bike-voice
help-us-raise
donate-button

     

    Redevelopment is dead, as VOSD on Facebook.

      This article relates to: Government, News, Redevelopment
      Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

      Written by Andrew Donohue

      17 comments
      Fred Williams
      Fred Williams subscriber

      Put it all together, and it's clear that Donahue's claim is misleading...not Huckster Propaganda, or totally False, just inaccurate and distorting of the truth.

      Fred_Williams
      Fred_Williams

      Put it all together, and it's clear that Donahue's claim is misleading...not Huckster Propaganda, or totally False, just inaccurate and distorting of the truth.

      Andrew Donohue
      Andrew Donohue subscriber

      velopment's death, the city of San Diego made a brazen move. It sought to lock away $4 billion in future redevelopment money decades into the future.We put together a graphic explaining what it was spending the money on and where.The move may have been brazen. But the city doesn't seem so sure it will work.The City Attorney's Office said the law that killed redevelopment also allowed the state to challenge and unwind certain types of deals."So that might throw into question a lot of what went on with that $4 billion in allocations," said Jonathan Heller, the city attorney's spokesman.The lawyers, he said, are pouring through the documents.

      adonohue
      adonohue

      velopment's death, the city of San Diego made a brazen move. It sought to lock away $4 billion in future redevelopment money decades into the future.We put together a graphic explaining what it was spending the money on and where.The move may have been brazen. But the city doesn't seem so sure it will work.The City Attorney's Office said the law that killed redevelopment also allowed the state to challenge and unwind certain types of deals."So that might throw into question a lot of what went on with that $4 billion in allocations," said Jonathan Heller, the city attorney's spokesman.The lawyers, he said, are pouring through the documents.

      Omar Passons
      Omar Passons subscribermember

      There's alot of misinformation about the impact of not having redevelopment as it has existed in San Diego. Whether you are for or against redevelopment, there are objective sources to help understand the real possible impacts, where the funds do or don't go and so forth. There is reliable information on the city's website about the nuts and bolts. This site is generally good about the research for its stories, especially ones that have objectively verifiable information like this topic. The best part of this thing is that it seems to be engaging us citizens more. Hopefully we will all seek to know the real costs of repairing and maintaining our city and the services associated so that we can help our officials evaluate what alternatives are appropriate for our community.

      omarpassons
      omarpassons

      There's alot of misinformation about the impact of not having redevelopment as it has existed in San Diego. Whether you are for or against redevelopment, there are objective sources to help understand the real possible impacts, where the funds do or don't go and so forth. There is reliable information on the city's website about the nuts and bolts. This site is generally good about the research for its stories, especially ones that have objectively verifiable information like this topic. The best part of this thing is that it seems to be engaging us citizens more. Hopefully we will all seek to know the real costs of repairing and maintaining our city and the services associated so that we can help our officials evaluate what alternatives are appropriate for our community.

      David Hall
      David Hall subscriber

      What a nice way to end 2011.

      sdguy
      sdguy

      What a nice way to end 2011.

      Frances O'Neill Zimmerman
      Frances O'Neill Zimmerman

      Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me that whenever the basic redevelopment mechanism is threatened (as now) we hear a lot about "affordable housing," but when it's business as usual, it's about stadiums and lucrative private enterprise.

      Thomas Shepard
      Thomas Shepard subscriber

      This article -- and all others I've read on this subject -- overlook the Cooperation Agreement signed between the city and the agency last year that committed most of the projected tax increment revenues for the forseeable future to specific projects in the redevelopment area. It's my understanding that the city provided the state with a complete listing of those commitments as required by the state legislation, and that the state had a set time period to challenge those commitments, and that the state did not challenge them. If correct, this means the state will be getting zero redevelopment dollars from CCDC in the forseeable future.

      Campaigns
      Campaigns

      This article -- and all others I've read on this subject -- overlook the Cooperation Agreement signed between the city and the agency last year that committed most of the projected tax increment revenues for the forseeable future to specific projects in the redevelopment area. It's my understanding that the city provided the state with a complete listing of those commitments as required by the state legislation, and that the state had a set time period to challenge those commitments, and that the state did not challenge them. If correct, this means the state will be getting zero redevelopment dollars from CCDC in the forseeable future.

      Mark Giffin
      Mark Giffin subscribermember

      Doubt it but perhaps

      mgland
      mgland

      Doubt it but perhaps

      Chris Brewster
      Chris Brewster subscribermember

      One thing to remember: A key architect of the bill that was found unconstitutional was Nathan Fletcher. Note in this VOSD article - http://bit.ly/h7VDKl – that the bill was, “secretly worked on for months.” (Always nice to hear about secrecy in government.) As well, “Local Republican Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher, who brokered the deal, defended it as a big win for San Diego and emphasized that the bill guaranteed all school funding.” Well, that cigar has now exploded.

      B Chris Brewster
      B Chris Brewster

      One thing to remember: A key architect of the bill that was found unconstitutional was Nathan Fletcher. Note in this VOSD article - http://bit.ly/h7VDKl – that the bill was, “secretly worked on for months.” (Always nice to hear about secrecy in government.) As well, “Local Republican Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher, who brokered the deal, defended it as a big win for San Diego and emphasized that the bill guaranteed all school funding.” Well, that cigar has now exploded.


      ×

      Log In or Register

      If you’ve never logged in before, you must first create an account. If you’re a VOSD donor, please use the email address associated with your membership.

      Registered users can check donation history, follow narratives, comment on stories, and RSVP for events.

      Forgot Password?
      New to VOSD? Create an account

      ×
      Test Modal
      • Note: You cannot change your username.

      ×

      cow-modal