voiceofsandiego.org: Contributing Voices... <span style="display:block;font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif; color: #5F5F5F; font-size: 9pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; margin: 0px; text-transform: capitalize;">Tenth Avenue and Proposition B</span>Wresting Control from the Port Octupus
an independent nonprofit |
Support This Service

Tenth Avenue and Proposition BWresting Control from the Port Octupus

By Frank Gallagher



Wednesday, Oct. 8, 2008 | Why did the San Diego Unified Port District spend hundreds of thousands of dollars of public funds to try to keep Proposition B off the ballot?

Fortunately, they lost.

But, when more than 62,000 voters signed petitions to put Proposition B on the ballot, the Port District went to court to try to stop the election.

When the courts ruled in favor of the voters, the port appealed -- and lost again. Once more, the question is: Why?

Here's what's at stake: 97 acres of prime San Diego waterfront property south of the Convention Center. Proposition B will give the public the right to determine what happens with this property.

Some real estate analysts value this property -- even in today's distressed market -- at more than $1 billion and say that it could generate hundreds of millions of dollars annually for cash-starved local governments.

Moreover, as development along San Diego Bay marches steadily southward, the value of this property keeps increasing.

The special interests that control the Port District, on the other hand, want to keep control over this prime acreage. The Port District is so alarmed by the prospect of losing control over this property that they have embarked on a fear campaign. The centerpiece of their campaign is the completely false assertion that Proposition B will somehow eliminate marine freight from San Diego and allegedly cause severe economic harm to the region.

But, the facts are just the opposite. Written into Proposition B is a legal requirement that marine freight must be preserved. Let's look at what Proposition B really does:

One: Proposition B will not cost the public any money -- not one cent. There are no ballpark-style subsidies, no hidden tax breaks and no ticket guarantees. Instead, Proposition B will generate public revenues -- and potentially a steady stream of taxes and revenues that could help pay for police, fire protection, roads and schools.

Two: Proposition B calls for a visionary "decking" of the terminal, in order to permit cargo offloading, parking, and other commercial uses to continue at ground level while a pedestrian waterfront promenade and a variety of other public uses can be developed on the top deck.

The Port District has criticized this decking proposal as "impractical" -- but the engineering technology exists. What's lacking is the vision that looks forward and sees a dynamic future for San Diego. For example, almost 100 years ago, in New York City, the operators of the New York Central Railroad developed a plan to put the railroad yards leading into Grand Central Station underground. Today, the "deck" above those tracks is called Park Avenue and is the site of some of the most exclusive hotels, offices and homes in the world.

Three: Proposition B requires the Port District to seek proposals and public input to put the Tenth Avenue Marine Terminal area to better public use. In other words, the public -- not the special interests who control the port -- will determine how this property is utilized.

Below is a list of possible ideas for this site. None of them are required by Proposition B. The final decision will be made through a public process and not in secret, closed door meetings:

  • open space for walking paths next to the harbor

  • a new soccer/football stadium

  • expansion of the Convention Center
  • a new cruise ship terminal
  • a new sports and entertainment arena, like the Staples Center is Los Angeles

  • a world class aquarium, such as Monterrey Bay Aquarium

  • 10,000 parking spaces for Petco Park and the Convention Center.

What's your opinion? It should count. Each of us should have their favorite from the above list of uses and others that should be added. Use your own vision for San Diego's future.

Proposition B requires agreements with all interested community groups.

One more point. Proposition B requires the project to meet strict standards set by a wide range of federal, state and local governmental agencies, including Homeland Security Administration, the Department of Defense, the California Costal Commission, the city of San Diego, the California Regional Water Quality Board, the San Diego Air Pollution Control District, and many, many others. The redesigned terminal will also provide a higher level of security for the military strategic port requirements than what currently exists.

Fortunately, the port's opposition has met its match. The initiative process in California was created in 1911 to wrest control of the political process away from special interests like the port. Back then, the Southern Pacific Railroad, often called "The Octopus," controlled the Legislature, the courts, even the press.

Today, in San Diego, a local version of the Octopus has been reborn as the Port District. The local Octopus wants to protect its financial interests and those of their business friends.

But, thanks to Proposition B, on Nov. 4 the decision will rest with the voters.

Frank Gallagher is leading the effort to pass Proposition B. You can reach him at csc@cts.com. The piece is part of a week's worth of commentary for or against Proposition B and discussing the future of San Diego's harbor. Join it here.




6 Comments so far on this story...

You are wrong in that engineering technology exists for your current plan. There is no possible way that your world renown consulting engineering firm CH2M HILL link told you that your plan is feasible or practical for this specific location. Two to four active strands of the active Silver Strand Fault of the active Rose Canyon Fault Zone (RCFZ) traverse the site on liquefiable soils making the south side of the property off limits for your proposed elevated deck. link The only mitigation and engineering solution available for active fault lines is to avoid them, provide buffer setbacks, and not build right on top of them. What was the real analysis from CH2MHILL regarding building over an established Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone? If it exists, please provide the voting citizens with a due dilligence letter from CH2MHILL saving the site is safe, free from natural hazards.

Posted by La Playa Heritage | reply to this comment
October 8, 2008 4:09 am

Frank, based on the way you conducted yourself at last month's South Bay Economic Forum, I'm not convinced the public will have their say if Prop. B passes. The abrasive and dismissive manner in which you answered questions from paying attendees was an insight into how any future "stakeholder groups" would be dealt with. Yes on B isn't about generating millions of dollars for "cash-starved local governments," it's about making millions for yourself and your friends. Meanwhile, the community most at risk - Barrio Logan - will be gentrified, rents will rise, and Cesar Chavez Park will be eliminated with the stroke of a pen. Does anyone really believe that 24/7 loud and dusty maritime trade and luxury hotels and massive family-friendly tourist attractions can all coexist on the same property? And - you never answered the question at the forum: why no EIR?

Posted by UTC | reply to this comment
October 8, 2008 8:25 am

This dream creates quite a bit of hotel real estate development and low wage service jobs........the two last things that San Diego needs right now. Public resources for a professional sports complex? I would rather see our energies directed at public mass transit systems and developing a manufacturing/indust base for job creation (real economic growth). The Port is correct in protecting San Diego's precious industry based resource from spurious and short sighted hotel developers with ties to the NFL.

Posted by John Dutch | reply to this comment
October 8, 2008 10:02 am

Mr. Gallagher: Granted the Port District is a badly flawed agency, which needs to be made more responsive to the public. But how would passing your own special interest proposition designed to further enrich you the the Chases by handing you control over publically owned tidelands improve the situation? It would only make things worse. Please go back down your hole and let the public deal with the Port.

Posted by Watcher | reply to this comment
October 8, 2008 10:19 am

This measure isn't about letting citizens decide the fate of 97 acres of prime waterfront. This measure is about forcing the port to do business with you. Nobody can put together a development plan for that area in 60 days and you know it. Prop B is a land grab, pure and simple.

Posted by Larry | reply to this comment
October 8, 2008 10:33 am

Prop B is a land grab and it will never fly. Can it now and be done with it.

Posted by Billy Bob Henry | reply to this comment
October 8, 2008 5:59 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
d1dff6b



MOST POPULAR STORIES:


Copyright © 2009 voiceofsandiego.org. All Rights Reserved.