voiceofsandiego.org: Opinion... Off Course
an independent nonprofit |
We depend on your donations. Consider joining us today.

Off Course

By Hank Cunningham



Thursday, Aug. 28, 2008 | I've been reading with some interest the growing discussion/debate over the continued viability of the city's two nonprofit redevelopment entities, Centre City Development Corp. and Southeastern Economic Development Corp.

"It's now, I believe, abundantly clear that both CCDC and SEDC exist mainly for their own benefit rather than that of the community at large."
In my opinion, both organizations should be dissolved and rolled into the Redevelopment Agency under the direct control of its legislative body, the City Council, and its executive director, currently the mayor.

The organizational structure of the San Diego Redevelopment Agency is unique among all of the numerous RDAs in California. No other agency includes nonprofit corporations such as CCDC and SEDC wherein staff are employed by an outside organization, rather than by the city government of which both entities are by state law a part.

While in the case of CCDC, in particular, this structure was helpful in facilitating the revitalization of a blighted and neglected downtown central business district, it certainly wasn't the only possible way by which to have accomplished this urban revitalization. One only has to look as far as Los Angeles or San Francisco to see similar redevelopment success stories achieved under the auspices of large, well-funded RDAs that didn't utilize the separate nonprofit corporation model.

The inherent problems with this structure have now become painfully obvious. The corporations are, in effect, quasi-public development entities that are lacking in adequate oversight by the municipal government which they ostensibly serve.

It's now, I believe, abundantly clear that both CCDC and SEDC exist mainly for their own benefit rather than that of the community at large, nor just as importantly, for achieving the objectives proscribed by state redevelopment law. Pure and simple, redevelopment was created in California and elsewhere around the country to eliminate slums and blight, both physical and economic.

It was not established for the purpose of facilitating the construction of expensive condominiums affordable only to high-income individuals, many of whom were clearly real estate speculators. To the contrary, the basic tenet of redevelopment is to improve the quality of life for low-income persons and families through fostering job opportunities, affordable housing, and public infrastructure improvements in older, urban core areas. Somehow this goal became obscured as CCDC and SEDC pursued projects that tended to enhance the bottom line of the corporation and/or its executives rather than the community or its residents.

I was hired by the city in 1999 to administer the operations of the Community Economic Development Department and the Redevelopment Agency. I remained in that position until mid-2005 when I left to accept a position in the private sector.

On paper, at least, through the city manager who then served as executive director, I was in charge of all RDA activities, including those of CCDC and SEDC. I soon found, however, that my authority didn't really apply to these organizations when the CEOs of each made it abundantly clear that they reported solely to their board of directors, not to me or the city manager. This disconnect came to a head during 2004 when I recommended to the City Council Land Use and Housing Committee and the Public Safety and Neighborhood Services Committee that :

    (1) the low-to-moderate income set-aside be increased from its statutory minimum of 20 percent of annual redevelopment tax increment up to 25 percent; and,

    (2) the city consider advocating for a change in state law that would allow for the use of tax increment to help defray the enormous cost burden for public safety (police and fire protection) in the downtown area.



Both recommendations were strongly opposed by the CCDC and SEDC boards and executive staff, and ultimately died for lack of political support. In the first case, a broad-based citizen committee on affordable housing had previously recommended that the LMIH set-aside be increased to 35 percent. The second proposal caused then-CCDC CEO Peter Hall to erupt with the following charge in an e-mail to the city manager: "Hank's cavalier attitude about focusing the legislation -- on downtown only demonstrates again his rogue behavior. This is the second instance recently where his intrusion into CCDC business is not only inappropriate, but absolutely off the mark. I'm not sure what drives his lack of regard for downtown redevelopment, but feel the time has come to request that you direct Hank to refrain from engaging in any policy recommendations that impact downtown redevelopment," according to the memo quoted in CityBeat.

Interestingly, none of the nonprofit CEOs, past or present, possessed any public sector redevelopment experience or credentials. In my mind, this creates a problem. How can professionals lacking any public sector background whatsoever be expected to function effectively in this much more open, as well as more highly regulated governmental environment?

Nationally, redevelopment/economic development is a credentialed profession with a uniform code of conduct and educational standards. It's not a field where executives should be hired based on political or business connections. The simplest way to avoid future problems such as those being faced today is to dissolve CCDC and SEDC, return their assets and repay their substantial loans to the city, and bring the Redevelopment Agency under direct city management control.

Hank Cunningham was director of community and economic development and assistant executive director of San Diego redevelopment. Previously, he was an appointed technical advisor to the California Redevelopment Association Board of Directors. You can email him at: hank.cunningham@sbcglobal.net Agree with him? Disagree? Submit a letter to the editor here.




Editor´s Choice
The reader comments you won't want to miss. (Editor's Choice selection do not represent the views of the editors. They are comments that seem to add to the discussion as opposed to less productive insults or arguments.)

without the stand alone status of ccdc and sedc the city would have to own up to being the heavies, you know, the ones who are gentrifing our neighborhoods and pushing redevelopment programs which very few of the people living in those neighborhoods want or need.

