Redevelopment is dead, as VOSD on Facebook.

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

    Stay up-to-date on stories like this. Sign up for a VOSD newsletter.

    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

    Registered users can follow narratives, comment on articles, check donation history and more.

    If you’ve never logged in before, please create a free account. If you’re a VOSD member, please use the email address associated with your donations.

    Forgot Password?
    New to VOSD? Create an account

    ×
    Test Modal
    • Note: You cannot change your username.
    • Minimum length of 8 charactersStrength indicator

    ×
    Sign Up For the Morning Report and Top Stories

    Sign Up For the
    VOSD Morning Report

    Get San Diego’s top stories delivered to your inbox each morning.

    To stop this message from appearing, Log in or Register.

    ×