EMPOWER SAN DIEGO - Latest Blog Entries

San Diego “Portland Loo” Project to be Delayed Longer than Expected

Wed, 21 Dec 2011 16:50:00 -0600

A project suggested to City Council by Girls Think Tank over a year ago still has not seen the light of day

December 21, 2011—San Diego, CA. With the end of the fiscal year approaching fast in June, there is only so much time to change the budget conversation in San Diego. Like Empower San Diego, fellow non-profit Girls Think Tank (GTT) has taken steps to convince the City Council to use valuable tax-payer funds for projects that benefit the less fortunate. GTT has been working for nearly 2 years to get the City to install 24 hour access public restrooms as a part of their Basic Dignity Campaign for San Diego’s homeless.

The group thought they had succeeded when $700,000 was earmarked to install two so-called “Portland Loos” in downtown San Diego. Unfortunately, the project has been delayed for a year with little apparent reason. The homeless of San Diego that so desperately need access to clean water and restrooms have not seen the results due to complications in San Diego redevelopment. However, the issue was already being 'slow walked' before redevelopment was in jeopardy. Proponents question what the City was doing with the approved money in the 16 months after the project was approved since redevelopment has only been in question since August of 2011.

GTT first proposed the loos in early 2010 to City Councilmember Marti Emerald of District 7. Compared to the $200,000 spent to maintain two 24 hour public restrooms in Civic Center and the Gaslamp Quarter, the Portland Loo only costs $24,000 a year to maintain. In addition, these stand-alone restrooms are also very eco-friendly with their solar panels and low flow toilet, are graffiti proof and louvers that make it easy for police to monitor them without invading privacy. With encouragement from Councilmember Emerald, the City Council approved the plan to install one loo on 14th and L Street next to Tailgate Park and one on 11th and Market Street near a dog park.The cost of maintaining the Market Street loo would have been covered by the owners of the dog park and the other by the Downtown San Diego Partnership under a one year pilot program.

However, the loos may not get their first flush till the state Supreme Court makes a decision about the future of redevelopment. In August of 2011, a lawsuit challenging the state’s overhaul of local redevelopment put the Portland Loo project into further jeopardy. Legislation that required cities to dissolve their redevelopment agencies or make annual payments to the state in order to go through with redevelopment has been challenged. Thus, redevelopment activity will have to wait until the outcome of the suit is decided on January 15th of 2012.

On Saturday, November 19th of this year, GTT held a press and community conference in the very park that a Portland Loo was promised and demanded that the City Council address the ongoing lack of clean water and restrooms for the homeless of downtown San Diego as “a public health issue and human rights issue” and find other sources for funding the project. Noor Kazmi, president of Girls Think Tank believed holding the event on World Toilet Day brought attention to the need for clean water and restroom facilities for all. The conference concluded with a march around the transit center. Kazmi promised that the next GTT event like this one would be “more coordinated and more over the top.”

The future of Portland Loos remains uncertain as setbacks in redevelopment are a barrier to their installation. However, it is certain that the city had been delaying the project even before redevelopment became an issue. For now, we can take comfort in organizations like the Girls Think Tank looking out for homeless persons’ livelihood when the city will not.

by Lara McCaffrey, Community Action Reporter, EMPOWERStudents!

Gus Chavez Resigns from Union Tribune's Latino Advisory Council

Thu, 15 Dec 2011 19:43:00 -0600

Open letter to the Latino community from Gus Chavez

Members of the San Diego Union Tribune Editor's Latino Advisory Council,

"It is with deep regret that I take this time to inform you that I, effective immediately, chose not to be a member of the Council due to the recent changes in ownership of the newspaper. While welcomed public announcements regarding journalistic and editorial integrity have been made by the new owner, Chairman & Publisher Douglas F. Manchester, I remain concerned and skeptical that forward progress in reporting news as well as editorial fairness influenced to date by the Latino Advisory Council may be short lived.

My withdrawal from the Council is also driven by the fact that a son of mine is gay and whose life style is in direct conflict with the personal philosophy of the new owner Douglas F. Manchester as demonstrated by his open financial support for the passage of Proposition 8. Needless to say my personal philosophy and my love for my son is in direct contrast to Manchester's position regarding personal freedoms desired and enjoyed by Americans.

I commend the work of the Latino Advisory Council on many fronts, however, much more needs to be accomplished if the Union Tribune wants to be nationally known as a first class superior newspaper that is inclusive of the journalistic needs of all communities in the region.

I give special thanks to Mr. Jeff Light, Editor, for being open to our suggestions and taking action on our recommendations for change that bring the Union Tribune closer to the Latino community.

My son will soon be home for a joyous family Christmas gathering and I just felt compelled to disassociate myself from the Union Tribune for the reasons stated in this communication.

I plan to share my withdrawal from the Council with members of the Latino community".

Sincerely,

Gus Chavez

Annual Report for 2010

Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:15:00 -0600

Annual Report for 2010

Civic Engagement

Community Power

County Board of Supervisors Considers Handing over Redistricting to an Independent Commission

Wed, 16 Nov 2011 12:45:00 -0600

return to News

Although a step in the right direction, redistricting may not be as democratic if handed over to a commission of retired judges.

November 15, 2011-- San Diego, CA. Thanks in part to the efforts of the Communities in Unity Redistricting Coalition (CIU), the San Diego County Board of Supervisors is considering a move that would forfeit their redistricting powers to an independent commission. However, the proposal brought forth by Supervisor Greg Cox would have the commission made up of panel of retired judges. Although enacting an independent commission to draw up district maps is a step in the right direction, a panel of citizens representing the various communities in San Diego would ensure a fairer redistricting process, said speakers from the public, during the County Board of Supervisor’s meeting on October 11th.

