voiceofsandiego.org: Slop... Mayor: Economy Killing Downtown Library
an independent nonprofit |
Support This Service

Mayor: Economy Killing Downtown Library

Published: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 3:06 PM PST



Mayor Jerry Sanders says it would take some kind of magic to salvage the concept of a new central library for downtown San Diego and that he can't picture how it would happen.

He said the long push for a main library downtown has been just about brought to an end.

"The economy has brought it just about to the end," Sanders said in an interview. "Reality is not going to allow a library of that type downtown."

The cost of the downtown library was last estimated in 2005 at $185 million. The estimate hasn't been updated despite fluctuations in labor and construction costs. The city has long set aside $80 million in taxpayer funds meant for downtown for the project. In addition, proponents counted on a $20 million grant from the state and they hoped to raise the rest -- $85 million -- from private donors. But only $3 million has been pledged for the effort since it was approved in 2002. Two-million dollars of that came from the owner of The San Diego Union Tribune, David Copley, who has been dissolving his newspaper and looking for a buyer for it.

Sanders said he expected the state to withdraw its grant for the project and that city money set aside for the facility will need to be freed up for other uses.

"We are going to need the money saved at CCDC for the Embarcadero and other uses," he said.

I interviewed Sanders for a column I'm writing about the budget controversy that has engulfed City Hall in the past few weeks. To deal with a shortfall in this year's budget, Sanders proposed that the city shutter seven libraries before the City Council rebuffed his move and located one-time funds to keep them operating for the next few months. The mayor has warned that the council's decision will pass along a $10 million shortfall to an already frightening budget taking shape for next year.

I asked him, just to be sure, whether he was saying that San Diego should wake up from its dream of a downtown library.

"I can't imagine that there's going to be any rabbits brought out of the hat now," he said.

That, after all, would require magic.

A member of Sanders' staff called back to clarify that proponents of the library can still prove its viability by raising the $50 million in private funds needed to break ground by the end of the year.

-- SCOTT LEWIS




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.)

The Library Foundation and Library Development Office has been a waste of space since they lost their seasoned development officer and hired a guy who only knows how to do direct mail (and that not very well). The Mayor said he would take the lead on fundraising and then disappeared from the project. The Commissioners and Foundation Board (who have lots of entanglements with each other) have been promising big donations for YEARS and not delivered. Yet the project is allowed to drift along so that Quigley can make lots of money for not building his monstrosity and the Library Foundation can pretend it does anything except take credit for other people's fundraising efforts. The whole thing is an embarrassment. The Foundation, the Development Office, the Main Library should all be shut down, and the money used for something beneficial for the library.

Posted by Leanne1 | reply to this comment
November 26, 2008 9:59 am

28 Comments so far on this story...

“Mayor: Economy Killing Downtown Library” I believe the Mayor would be much more correct to say, “The HUGE debt responsibilities our city has gathered over the last twenty years - is killing Downtown Library”

Posted by Iknowtodd | reply to this comment
November 25, 2008 3:14 pm

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day, Iknowtodd. For once I agree with you wholeheartedly. For those who continue to insist that this monstrosity be built, I say fine. Go for it. Just make sure that only private funds are used to finance the effort.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
November 26, 2008 7:53 pm

In many other cities, philanthropists would step forward to help support a new, state of the art, downtown library. Sure, they would want their respective names attached to a wing or a special collection or the whole library, but that's the "price" a community pays for such an amenity. Enlighten me, please, if I'm wrong, but San Diego just doesn't seem to have that kind of critical mass of deep-pockets families and foundations to support these kinds of civic and cultural treasures. But second, the plans I saw for the new downtown library seemed entirely too grandiose. Speaking only for myself, we ought to start over, integrate a new library into a new City Hall and Concourse complex, scale back on the garishness, and make the entire City complex happen through a public-private partnership, and incorporating philanthropic funding, as well. Otherwise, it won't get done.