Posted by iknowtodd | reply to this comment
August 27, 2008 5:18 pm

These are exclusive institutions for developers- developers selecting developers to permit development. The Downtown Community Plan, which was one of Nancy Graham's first projects, saw to it that constitutional rights were granted to developers, via increased entitlements. When the economic cycle was in its upswing, downtown was the "goose that laid the golden egg" that nobody wanted to touch. All those who are not developers, and wanted to contribute to the vision of a "Downtown for Everybody" were left behind. The purpose of existence of these entities is to allow private developers to do whatever they want. The problem was that the arrangement worked too well...

Posted by Murtaza | reply to this comment
August 28, 2008 11:37 am

15 Comments so far on this story...

Editor´s Choice
without the stand alone status of ccdc and sedc the city would have to own up to being the heavies, you know, the ones who are gentrifing our neighborhoods and pushing redevelopment programs which very few of the people living in those neighborhoods want or need.

Posted by iknowtodd | reply to this comment
August 27, 2008 5:18 pm

Thank you, Mr. Cunningham, for sharing your perspective as someone who was actually "in the trenches" when it came to how and why redevelopment should be done, and more importantly, how it should most definitely NOT be done in this city. I am also gratified that you have laid it on the line and advocated what I and many other people have, that SEDC and CCDC should be abolished, and their respective "responsibilities" returned to the more accountable Redevelopment Agency, the City Council. Although the City Council has, to this point, been far from diligent and responsible in their oversight of the two agencies, they should take the opportunity now presented to them to turn a new leaf, and demonstrate what good government is supposed to be about. But again, let's not waste any more taxpayer dollars or any more "political capital" trying to save SEDC or CCDC.

Posted by Robert E. Lee | reply to this comment
August 28, 2008 6:14 am

Exactly how did Owens end-up on the SEDC board - much less being the Chairman of that Board. Who put his name into the hat; who selected and approved him as a member in the first place? I mean, does he have a close businesses relationship or friendship with some senior political office holder in the city or country of San Diego or something? I do not understand how he could 'understand clearly the needs and desires of the community' - as the supporters of SEDC keep claiming future board members must have a knowledge of… so, where did Owens come from? I’ve been reading all these stuff about Owens, it does not seem he is from San Diego or even has strong community roots in San Diego - so, who put Owens on the SEDC Board?

Posted by Gregory | reply to this comment
August 28, 2008 6:39 am

SEDC, CCDC, water department, development services..., we have the impression the senior staffers are all fervent R-party affiliate, (much like Dick and Lamont?) will any of them be held accountable for their evident ineptness or, it has been said, dishonesty/greed?

Posted by Really? | reply to this comment
August 28, 2008 6:39 am

Really: Your impressions are not correct and you should get to understand the individuals that hold those positions before you make irresponsible allegations. While there may be a minority element that may fit that description in any industry base, the VAST majority of individuals who serve the City of San Diego and our other regional government agencies are honest, smart, ethical and hard-working individuals! Mayor Murphy, Lamont Ewell, and the current Directors of the Departments you are so quick to label as dishonest and greedy are individuals that I would be proud to serve with, or for, any day of the week. Accountability, "Really" could come by being willing to identify yourself and stand behind your allegations. Oh yes, before you decide to throw the Sunroad card down, don't bother! The whole story

Posted by Marcela Escobar-Eck | reply to this comment
August 28, 2008 7:09 pm

Accountability, "Really" could come by being willing to identify yourself and stand behind your allegations. Oh yes, before you decide to throw the Sunroad card down, don't bother! The whole story will still be told when the time is right!

Posted by Marcela Escobar-Eck | reply to this comment
August 28, 2008 7:12 pm

Marcela, when will it be "right" for you to tell us this fascinating story of yours? Do we wait until the statute of limitations has run out? Your involvement in some well-known scandals should prompt you to clear your name now. What are you waiting for? If we've all got it wrong about you and your "honest, smart, ethical and hard-working" friends, then please tell us your side of the story. Otherwise, we'll have to trust what we've been reading in VOSD. (Thank you for using your real name. Fred)

Posted by Fred_Williams | reply to this comment
August 30, 2008 6:21 am

And first among the "minority element that may fit that description", the "dishonest and greedy", is yourself Marcella. I look forward to hearing you explain why you lied to the City Council on November 11, 2002 so that Murphy and Ewell could con the Council into sneaking through massive entitlements to Sunroad. Here is the link link Having got it past the Council by multiple misrepresentations you then litteraly filled in the blanks. Why did you not add Tom Story to your list of "honest, smart, ethical and hard-working" municipal saints? Do you really think we're that stupid?

Posted by Pat Flannery | reply to this comment
August 30, 2008 11:10 am

Good letter, and it carries serious credibility by virtue of who it comes from.

Posted by Billy Bob Henry | reply to this comment
August 28, 2008 10:32 am

Editor´s Choice
These are exclusive institutions for developers- developers selecting developers to permit development. The Downtown Community Plan, which was one of Nancy Graham's first projects, saw to it that constitutional rights were granted to developers, via increased entitlements. When the economic cycle was in its upswing, downtown was the "goose that laid the golden egg" that nobody wanted to touch. All those who are not developers, and wanted to contribute to the vision of a "Downtown for Everybody" were left behind. The purpose of existence of these entities is to allow private developers to do whatever they want. The problem was that the arrangement worked too well...

