Blog of Otay Mesa

The following opinion editorial was in the L.A. Times on May 4th.  Very appropriate as it relates to San Diego and Otay Mesa also.  Thought you would find this fascinating.

An industrial-strength conundrum for L.A.; If we keep using factory land for housing and stores, what happens to those vital jobs?

 At a time when the local economy is shrinking and City Hall is already struggling to close a $406-million budget deficit, L.A.’s growing population is putting increasing pressure on city officials to build more affordable housing and create more middle-class jobs.Unfortunately, these needs sometimes conflict with one another, and they are conflicting today in what was once the industrial heart of Los Angeles near downtown and in Hollywood. There, City Hall has lately opted for housing over jobs by using L.A.’s industrially zoned land for purposes other than originally intended.Here’s the problem: With the aerospace industry largely gone, the two greatest sources of middle-class jobs in the city today are the garment and entertainment industries. By allowing more industrial land to be used for retail and housing, the city effectively limits the growth of those industries — and the jobs that come with it. At a certain point, the garment and entertainment industries may even leave town.Industrially zoned property — which makes up about 8% of L.A. — doesn’t get a whole lot of love from urban planners. It is usually separated into limited (warehouses or machine shops), light (furniture manufacturing or lumber yards) and heavy (car factories or rail yards) manufacturing, and is home to such things as old movie and television studios and auto repair shops.Much of the industrial land is concentrated where you would expect it to be — around LAX, the port of Los Angeles and in the garment district south of downtown along the L.A. River. But strands of it turn up in unexpected parts of town. There is, for instance, a major strip of land zoned for light industry that follows the freight rail lines running through the middle of the San Fernando Valley and ending in the Chatsworth industrial district. A large portion of the land in Hollywood is industrially zoned and houses support services for the entertainment industry.In 2005, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa declared to his department heads that “these industrial areas are a precious resource that, if lost or severely compromised, will be impossible to re-create.” Yet in the years since, the city has continued to chip away at the land.Its gradual erosion can be traced to two factors. The first is the city’s need to generate more sales-tax revenue. Retail development, by law, has always been permitted on at least 75% of the city’s industrial land, and developers have increasingly pursued the opportunity to build and operate big-box stores on it. Over the last decade, about half of the new development on industrial sites has been for commercial purposes.More recently, a second assault on industrial land has come from the city’s quest to add housing, both affordable and otherwise. Unlike retail, building housing on industrial land requires getting variances in the zoning laws, which the City Council has been increasingly willing to grant. One of the biggest such developments is Playa Vista, near Marina del Rey, which was once the site of an aerospace manufacturing facility but is now home to about 3,200 new housing units, with at least 2,000 more planned.It’s not hard to understand why residential and retail developers are increasingly eyeing industrial land in Los Angeles. A 2006 study by Keyser Marston Associates, a real estate consulting firm, looked at the price of land in the downtown area. It found that industrially zoned land — valued at about $38 a square foot — was far cheaper than comparable residentially zoned land — about $177 a square foot. That price difference has some affordable-housing builders, as well as market-rate developers, looking at sites in the garment district and in Hollywood that they previously would have ignored.The city seems all too willing to give up its industrial land. Two recent cases illustrate the point.In the first, the City Council, in pursuit of more affordable housing, overturned a Planning Commission decision that would have blocked construction of an 180-unit live-work loft project in the garment district. As a result, 2.5 acres of industrial land was lost, a possible location for future jobs.In the second case, the Planning Commission approved a 210-unit market-rate housing development on three acres of land that was previously the site of a local television studio. The commission’s rationale was that the new housing would be located near major bus lines, encouraging residents to use public transportation rather than cars.One problem with allowing residents to live in industrial areas is that once they become exposed to the noise, air quality and other environmental issues presented by their industrial neighbors, they often push for new, stricter regulations that effectively limit future use of the surrounding land for industrial expansion and job creation.It is certainly reasonable for the city to use industrial land to produce new revenue and create more affordable housing. But those gains must be weighed against the potentially more significant long-term cost to the city’s ability to give the garment and entertainment industries space to grow.Consider the entertainment industry. The small support businesses — lighting, sound, scenery and special effects — and major postproduction facilities in the county help keep the industry anchored to Southern California. And they are primarily located on available light-industrial land in Hollywood, the Valley and on the Westside.If L.A. doesn’t bank industrial land to support growth in the entertainment industry, that growth may go elsewhere. Because much of the entertainment industry these days is digitalized, it doesn’t matter if workers who put together movies, soundtracks and TV shows are looking at monitors in Hollywood, Phoenix or Salt Lake City.Garment manufacturers also may be squeezed out of their L.A. niche if residential complexes or big-box stores are built adjacent to them. And the same can be said for other industries — Web-based information services, biomedical research, green industries — that will fuel future job growth in the city.The city Planning Department and the Community Redevelopment Agency have been struggling to define a coherent industrial-land policy ever since Villaraigosa declared these areas to be a precious resource. The two came up with a draft in 2007 that puts the city’s industrial land into categories: either “to be protected,” “potential [for] mixed use” or “[in] transition.” It’s not hard to see that, under such a policy, the City Council could readily find a “community benefit” in converting industrial land to another use, further eroding the city’s industrial base and the jobs it supports.It makes little sense to talk about preserving the city’s industrial lands while at the same time approving selected housing and mixed-use developments on old industrial sites. Such a policy will generate revenue and add housing, but the wage-earners needed to fill the mixed-use projects will probably be working in Arizona, Colorado or Utah.Credit: Bill Christopher is an urban planner and a former member of the city Planning Commission. 

