San Diego City Council President Ben Hueso is on a tear. Just in the last week he has: formed a legal defense fund; provoked a discussion about whether his term as president should be longer than the established one year; provoked another discussion about the city seceding from the county of San Diego; and pushed a park to get some restrooms the U-T says residents don't want. He's also going around town scheduling meetings to apparently lay the ground work for tax increases.
So what do you do after so much action? Party!
A flyer is circling among some city insiders inviting them to a "private reception" at the Logan Complex. It will be "recognizing the accomplishments of City Council President Ben Hueso" with a hosted bar and hors d'oeuvres.
I was curious as to whether this was an event to not only recognize the council president (whose only been the council president for a month and a half) but also to persuade people to start filling up that legal defense fund.
I called to see if tonight's event indeed was a fundraiser.
Spokeswoman Michelle Ganon said no, "It does not ask people to bring their checkbooks. It is definitely not a fundraiser."
The event, she said, was being sponsored by artist Ron Miriello.
Since renovating The Logan and moving to Barrio Logan in 2007, Miriello Grafico has helped nudge ahead the evolution of the Barrio. When San Diego Councilman Ben Hueso asked to have his celebration event at The Logan -- we had to say yes.
The newly elected president of the San Diego City Council was born and raised in Barrio Logan and still lives in Logan Heights. About one hundred of his friends, key supporters and fellow politicians will use The Logan as party central, to celebrate both Hueso’s political success and to demonstrate the positive re-use of former industrial space for professional and creative endeavors -- like Miriello Grafico.
Party on.
Remember the City Council's IBA wrote that the mayor was being "presumptuous" in assuming that the city would have to ante up $4 million more next year to cover the cost of the massive software overhaul the city's trying to implement? This is the affectionately dubbed Wild ERP project.
The IBA says it's presumptuous for the mayor to think there's going to be an increase in costs because the increase would have to be approved by the City Council and that body has a lot of questions still about this project. So she struck it from the list of liabilities the city will have to face in coming years.
But here's a question, if it's presumptuous for the mayor to assume, in his five-year financial outlook, that the city will have to come up with another $4 million for this, isn't his whole five-year outlook presumptuous? After all, the City Council has to approve almost all city spending. The mayor just makes recommendations.
I wonder why this mayoral assumption was worth calling presumptuous.
The U-T also took note Monday of the LA Times' scoop that the Chargers had hired a marketing firm in Los Angeles.
Two things stand out.
One: Reporter Ron Powell called Chargers' Special Counsel Mark Fabiani and Fabiani, true to form, was able to say a lot with a little.
But Mark Fabiani, the team's general counsel and point man on stadium issues, said: "This has nothing whatsoever to do with the team staying or going. Fans shouldn't be more concerned than they already were."
Don't worry a lot fans, just worry enough.
But this is what really stuck out at me:
Chula Vista Mayor Cheryl Cox, contacted yesterday afternoon, said she had not heard about the marketing push and has not spoken with team representatives since April.
Let me see if I understand correctly: The Chargers have maintained still that Chula Vista is their top priority in their search for a stadium in the San Diego region. Cox is no longer distracted by the Gaylord Entertainment push to build a convention center and resort on the Chula Vista bay front. She had said she couldn't talk much about the Chargers until that happened. To be clear, she is distracted by the financial collapse her city's experiencing.
So you're telling me that the Chargers' supposed best hope for staying in the San Diego region is to work with a city at the brink of financial catastrophe whose mayor has not spoken to the team at all in nine months?
And, at the same time, Los Angeles is on the way to building a stadium (led by a friend of the Chargers' owner); the Chargers are hiring people in Los Angeles to generate enthusiasm for the team in that vastly more populated and wealthy region; and the team is reminding everyone that it's been working on getting a new stadium here for seven years and it is anxious to point out that they're closer to the end of a search for a new stadium than the beginning.
From yesterday's latest LA Times rendition of the "Chargers Are Coming to Town:"
While the league is kicking around the notion of playing the 50th Super Bowl in L.A. -- where the first one took place -- the onetime L.A. Chargers appear to be inching closer to a possible return to their birthplace.
As is always the case with the on-again, off-again saga of the NFL's flirtation with the nation's second-largest market, nothing is written in stone. In fact, it's more like murky skywriting, completely at the mercy of the fickle winds of change.
So, Charger fans, there's nothing to worry about except what you were already worried about.
Keep those thoughts coming on both the solar power initiative and Hueso's idea to get the city its own county.
Okay, Scott, how about this: You and I make a friendly wager on whether the Chargers stay or eventually move (back) to L.A.? I'm already on record, as someone who used to work in media and advertising, that the NFL *really* wants a team back in L.A., media market #2, with its billions of ad dollars across all media (TV, cable, Radio, newspaper, the Net, etc.). Again, it's a matter of when, not if...
Fabiani conveniently neglects to mention the nearly $100 million we already gave them to stay here until 2020, the ticket guarantee, and substantial infrastructure and public safety expenditures on the Chargers all along. The Spanos clan NEVER intended to honor its word to San Diego, and will do anything to milk us dry before skipping town. This move to LA was preordained when McGrory and Golding did the deal, and we've been paying ever since. Before the Chargers leave, can the Mayor, DA, or City Attorney do something to get our money back?
Since the Raiders and Rams left LA 14 years ago, 20 new stadiums have been built for the NFL and 2 more are being built. I would say that the threat of moving to LA has been much more lucrative to the NFL in extorting new stadiums from cities, then the money they would have received from the market itself from having a team there. At this point they have made about all they can from the LA threat, and it is time to move a real team back to the area. As for the Chargers, it is preposterous on its face to pursue an LA marketing effort and a relocation to Chula Vista. Oceanside possibly, but last I looked Chula Vista was even further from the LA/OC market then they are now, not closer.
Can we get Ben Hueso to move to LA and keep the Chargers? LA is a beautiful place for people without substance. It's the Shangri-La of self important people partying on fame without accomplishment. For weeks now, I have been reading and listening to the media declare Hueso as some sort of dynamic new leader. Has any of this crowd actually listened to Benspeak? If he didn't have the City Clerk coaching him along, he'd have a tough time chairing a council meeting. I guess being an order taker has strong appeal to the let's do nothing; but, look like we're doing something crowd. As to the Chargers, they have had a full press media blitz going on this week. They're everywhere. Question: Where has the mayor of SD been, on this topic, for the last four years?
Question: Did Hueso set up his new legal defense fund to pay for his past ethical mistakes, or to defend himself for the crimes he's planning to commit?
"LA is a beautiful place for people without substance. It's the Shangri-La of self important people partying on fame without accomplishment.". Sounds a whole lot like good ole sunny San Diego. Maybe we are just a clone of LA after all.
Even I, who loathe professional football, would be willing to keep the Blots -- I mean Bolts -- in order to get rid of slimy City Council President Ben Hueso who has more chutzpah even than Chargers spokesman Mark Fabiani. Hueso has had the unmitigated gall -- is there any other kind? -- to open a legal defense fund to protect against Ethics Commission findings that he has overstepped the rules of his game. How do we manage to keep on getting such losers in high City office? As one writer said, it must be Aguirre's fault. Or maybe the fault lies with the local establishment which works a quid pro quo with these ciphers. Or maybe it's the knee-jerk jerk voters who never demand anyone better. I do know that Hueso wouldn't last ten minutes up in LA.
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
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
PRINT 
E-MAIL STORY
SHARE
FACEBOOK
REDDIT
NEWSVINE
DIGG
DEL.ICIO.US
BLINKLIST
Don't want to miss a story? Want to be the first to know about breaking news? Sign up now.