Posted by Robert E. Lee | reply to this comment
November 25, 2008 3:28 pm

C'mon, Gen. Lee. You know that everybody is hurting right now. Why, even Warren Buffet is stretched thin. Deep pockets are not as deep as they used to be. What "ought" to be done, to use your word, is to drop the project forthwith. If any money is left over (like that is going to happen) it can be used to keep the branches afloat. To quote cranky, "it is a scandal" -- a scandal I tell you, not of the type Herr cranky has in mind, but that anyone in or out of their right mind might continue to shill for this project. Look, municipal business is to provide certain enumerated services and regulations. Get this burg out of the welfare business and back to municipal duties. That includes support for branch libraries -- the ones people use. Not for some ornament to bolster some people's persosnal pride.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
November 26, 2008 7:56 pm

I don't care if God herself came down and told Sanders that a new central library ain't gonna happen, just so long as we take whatever money has been set aside for this turkey of a project and use it in this time of need. Talk about a no-brainer.

Posted by Larry | reply to this comment
November 25, 2008 4:54 pm

Well the eighty million set aside will definately be helpful Now that the City is in such dire straits. Seems to me Henry, the $80,000,000.00 would be considered liquid assets, wouldn't it? So from my recollection, this would at least put a dent into our mid year deficit. If the Council Members would just stop spending money needlessly and with the hiring freeze (or thaw depending how you look at it) Our City will be better off financially than most municipalities in the state and far off from even considering bankruptcy. All luxuries need to be put off indefinately. Streets, sewers and some environmental restructurng should be our number 1 priority to keep this city functioning and attracting tourism.

Posted by Ron Weiss | reply to this comment
November 25, 2008 8:54 pm

I don't know what "environmental restructuring" means, but there IS a lot of waste at the police department that could be cleaned up. They could start by not having four or five units respond everytime a panhandler needs to be FI'd.

Posted by Larry | reply to this comment
November 26, 2008 6:50 am

Officer Ron Weiss!! I am surprised at you! Do I have to remind you, an officer of the law, that the number one responsibility of any city should be the safety of its citizenry, i.e., police and fire (but, of course, not with Rolls Royce pensions and overblown pay scales)? Number two should be infrastructure -- and that also primarily for the safety of citizens ..... THEN to draw in new business and tourists. New central library... hmmm, lessee. Nope. Not so much.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
November 26, 2008 8:19 pm

Well, it looks like the economic downturn has one plus: the charlatans who've been pretending to raise money for the downtown Central Library can put aside their false pretenses now and just go back to whatever it was they were doing before blowing a state library grant and misusing (without an ounce of accountability) a million dollars from some mayor or other to raise the money to get the job done. To say nothing of the big bucks paid to architect Rob Quigley for designing a DOMED edifice for a sunny and hot climate. Like so much else in this town, the Central Library saga has been a scandal. I was once a supporter of the idea -- even though the building was imperfect and the Ballpark location left a lot to be desired -- but now I am relieved that the project is dead as a doornail.

Posted by Fed Up | reply to this comment
November 25, 2008 10:10 pm

Duh!!! I am not an oaf.

Posted by Norman | reply to this comment
November 26, 2008 3:40 am

Think if you took the 80mil and used the income off it to fund updates and remodeling funds to the local libraries. The idea that we needed a "main" downtown library was ridiculous from the get go. The commitment should have been to replace and upgrade the local libraries.

Posted by MS Jordan | reply to this comment
November 26, 2008 9:33 am

I disagree that a Central Library downtown is ridiculous: every great city has a main library downtown. But we are just a fakey "finest city," not a great city, so I have scaled back my expectations. "Branch" libraries are just that: branches off a main center. This particular failure of civic philanthropy and vision is another disgrace, one among many.

