotment of Charger and bowl tickets? When did grand jury's start encouraging ticket scalping? Who really cares if City Council members and their families or friends are going to Charger games? It’s a publicly funded stadium, we've voted them as elected officials to be public servants, and that responsibility should come with a few advantages.

Posted by DC | reply to this comment
May 24, 2007 7:15 am

Their report on Real Estate Assets just regurgitated the Grubb & Ellis report. It seemed as if READ management wrote the report.

Posted by Gloria | reply to this comment
May 24, 2007 9:16 am

The whole concept of a new downtown library is ludicrous. The city is broke. That's B-R-O-K-E. As in no money. In fact it is worse than that. We owe money, LOTS of it. The pension fund, erroneously underestimated at $1.4 BILLION is just the tip of the iceberg. If the money we do NOT have is burning a hole in the city's pockets, why not take just 12.5% of the amount the downtown library would cost (or $25 million) and use that to upgrade branch libraries, keep them open more hours and generally make them even more useful to the public? After all, who goes to the downtown library, anyway -- the homeless, some downtown residents and even fewer people working there? I was last there 45 years ago. This is beyond ludicrous -- it's surreal. The design looks like Hiroshima.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
May 24, 2007 11:02 am

There's nothing in this response from the Grand Jury to change my mind -- their statutory 'reason for being' needs to be revised to eliminate wasteful activities like debating library construction. Like I said, when a grand jury, of all bodies, gets into discussions of public and social policy, you know it's time for immediate change! Enough already!

Posted by Robert E. Lee | reply to this comment
May 24, 2007 9:13 pm

This is a difficult transitional time in library design and contruction. First, people need to accept that "traditional" brink and mortar castles may bring "refinement" to a city's reputation but they do not bring literacy and knowledge to the masses. And,that is a big reason why there are libraries. Collections are important, but can be stored in a warehouse. Reference librarians are important but can be available by phone and e-mail 24 hours a day, and of course - at the place most people go, to their branch library. I don't know who the grand jury is made up of but I would be interested to know their ages and ethnic makeup and what neighborhood they live in. I would guess most aren't young, aren't non-white or don't depend on public transportation.

Posted by Book Lover | reply to this comment
May 24, 2007 10:09 pm

Of all the wretched posts on the topic, Edgar's takes the cake. I go to Central all the time; I've been throughout that building from top to bottom and know what's in the collection. It's bloody amazing! And it cannot easily be seen because there's too little floor space. An earlier post, ignored by Lewis, refrained a worthwhile question posed by the Grand Jury; why not explore asking for the public---the Joes and Janes for money enough to at least add on to the current building as was intended by its builders 53 years ago? There are more solutions than one may expect to problems; obviously things that Edgar, who admits his failure to use a library since Kennedy was in office, may not understand. And Robert E. Lee...lighten up and get a new handle. That confederate one is really getting on my American nerves.

Posted by ExLibris | reply to this comment
May 25, 2007 3:39 am

Scott, Good work again! I don't get the people who comment on the library when the issue is the grand jury. Who is it that is not managing the priorities and activities and subjects that the grand jury looks at? How much public money is spent on such folly as this thing on the library? And what kind of people would spend a year of their lives "working" on such subjects as this? I, too, need a break; this is tooooo much.

Posted by Mike L. | reply to this comment
May 25, 2007 5:03 am

ExLibris: I assure you, Robert E. Lee is very much my real name. In fact, you may go to my website at link The site is still under construction, but there I am, in all of my real, flesh-and-blood glory.

Posted by Robert E. Lee, 2 | reply to this comment
May 25, 2007 6:29 am

I have not read any comments on existance of a county grand jury except to state some kind of state legal mandate that says, "there will be a grand jury". For those who see the reports as trivia do not really know what it takes to come about an investigation of a citizen complaint. All citizens have the right to use the grand jury as a sounding board and not one complaint can go unanswered. The grand jury is a complement of 19 people who volunteer to come together and be the eyes and ears, yes, even look under rocks, to satisfy the rest of the county that there is a watch dog looking out for them How many are their in the over two million residents in san diego county willing to cast their name, volunteering for such a job at $25 a day. Oh,yes,theygetfreepa

Posted by Jesse Macias | reply to this comment
May 25, 2007 7:16 am

Put on your reading glasses, Ex. I said I had not been to the downtown library in 45 years. I was in the Carmel Valley branch last week and the Del Mar library this week. I read. I don't have to go downtown to do that. If you want to get private donations to build your downtown homeless day care center/bathroom and drug recreational center, be my guest. Just stop pontificating about how the taxpayer should support your private charity. For me and for most taxpayers THE libary is the local branch. Put whatever money is available there, because that is what the people use. We do not need a monstrosity downtown that is modeled after the bombed out government building in downtown Hiroshima. We need local libraries that are available, open and staffed.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
May 25, 2007 9:17 am