The group of developers who comprised the Otay Mesa Planning Coalition has formally asked the City of San Diego to reimburse them for $9 million dollars they say they have spent on the Otay Mesa Community Plan Update. 

That’s right $9 MILLION!! HERE IS THE LETTER THAT THE COALITION ATTORNEYS SUBMITTED QUIETLY TO THE CITY LAST NOVEMBER. COALITION REQUEST TO CITY LETTER .  This letter is 4 pages for your review.   The complete complaint including exhibits is 40 pages.  I have only included the Coalition letter without the attachments.  If you would like to be sent the full complaint please let me know and I will forward it on to you.  The story that has been consistently  told by the City and the Coalition the last 3 years was that the Coalition would 100% fund the Community Plan update and there would be no cost to the City, the community, or the taxpayers.  Furthermore the Coalition had agreed to pay for the Plan Update with NO GUARANTEES that their plan would be approved.  Well obviously that was A BIG LIE!!!

Thankfully, initially at least, the City has refused that request per their attached reply.  CITY RESPONSE TO CLAIM  But where is this leading to?  What is the next step in this boondoggle?  Stay tuned to Blog of Otay Mesa for further updates.

Last Wednesday’s Otay Planning Group meeting might have hit a new all time low.  Given the groups history that is saying a lot.  The Groups chairman Rob Hixson and other executive member members as well as their co conspirators at the City of San Diego have absolutely no regard for what is best for the Otay community nor do they care about following any policies and procedures for running a City sanctioned organization.  Because of their actions I sent the following letter to everyone i could identify who is involved in this malfeasance. 

March 25, 2008

Mr. Rob Hixson

Chairman, Otay Mesa Planning Group

VIA: Email and Fax

 RE:  Otay Mesa Planning Group Meeting held March 19, 2008 

Dear Mr. Hixson:

The Otay Mesa Planning Group meeting held March 19, 2008at the Otay Mesa Nestor Branch Library was full of improprieties and in direct violation of City council policy 600-24, the Brown Act, and all acceptable procedures for running a meeting of a City of San Diego approved Group.  These impropriates included:

1)      During the Chairman’s report Mr. Hixson discussed all communication that had been sent to the Planning Group in the last month.  He failed to disclose the letter I sent to the Planning Group dated March 16, 2008 and attached with this letterMissrepresentation letter.  This was a formal complaint that required compliance with City of San Diego Policy 600-24 Article 9. 