Posted by Fed Up | reply to this comment
November 26, 2008 10:12 am

I am so glad you are accepting reality, Fed Up. I'd like to meet the man who first had the bright idea of "America's Finest City" (I am sure it was an aide to Pete Wilson, two or three levels down) so I could kick him in the shins. For one thing, truly great "things": cities, people, organizations, etc., don't go around trumpeting their greatness with such a silly, gingoistic platitude. For another, San Diego truly ain't a "great" city. What it is is a pretty little city, set in a very picturesque location, with terrific weather (in short, a wonderful place to live) with a fourth rate amateur government that squanders taxpayer money on all manner of useless projects and leads surreptitiously planted shills in cries for "more taxes!", while it spends, spends, spends. Yes, as you said, FAKE and DISGRACE.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
November 26, 2008 8:25 pm

Independent Budget Anal,yst report 08-114 of Nov. 10 about mayor's budget cuts says "these costs should be discussed to determine if new facilities are a higher priority than existing programs being recommended for elimination." Note that the mayor now wants the library funds used for new facilities to be built on the Embarcadero. He proposed eliminatiing existing facilities ,e.g. branch libraries. He puts luxuries ahead of necessities. If he tells you, this money can only be used downtown, don't believe him. Just say,Grantville. Besides which , the Redevelopment Agency owes the city $259 million. Centre City share of this debt is $116 million. Somehow, this debt is never mentioned by the mayor, the council or the Union-Tribune.

Posted by mel | reply to this comment
November 26, 2008 10:00 am

It is a scandal - but a scandal of ineptitude, not intent. A Central Library can be a catylyst for other development if it is considered as an attraction - and no one can fault Quigley for not delivering a design that provokes, delights and functions at mulitple levels. I tire of his firm's effort being ridculed by either rubes or those with legitimate beefs with the centrailized library concept or the funding. The design rocks. Give props where due, haters. The funding and sad history of the project speaks more about institutional malaise, malfeasance and lack of will. While the Library withers CCDC seeks developer proposals for Mayor Sanders' new office. The Port gives away Lane Field to an Indian Tribe and asks for only revenue in return.

Posted by cranky | reply to this comment
November 26, 2008 11:05 am

I don't think Quigley's design rocks. I think it's awful. But I agree with you about the on-going malfeasance re CCDC -- which owes the City money -- and the Lane Field debacle. Will this never end? Apparently not. We have much to be thankful for, but city fathers and mothers are not among our blessings, nor even those opiates of the masses -- the Chargers and Padres .

Posted by Fed Up | reply to this comment
November 26, 2008 8:24 pm

cranky, the design of the Auschwitz concentration camp could also be said to "provoke," but does that give it validation.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
November 26, 2008 8:38 pm

We could operate all the proposed closed branches for a year or two with the 4+ million paid to Quigley to date.....what a joke

Posted by Mr. Wright | reply to this comment
November 26, 2008 12:39 pm

The idea of a grand downtown library is outdated and a potential waste of money. I actually have used the downtown library frequently. Have any of you posters? Do you know how far most people have to travel to reach it? Or how hard finding parking downtown is? Visit the place and notice just how many school age children , who ought to be its main clients, are there. I'll save you the parking fees: There are very few to be found there. With the interconnectedness of the computer age we live in there is just no reason to let grandiose boosterism decide this issue. Instead, the ability to deliver library services throughout the city should be the primary concern. To get to that right, making library services available online or in the neighborhoods is the answer.

Posted by Bill | reply to this comment
November 26, 2008 5:54 pm

A massive downtown library may be an icon to the ingedients of a "great city," but it is not an ingredient that runs the risk of spoiling the overall receipe. We have already hawked future generations' spendable income to meet current demands and the 80 or so million that is in limbo can and should be used to prevent other budget shortfalls NOW. There is no reason that San Diego has not moved to offering WIFI technology that would allow citizens downtonn and in other areas to access the information highway at a much more reasonable cost structure. Years ago, Mayor Murphy's red-faced point man stood before CCDC and promised that if in 9 months the matching funds were not met, the project would die... Here we are once again, promised a sunset date that is twisted and turned to benefit a few special interests.