What the grand jury might have suggested, had they taken a more global view instead of just taking what the City provided and going no further, is the possibility of dumping the ugly new main library design, selling the site (which would bring a pretty penny), and building, instead, a combined library / civic center. Our City Hall is in need of replacement. Why not have everything in one place, with the main library being a true City resource that is nearby instead of a long haul to an area that is dreadful to manage when the baseball team is in town? Certainly if you look at the main library site and their limp fundraising efforts, you can hardly say that much money would be wasted by taking an approach that would bring us an invigorated downtown by reviving the center of city busness.

Posted by Leanne | reply to this comment
May 25, 2007 8:38 pm

Now there is a person with forward-thinking vision! You present an excellent proposal, Leanne!!! Combining a new civic center and library (can I assume you include a new city hall in your definition of 'civic center'?) in a more centralized area of downtown is eminently more sensible. Of course, your idea, with the financial condition the city is in right now, would indeed be contingent on finding a guaranteed buyer for the site where the main library is currently located. However, I think that condition is very 'do-able'. And I don't know the answer, but if the city is required to offer a municipal asset or property to another government entity first, then the property would not sell for what a private sector buyer would presumably offer... Otherwise, great idea!

Posted by Robert E. Lee, 3 | reply to this comment
May 26, 2007 12:01 am

HOORAY for the Grand Jury! As a member of the '04-'05 SD Grand Jury I can testify that it is a valuable resource for both citizens and public agencies. Now I am on the "Past GJ Assn" and find that there has been much "measureable" benefit to communities all over this state. We have an ongoing "Implementation Review Committee" with the County for many years, and are now poised to set up one for the City.

Posted by Walter D. Hofmann, M.D. | reply to this comment
May 26, 2007 3:12 am

The key "finding" that SHOULD have been reported is that the Grand Jury sought "testimony" mostly from ardent library fanatics--people who support ANY spending on ANY library ANY time. While SDCTA gave its lone opposition report, the Grand Jury never thought to check with the folks who wrote the successful ballot arguments against the library sales tax increase measures, and handled the debates in such matters. We opponents can provide additional information verifying that the new downtown library is an astonishing waste of land and resources. Bottom line -- ignore the bumbling, biased Grand Jury and its library report.

Posted by Ricard Rider | reply to this comment
May 26, 2007 1:32 pm

Well, good Robt. E. Lee, you can work on Leanne's idea when you get on the city council. Of course, that will never happen.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
May 27, 2007 7:54 am

Thank you for your vote, Edgar. With your support, I'm now well on my way down the road to a future in public service!!! lol!!! That's okay, I have 'thick skin', and I'm ready for the challenge. And I have the courage of my convictions... Oh, by the way, Edgar, you can send your campaign contribution to... Just kidding!!!

Posted by Robert E. Lee, 4 | reply to this comment
May 27, 2007 11:10 pm

The county grand jury has an '"Implementation Review Committee"...now poised to set up...for the City.' Oh, Lord, help us now!!! lol!!! Sigh!!! Just what we need -- another level of bureaucracy telling San Diegans how to spend their tax dollars! Where does it all end??? Some things are beneficial to the city -- this kind of interference is NOT!!!

Posted by Robert E. Lee, 5 | reply to this comment
May 27, 2007 11:14 pm

Last year, I sent a complaint to the San Diego County Grand Jury. I was given File # 2006/07-002 which to me meant that it was the second complaint they received for the 2006-2007 grand jury. I can't believe that my complaint was superseded by the illusions of a downtown library. The funny thing is both issues have there beginning with none other than former Mayor Susan Golding. I guess Civil Studies at a non-existent San Diego City Library are more important than the Civil Liberties of existing San Diego County Residents.

Posted by Sal D'Anna | reply to this comment
May 29, 2007 12:14 am

Are there not real issues in San Diego County? Having the grand jury report on a big, expensive library would indicate that all the other problems are solved. Including the city box tickets at the Q! What are they not concerned with the city box tickets at Petco Park?

Posted by Jean | reply to this comment
May 29, 2007 1:31 am

• Users may post more than one comment, but should not pose as multiple users. Multiple posts from the same IP address but with a different user name on each will be reviewed to determine whether abuse has occurred.
• Posts with overly personal attacks or unsubstantiated allegations may be edited or deleted.
• Please be patient with the posts -- there may be a delay before they appear on the site -- and make sure to enter the code in the "image verification" box.