2)      During the discussion of agenda item 6C, Community Plan Update, there was a motion made by Mel Engals and seconded by Michael Murphy to place on the April Agenda as an action item taking a position on Otay Mesa Community Plan Update Option 4b.  During the discussion period of this proposed motion I made the point that the Planning Group Executive Committee members who had a Direct Economic Interest in this issue needed to recuse themselves from the motion and any further discussion on Option 4b.  The City Attorneys office was also concerned about Planning Groups and the Direct Economic Interest issue so much that on July 18, 2007 City Attorney Michael Aquirre met with the Otay Mesa Planning Group during which he outlined City Policy 600-24 and the ramifications of not adhering to the Direct Economic Interest section regarding indemnification of the individuals and the planning group as a whole for not recusing themselves from items that affect members.  Yet despite Mr. Aguirre giving this warning in person there are many members of the Otay Planning Group who have a Direct Economic Interest in Option 4b of the Plan Update including Mr. Engals who made the motion and Mr. Murphy who 2^nd the motion.  Mr. Muprhy even stated that he didn’t have an economic interest, since he had all his entitlements already.  Though as he is well aware if Option 4b is enacted the zoning for his vacant land fronting Otay Mesa Rdwould be significantly upzoned from Industrial to Mixed use, including allowing residential.  Even with my warnings regarding that each member should assess their economic interest before voting on the motion they all voted yeah to put the item on the April action item agenda.  Thus not heeding  Mr. Aquirre’s warning regarding Direct Economic Interest and recusing them from any action regarding this item.

3)      Election of Planning Group members.  This may be the most egregious violation of all acceptable and approved practices.  At the February Planning Group meeting Mr. Hixson passed out a sample ballot using the formula for Group composition is the proposed new bylaws that were passed by the group last October but have not yet been approved by the City of San Diego.  After witnessing this mistake in February I wrote the attached email to the Planning Group and the City.   I received back correspondence that the Planning Group should use the OLD or still existing bylaws until the City finished their review of the proposed new bylaws.planning group election email #1  I then wrote another email that is attached mentioning that according to the old bylaws the composition of the group is based on the build out percentages of the Mesa.  The composition changes depending on how much of the Mesa has been built out.  This built out calculation should have been included in the 2007 Annual Report from the Planning Group that is due to be submitted to the City by February 15^th 2008per Policy 600-24 and the Otay Mesa bylaws.  Unfortunately there was never an annual report filed and no build out percentages calculated.  This brings us to yesterdays meeting and the March elections.

Prior to yesterdays meeting I sent an email which is attached to Rob Hixsonchair of the Planning Group and Theresa Millette the City of San Diegos responsible party for the Otay Planning Group asking what the status of the March Elections were, given that they used the wrong sample ballot in February, and that there had been no new noticing for an election in March,   Even  March Planning Group agenda that was posted on the city website  Friday March 15^th  shows March Elections under the category of Information Items.  I received no response to my attached email prior to March 19th meeting.planning groupplanning group election email #2.  At the end of the meeting on March 19^th, Mr. Hixson passed out a new ballot reconfiguring people into the existing categories using the same build out composition as last year.  He stated that Theresa Millette said the build out percentages were the same as last year, but gave no back up, no documents showing the buildout calculations as required by the old bylaws..  Mr. Hixson then proceeded with the election.   I objected stating all my concerns that I mentioned above that an election cannot take place.  They proceeded none the less to hold the illegal election and seat the newly elected planning group. 

The above mentioned actions are just the latest in a continuous string of non compliance with absolute no regard to following all Policies and Procedures that the City of San Diego has outlined in how an approved Community Planning Group needs to operate.  It is not fair to our Community for a Planning Group to operate in such a rogue manner.  I ask for an immediate undoing of these illegal acts and for the Otay Planning Group to take the appropriate actions to rectify these wrongdoings.

Sincerely, 

Stephen M. Gross

President Bintional Logistics

Otay Mesa, CA

Cc:  Mayor Jerry Sanders

       Honorable Councilman Ben Hueso

       William Anderson

        Theresa Millette

        Bernie Turgeon

        City Attorney Michael Aguirre

        Assistant City Attorney Marianne Greene   

Otay Mesa Planning Group Executive committee

So far the Blog has not delved into the US Presidential Elections.  As the year progresses I plan on commenting and editorializing on the candidates especially when it relates to the Border, Free Trade, and issues and policies that could affect our way of life. 

Such an issue arose last night during the Democratic debates.  It seems that both Clinton and Obama are very much against Free Trade and specifically NAFTA.  Mr. Obama in particular lashed out at NAFTA and the offshoring of US jobs to China and Mexico specifically.    (here is an add Obama ran in Ohio paper http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2008/02/1obma.pdf)

But then on the other hand when the subject turned to Illegal Immigration and securing the border both candidates were very non committal and wavering regarding how the U.S should deal with our illegal immigration problem and the 12 million illegal immigrants already in the United States.