Posted by D Correia | reply to this comment
November 27, 2008 6:15 am

Libraries are a relic of the past. There is no reason in this day and age of digital that a book or reference material cannot be found on the internet.

Posted by Mike | reply to this comment
November 28, 2008 5:18 am

This issue was decided when John Moores used the Padres to gain control over our downtown. We're all paying at least $11 million a year for his ballpark, plus extra police and trolley services. We voted to make this happen, right after a bunch of snorting and shooting ringers took his team to the World Series. There was no VOSD...only media outlets with financial partnerships with the Padres. Moores got the ballpark, and we'll never have a library. Meanwhile he tans himself at a resort in the Bahamas...

Posted by Fred Williams | reply to this comment
November 28, 2008 7:24 am

And don't forget those darn bonds are still owned by Bank of America. They were never refinanced. And now CCDC is using redevelopment dollars to pay them. That is obscene. Those bonds need to be refinanced and payed out of the general fund. The voters VOTED to pay for the ballpark out of the general fund NOT with redevelopment $$$. If Mr Moores had not got into an ugly divorce, I bet $40 or so million for the library would have come out of Beck and John Moores pocket. Now it is going to their lawyers. Remember San Diego is still a town.. and no where near a city...

Posted by Another Joe | reply to this comment
December 2, 2008 4:44 pm

Joe, the promise made to voters in 98 was that TOT would pay for the bonds, NOT the general fund...but Moores never built the promised offices and hotels...and as a recent downtown study says, "Billions of dollars worth of public revenues, borrowing capacity, land and other resources have been used to construct largely privatized downtown spaces." (http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/2/3/8/4/8/pages238488/p238488-1.php) San Diego used scarce tax money building Moores his stadium, and DIDN'T fund the pension, or parks, libraries, or public safety. The general fund is being raided to enrich billionaire John Moores, and it's just wrong.

Posted by Fred Williams | reply to this comment
December 12, 2008 3:20 pm

when was the last time any of you, unless you're homeless, set foot inside the downtown library? ever? a downtown library is a huge mistake in a city/county such as san diego. re-model the current facility, modestly, and push the bulk of the operating funds out to the branches. those are where the vast majority of people and schools are; hence the need and priority.

Posted by the truth | reply to this comment
November 29, 2008 1:34 pm

We do not need a library. We need to be left alone to enjoy the fruits of our own labor and to decide for ourselves how our money ought to be spent. The council seems so silly to me, or maybe they are only in denial about the future of San Diego and our country. For certain they are ignorant and immoral. But that includes our government and half the population of our nation, so what is the difference.

Posted by pauli | reply to this comment
November 30, 2008 2:59 pm

I agree with you -- in very broad terms -- although I have a sneaking suspicion that the one-half of the country to which refer is my half. I don't agree with that, if that's the case. We do need libraries (i.e., our local branch libraries) for the time being, but a new age is rapidly coming where these institutions, as we know them, will be superfluous. We have already long since left the stage where some institution is needed to pass out John Grisham novels, DVDs, the boulevard press or any other manner of things readily available for sale. Can't afford it? Then you probably shouldn't be reading or watching it anyway. I say hold onto and nurture the branches until we really do reach the golden age of information. After that, let them go -- and don't even start with a silly central library.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
November 30, 2008 7:48 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
cdf765a

Scott Lewis on Politics

The Scott Lewis on Politics blog, abbreviated cleverly as SLOP, is a collection of observations, insights and the occasional scoop on public affairs in San Diego. Please feel free to e-mail Scott at scott.lewis@voiceofsandiego.org.


Listen to voiceofsandiego.org's radio program on AM 600 KOGO: Latest Episode (November 8): Scott Lewis and Michael Zucchet talk about the city's budget

Subscribe to the Podcast Feed



MOST POPULAR STORIES:



MOST POPULAR STORIES:


Copyright © 2009 voiceofsandiego.org. All Rights Reserved.