Posted by Murtaza | reply to this comment
August 28, 2008 11:37 am

Now I do not know the nuanced ins and outs of who is who downtown in these increasingly tangled scandals that emerge with increasing regularity. I do know that these agencies have the power of eminent domain which means they can, and do, TAKE private property property for some higher purpose as determined by very powerful developers and their urban planning flunkies. Evidently greed has overpowered discretion and the entire edifice is now standing naked, revealed for what it really is: a means for big developers to get property without having to pay market prices, and take that property if the owners won't sell. I sincerely hope some of these fine City employees get serious jail time. Regarding Ms.Escobar-Eck's defense of these paragons: "methinks she doth protest too much". The elitism and cronyism of this city is sometimes too much to bear.

Posted by Chris in Allied Gardens | reply to this comment
August 30, 2008 7:04 am

San Diego has always been about real estate development and corruption ever since Alonzo Horton bought up what is today's downtown and bribed the mayor and city council to upzone it and move city hall from old town to "Horton's Addition". It has always been about bribing elected officials and their representatives with campaign contributions, just as CA Smith bribed the then city manager to convince the mayor and city council to move city hall out of the waterfront administration center to its current location on C Street to build a market for his 2 new hotels being built on C St. This kind of bad behavoir was always ignored by the Spreckels and Copley owned Union-Tribune papers because the papers owners benefited by all the shady dealings. Things have changed now that the Voice of San Diego and other alternative media have begun blowing the whistle.

Posted by Watcher | reply to this comment
August 30, 2008 9:02 am

From a February 2003 entry in the San Diego Metropolitan Magazine newsline: "Just as the state is facing a critical budget crisis, Hank Cunningham is stepping into a position that will directly involve him in statewide development policy. Cunningham, assistant executive director of the San Diego Redevelopment Agency, is joining the California Redevelopment Association board. Although Cunningham did not seek the appointment, he says, “San Diego is a national model for how to do redevelopment. We should build on that success.” If you want the short course on who did what to whom as it relates to the RAs this is a very handy resource. The magazine and writers were--perhaps not shills, but certainly enthusiastic supporters of downtown redevelopment. Everyone acts as though they've been suddenly and miraculously cured of blindness. Where the hell have you been?

Posted by Linda Tegarden | reply to this comment
August 30, 2008 12:41 pm

Gary London has written a very cogent synopsis of redevelopment in the August 2008 issue of San Diego Metropolitan Magazine. His viewpoint is about what to do with future development--downtow is done--which must occur in the areas outside the 26 downtown blocks of of the city. He identifies the primary reason that so little gets done. The Community Planning Groups have enormous power though they are not elected to represent a constituency. NIMBYISM was born there. Here's the link to London's article: link

Posted by Linda Tegarden | reply to this comment
August 30, 2008 1:09 pm

"As President of The London Group, Gary H. London is strategic consultant and real estate ... Mr. London is a columnist with San Diego" Metropolitan Magazine. ... link So NIMBYISM that does not make money from redevelopment is somehow worse, in your mind, than NIMBYISM that makes from development. I wonder which is more likely to be objective and which is more likely to serve the whole of San Diego’s citizenry and not just those involved in the real estate markets, development, or being paid as consultants.

Posted by Really? | reply to this comment
September 1, 2008 1:14 pm


Reader feedback
  • 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.
Post a comment
Name:
Email:
Comments:
Current Word Count: Verification Code
2932346

This Just In

Schoobrary Doesn't Sway Taxpayers Group:

 'It seems like a convenient way for the school district to provide funding to close the gap on the library.' » Jan. 8 -- 6:51 pm



New Leader for the Teachers Union:

 A Wisconsin veteran takes the helm in the middle of tough bargaining.

Jan. 8 -- 6:06 pm


Pension Items to Be Docketed:

 Frye's proposals will be discussed behind closed doors.

Jan. 8 -- 5:26 pm


SURVIVAL IN SAN DIEGO

'Foreclosure Sanctuary' Lawsuits Dropped:

 San Diego's new city attorney lets AG handle the predatory lending suits.

Jan. 8 -- 5:40 pm



LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

The Extinction of Foreign News and the Guy Who Doesn't Care:

 Reporting has become synonymous with creative writing.

Jan. 8 -- 6:51 pm



CAFÉ SAN DIEGO

MPA Success Stories:

 Here's a look at the tangible results MPAs have yielded.

Jan. 6 -- 4:30 pm



COMMENTARY: SLOP

You're Corrupt? Get Out of Jail!:

 Convicts find freedom, the former city manager of Chula Vista heads to Iraq, and more tidbits.

Jan. 6 -- 7:22 pm



COMMENTARY: RICH TOSCANO

Another Resale Home Price Drop in December:

 The median-based price indicators closed out a dismal 2008 with another monthly decline.

Jan. 6 -- 4:06 pm


Copyright © 2008 voiceofsandiego.org. All Rights Reserved.