So they don’t want U.S. workers to lose out to jobs that are going to Mexican’s in Mexico, but it is okay then for U.S. workers to lose jobs to illegal Mexicans in the U.S?  HUH?  Aren’t the vast majority of the 12 million illegal immigrants currently in the US working in jobs that currently could be performed by U.S. workers? 

Someone is going to have to explain to me how Mr. Obama balances these two contradicting statements.

Seriously though, the rhetoric coming from Mr. Obama regarding NAFTA is worrisome for Otay Mesa, The Border Region and the US Economy as a whole.  Much more to be written on this issue in the near future.

After more than 15 years of being involved with business in Otay Mesa, it has become clear to me that operating companies here (manufacturers, logistics, and other industrially-oriented operations) really don’t have an organization that 100% represents their interests.  I have come to that conclusion after having served both as a Board member of the Otay Mesa Chamber of Commerce, and as an Executive Committee member of the Otay Mesa Planning Group. 

Let me explain, starting with the Otay Mesa Planning Group, an organization that is majority controlled by the Real Estate profession in Otay Mesa (including Developers, Property Owners, and Real Estate Brokers).  As Otay Mesa has developed, it was my hope (and would be logical) that this particular Planning Group would transition from a Real Estate controlled group to one that is more diverse and reflects the majority of the different “communities” and groups that now make up the vast majority of Otay Mesa. 

To truly reflect what exists in Otay Mesa, the Planning Group would represent both Residents on the West Side, as well as Business Owners and Operators on the East Side.  In fact, currently, more than 50% of the planned residential West side of Otay Mesa is built out, and over 50% of the Industrial East side is built out – so it would be a natural progression to integrate these proportions (and reflect the “true situation” of the Mesa) into this Planning Group.  Unfortunately, however, in yet another instance of gross neglect by the City over its many Planning Groups, the Otay Mesa Planning Group revised its bylaws late-last year and approved a non-representative makeup that included:

• 9 Real Estate Developers
• 3 individuals that supposedly represent homeowners on the West Side
• 1 individual from the Otay Mesa Nestor Planning Group
• 1 individual from the San Ysidro Planning Group
• 1 representative from the Otay Mesa Chamber of Commerce
• and 3 Operating Business representatives – which could include people from the Industrial area, companies that own real estate in Otay Mesa, or any person from an educational facility (i.e. San Ysidro High School or the new Southwest College facility).

Though I personally spent hours with the Planning Group, with officials from the Planning Department, and even our Councilmember, pleading the case for a more-balanced group – in the end, they approved a group structure that gives the biggest voice to developers (most of whom have a financial interest in maximizing their property values, not in creating a better community).  This also despite the fact the these same developers continue to promote placing housing in the middle of the region’s major center of industrial development.

Here you can see a letter from October 2007 that I sent to our current City Councilmember, Ben Hueso, Ben Hueso Letter with copies sent to Development Services at the City and Rob Hixson (the Chair of the Otay Planning Group…and a real estate agent for some of the same developers with something to gain).  The letter details many issues of concern with the Planning Group in great detail (many of which were even being looked at by the City Attorney’s office).  In what may be a sign of where allegiances lie, the Councilman NEVER responded to this letter….

The second group that represents many of the interests in Otay Mesa is the Otay Mesa Chamber of Commerce – which, after serving nearly 15 years on the Board, I resigned from last month.  The Otay Mesa Chamber (which I have also been President of) has long been a strong advocate for development and growth in  Otay – in fact, one of the only advocates for many, many years.  However, over time, the Chamber has become a more diverse – and compromised – group when it came for advocating on issues that mainly affect the operating businesses in the region.  A look at its membership shows why:

Of the over 350 members, about 90 (or approximately 25%) are physically located in Otay Mesa.  This document (from the Otay Chamber) Otay Chamber Membership Makeup shows that much of the membership is comprised of Real Estate representatives (over 30 companies), and a category entitled OTHER (over 190 companies) – which is often service providers who want to do business in the region, but are not located here.   My point here isn’t to say this is necessarily “wrong” – it’s a normal progression of many “regional” groups to include a wide variety of organizations that have a wide variety of interests.

Back to my point — currently, there are estimated to be over 800 companies that are physically located in Otay Mesa.  Looking at the Board of Directors, currently only 6 of the 15 Board Members have companies physically located in Otay.  Though for the majority of the issues that the Otay Chamber is focused on, this is probably acceptable, it is not acceptable when trying to reach consensus to aggressively fight such issues such as the Community Plan Update.

Why?  Well, in my opinion, the above mentioned makeup of the Chamber lends it to being more concerned about finding compromises and keeping as many parties that are involved with the Organization “happy”.  Included in this group is the City of San Diego itself, which provides over $40,000 annually to the Chamber’s budget from the Transit Occupancy Tax (TOT) funding.  So, politically, it would be easy to conclude that they are concerned about not “upsetting” our compromised 8^th District Councilmember, the Mayor (and his Sunroad friends, still active in Otay), or the City Staff – to avoid jeopardizing an important funding source.   

I’ve been an owner of a company in Otay Mesa for over 10 years, and prior to that I managed another logistics business.  I believe very strongly that the decision being made by the City (and pushed by Residential Developers) to site housing within the Industrial East End of Otay would ruin the great potential of the Mesa forever.  This is the defining issue for this region – which holds so much promise as a border crossing, a business, a high-tech industry, an energy center, and an air transportation community.  Once those first residential units are under construction (along with a new Elementary and High school to the East of Cactus Road) our community will NEVER be able to operate the same again. 

As we see in other areas of the County where developers have convinced the City to mix industry and heavier uses (…like trains next to condos? or houses and schools next to industry in Barrio Logan?), residents become voters, and voters begin to aggressively advocate for their interests – and then who loses?  The hundreds of companies that now call Otay their home, and the hundreds more that will occupy Otay in the future.  Trucks will be restricted on the streets they can travel (and risks of accidents with small vehicles will increase).  Manufacturing and logistics companies will further be restricted on what they can do, and when they can do it….  I think you get my point. 

So, given that the Otay Mesa Planning Group (i.e.: “Developers and their Friends”), and the Otay Mesa Chamber (i.e.: a strong, but divided group) are the two existing options that currently exist in Otay Mesa to render opinions, advice, and advocacy – but are compromised, and really only represent a fraction of the operating companies in Otay Mesa, what can we do? 

Maybe the answer is a new organization in Otay Mesa – one that is comprised solely of companies that actually operate in Otay.  A Town Council type of structure that represents only the Manufacturers and Logistic Companies in the region. This would allow a non-conflicted entity that could strongly voice opinions in a more aggressive and proactive manner on the Community Plan and other issues – without outside interests to distract it.  Such an entity could also be powerful, given that it represents hundreds of employers and thousands of employees that depend on Otay Mesa to operate efficiently to generate the economic engine that we have been able to create.

This is where I need your help.  What are your thoughts about starting this type of organization?  Is it needed? Would it be beneficial to the region?   Write me your opinion as to the strength of this concept.  Would it be formed replace the Otay Chamber or Planning Group – no!  But it would give the companies that call Otay Mesa their home (and their employees who depend on this region for employment) a stronger role in shaping what we want the Otay Mesa community to become in the future – and what we require for it to operate efficiently today. 

Hello All:

Iknow its been a while.  January has been a very interesting and eventful month.  Just have not had the time to write about it as of yet.  But don’t give up on me!!

One funny Otay Tidbit from today though.  At the Gas Station on Otay Center Dr where there is a Jack in the Box there has also been a Super Bronco Mexican restaurant and a Submarina Sandwich shop within the Mini-market Store.  They are located right next to each other and you walk up order your food at either one, wait for your food, then either eat at tables they have inside or take it to go.

Being close to my office I frequent either one of these restaurants probably 80% of the time i am in Otay for lunch because it is quick and close.  Well today I went in to get a sandwich and i noticed a change.  The Mexican restaurant apparently has bought out the adjacent Submarina and now we have a Superbronco Taco shop and a Subbronco Sandwich shop. 

Only in Otay!!! 

Welcome to 2008.  I have taken a few weeks off to recharge the mind and body and get ready for a year where many decisions will be made both Federally and Locally that will impact the future of Otay Mesa.  First Federally:

1)  An election year that elevates the National debate on many important border issues.  These include Immigration and Trade.  The immigration debate will focus on how to control our borders between the Ports of Entry, and at the Ports of Entry what type of increased enforcement will affect our border waits.  On the trade side there is the renewed call by some to modify or cancel NAFTA and become more of a protectionist country.  These topics will be debated by both Republicans and Democrats during the primary season and will be at the forefront during the General Presidential Election in November.

2) Locally, this is the year that the Otay Mesa Community Plan Update will come to a head.  A decision will be made by the City Council during 2008 on what the future of our community will encompass.  Will the City Council be influenced by the few powerful Residential Developers who want to construct houses in the middle of an industrial region, or will they realize the importance of this last remaining bastion of Industrial Land in the City of San Diego and the economic potential for the region. 

I look forward to opining, listening, and responding to these issues and many more during the coming year.  The one prediction that i know will come to fruition during 2008 is that it will be interesting, if not controversial.

At the December 4^th San Diego City Council meeting, the head of the City’s Land Use and Economic Development departments, Bill Anderson, formerly asked the Councilmembers to approve $850,000 to complete the Otay Mesa Community Plan Update [see the November 7^th blog article for an overview of the OMCPU]. $850,000 isn’t a bad deal – but, as with many of the goings-on in Otay’s community planning, there’s more to this than a simple request.

First, as the Independent Auditor noted in their report to City Council [http://www.sandiego.gov/iba/pdf/07_116.pdf], this unbudgeted request used up a large part of the City’s discretionary funds, leaving little else for other City needs or emergencies.  The Auditor also noted that documentation for this request was distributed with less than one day for public review or input – one of the several reasons the City’s own Independent Auditor recommended against approving this request until documentation justifying the cost could be provided by Mr. Anderson’s Planning Department and reviewed appropriately.

However, the City’s also been in a bind to move forward on finding the funds to complete this community plan, especially since the City finally faced the inherent “conflicts” with allowing a few powerful developers given an exclusive agreement to fund the entire plan update, and “officially” cut ties with them in July 2007.  This was one of Jim Waring’s last acts as COO of Land Use & Economic Development, in fact, although Planning Department’s interaction with the so-called Otay Mesa Planning Coalition and its fake-neighborhood group, the Otay Mesa Improvement Alliance has continued apparently unabated.

A November 7th, 2007, (DAVE NIELSON EMAIL) email between the Coalition’s chief strategist and consultant, Dave Nielsen of MNA Consulting, and Bill Anderson asked for a meeting to discuss  “xxxxxxx….  cost recovery”.  During the December 4^th Council deliberations, coincidentally, Councilmember Jim Madaffer noted that the Coalition (of developers) had already spent $4 million dollars on the Otay Mesa Community Plan Update [view it yourself at “http://granicus.sandiego.gov/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=3 ” , go to December 4^th, and when this video begins scroll down to item 501s].

Thus, we in the public are left with the feeling that – because a bad, sole-source agreement was made to allow developers to directly fund a community plan (and directly hire and oversee the consultants doing the work) – the City now owes these developers something.  Maybe even the rights to put housing in the middle of industrial Otay Mesa (next to major truck routes), because these developers have “contributed” such a large amount to this important public goal (er…I mean, “to update the entire community plan so that their property values increase exponentially”).

Well, what did the City expect when they formed this absurd relationship?  The City had to know years ago that these developers wouldn’t spend millions of dollar to update the community plan without getting something in return.  I don’t blame them (the developers) – these are not non-profit, public welfare organizations, but for-profit companies who don’t spend $4 million dollars without expecting results.  Though the City states from the start that they “did not guarantee” these developers their desired outcome, there was (of course) an expected (and now nearly inevitable) Quid Pro Quo for this level of investment. 

Not surprisingly, when (after over a year of public input) the Planning staff unveiled their so-called “draft 4^th Scenario” for the Otay Mesa community plan in October, it was no surprise that it was almost no different than the developer-financed and developer-preferred Scenarios #1 and #2 [see them here, and here – still promoted by the MNA’s “Otay Mesa Planning Coalition”].  Previously, the City staff had stated in public that this 4^th Scenario would be staff and City driven, and would take into consideration all the comments received from the community over the last few years.  This draft Scenario was finally unveiled in October – and showed the City’s true intentions: rezone Otay Mesa to fit the needs of such renowned developers as Sunroad, Mike Murphy, McMillan and de la Fuente, make these developers rich, and put a lot of children and families in harms way.

Such decisions didn’t come without the Coaltion’s input.  A Public records request shows emails between Coalition members and one of their real estate agents (Rob Hixson, also Chair of the Otay Mesa Planning Group) had met with City staff during late-August and early-September to discuss the supposedly staff-driven 4^th Scenario:

Mike Murphy Email Regarding Meeting with Bill Anderso

ROB HIXSON EMAIL REGARDING MEETING WITH BILL ANDERSON

ROB HIXSON EMAIL REGARDING OPTION 4

Yet, community groups, like the Otay Mesa Chamber of Commerce and others, that have been critical of the City’s process and the developer-created rezoning scenarios, were never allowed to provide such input. Nor was this input by the developer/Coalition proponents disclosed by the City at the “public” unveiling.  Thus, the 4^th Scenario and the continuation of the $4 million dollar Quid Pro Quo appear to have been kept in place. 

Four million dollars is a large sum of money to gamble on an “uncertain” change in a community’s zoning from industrial to residential, but it just goes to show the significant profit and dollars that are in play for these developers in Otay Mesa – at any cost to future residents and businesses.  Then again, who says that money can’t buy happiness and success at the City of San Diego?

It’s been a hectic week at work. Have not forgotten about you.  I’ll be writing some thought provoking blogs in the next few days. Please check back.  Have a great weekend.  Go Trojans beat the Bruins!!!

Steve

Well I hope everyone had a wonderful Thanksgiving and hopefully a few restful days off.  The Blogmaster is also an avid reader and lately have been concentrating most of my reading trying to understand the dynamics and potential consequences of what is going on in the middle east.  I truly believe that we are living in a very volatile world and the world is like a ticking time bomb waiting to explode.  The reading I have concentrated on lately is both Fictional and Nonfictional in nature.   I though  I’d share a few of my favorites for those of who looking for a good Christmas present to buy a friend or relative, or for those of you who want to get some sense of the complicated world we live in.  Here are four of my recent favorites:

1)  The Ezekiel Option by Joel Rosenberg:  Definately #1 on my list.  I am not a very religious person but this FICTIONAL book written on the thesis of Ezekiel in the bible was written in 2005.  It is a heart pounding, edge of your seat, spy mystery that intertwines many of the current state of affairs playing out in the world today with the bible.  It is not required that you have any previous knowledge of the Bible the book in a fascinating way will put all the pieces on the puzzle together for you.  A MUST READ!!

2)  Exile by Richard North Patterson:  Another Fictional novel that combines terrorists coming in through the Southern Border, an assassination in San Francisco, then a  journey to Israel and Palestine.  Again, although Fictional in nature, a througohly well resourced book that leaves  you wondering could this happen in real life?  Would it be that difficult?  A definite page turner that you can not put down.

3)  The Copper Scroll by Joel Rosenberg:  Another Fictional spy novel by Joel Rosenberg who has obviousiouly spent months researching the Dead Sea Scrolls and the current Political situation in the Middle East.  The novel is situated in Israel with International espionage and real life ramifications.  You should read the Ezekiel Option before you read the Copper Scrolls.

4)  Rigged by  Ben Mezrich:  A little different direction than the previous 3 books recommended.  I Just finished reading this new book that is NON FICTIONAL, but reads like a fictional spy novel.  It is  a real life story about a young Harvard Business Graduate who get a job at the New York Mercantile Exchange, the exchange that trades and controls a vast majority of Oil in today’s world.  The book takes you from New York to Dubai and gives a fast moving fictional like story of how  oil prices are traded and controlled by a small number of worldwide players.  Undersanding that Oil is more precious than Gold in today’s world it is alarming how low tech and unsophisticated the people who control the World’s Oil Supply can be.  BUT IT IS TRUE!!! 

In the next few days I will also post these books in a special section of the Blog for easier access.  Also if YOU have read any interesting books lately please let me know.  I am always looking for thought provoking books and I will post them on the Blog for everyone to enjoy.   

 HAPPY READING