Supervisor Cox claimed retired judges were the best choice for a redistricting commission because judges would be more objective than a panel of citizens and retired judges were more likely to be impartial. Cox used the redistricting process of 1991 as a model for his proposal—this redistricting was conducted by judges after the state legislature and Governor were unable to agree on a map. By many accounts, the judges produced a non-partisan map.
The Board, save for Supervisor Bill Horn, were ready to accept Cox’s proposal. “The people have spoken twice and they don’t want elected officials doing their redistricting,” said Supervisor Pam Slater-Price, referring to the newly formed State Redistricting Commission.
Horn believed that those who objected to redistricting by politicians did not speak for the majority of San Diegans and were trying to change a system that was not broken. “It seems like we are reacting to a very vocal minority that came in here at the last moment during what I thought was a very fair process,” said Horn. “I don’t want to let a small vocal minority change a system which I think is very fair—we’ve proven to be fair.”

The CIU thought otherwise. The original map, presented to the Board by their advisory committee, failed to included what the ACLU argued was a legally required “majority-minority district” in the South Bay. In the face of this legal argument and mounting public pressure, from the CIU and even the Union-Tribune Editorial Board, the Board of Supervisors finally approved a map that better recognized the voting rights of communities of color.

At last month’s meeting, a few slight modifications were made to the proposal but the importance of having a panel of citizens was shot down. Slater-Price agreed with Cox that the redistricting process of 1991 proved that judges had merit and were best suited to the task of drawing new districts. Ron Roberts said that judges were not necessarily unbiased but were the best choice for the job.
Speakers at the meeting commended the Board for the steps taken towards an independent commission but recommended more citizen input in the redistricting process. “Although appointing a commission of citizens seems cumbersome, sloppy, potentially argumentative, political and messy—it is also democratic,” said Brian Pollard of the NAACP. “The democratic process is also cumbersome, sloppy, argumentative and political yet it is the best process in the world.”

Creation of an independent redistricting commission is a step in the right direction, even if it is a late decision. The new process will not affect the current supervisors because of term limits, they will be out of office by the time redistricting comes around again. Hopefully, those chosen for the next redistricting will be representative of the diversity of San Diego County. Retired judges are the best choice according to the Supervisors, but perhaps a citizen panel is the perfect choice.

by Lara McCaffrey, Community Action Reporter, EMPOWERStudents!

Fall Benefit

Mon, 31 Oct 2011 14:01:00 -0500

return to News

Empower San Diego Fall Benefit

"Prioritizing Our Communities"

Emcee:

Donna Frye, Former San Diego City Councilmember

Thursday November 10th, 2011

6:30 pm

Home of Bill Powers

4821 Lomitas Drive

in Univeristy Heights

(Intersections are Adams Ave. & Park Blvd.)

Tickets: $20

RSVP to emily@empowersandiego.org

Sponsorship Available

Join Us to:

Honor our Progressive Champion of the Year

ACLU of San Diego Imperial Counties & Lori Shellenb

Look forward to EMPOWER's next project to ensure a fair and equitable budget in San Diego!

EMPOWER San Diego is a non-profit organization which brings communities together to open the halls of power and improve policy outcomes for everyday residents. We hold a set of progressive values that emphasizes inclusive, transparent government and the creation of a sustainable, equitable and just society.

return to News

City Council Passes Tourism Marketing District Extension with 7 to 1 Vote

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 00:20:00 -0500

return to News.

return to City Hall Watch Project.

Although the benefits of this possibly illegal ordinance have not been quantified, the Council believes its potential return on investment will be beneficial to the City of San Diego.

San Diego’s tourism industry is one of the city’s strengths. Tourists flock here to experience the restaurants, hotels, nightlife, beaches and history San Diego has to offer. City Council and the hoteliers see this industry as one that potentially could rake in enough revenue to help the economy. Enacted in 2008, the Tourism Marketing District Ordinance (TMD) was meant to do just that. The TMD allows hotels to charge a 2% tax most hotel guests which is used to promote tourism. City Council gave the TMD a 40 year extension on Tuesday, September 27th in hopes that it will benefit the economy. However, opposition fears this possibly illegal ordinance will fail to bring money made by the hoteliers to benefit the whole City.

Although City Attorney Jan Goldsmith claims that the TMD is exempt from Proposition 26, its legalities are questionable. Now Article 13 of the California State Constitution, this law was put into effect in November of last year to define the definition of fee hikes that require voter approval. Opposition to the TMD ordinance believes its extension will violate article 13 if not put on the ballot. Dan Rottenstriech, a representative of the Hotel Worker’s Union claimed the exemptions listed by the City Attorney do not apply. “I am positive the courts will reject it,” Rottenstriech said.

“’TMD works for me’—that’s what I see on a lot of people’s lapels today,” said Lorena Gonzalez of the San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council referring to stickers hoteliers wore bearing the message, “Well it does work for them, but it doesn’t work for everyone.” During her testimony, she argued that this marketing plan would only help wealthy hotel owners, not their employees or the City of San Diego.

Trinh Le, an organizer at Center for Policy Initiative agreed that underrepresented neighborhoods would not benefit from this tax and also noted that money give to this marketing plan could have been put to better use. “1 billion dollars are not going to fix our streets or keep our libraries open,” Le said. “Instead, a small group of hotel owners will control the money.”

Emily Serafy Cox of Empower San Diego pointed out that letting a small group of elite hoteliers controlling the tax money would mean a lack of tax oversight. “The hotel industry is not an elected body and should not be controlling tax money,” Serafy Cox said.

Hotel owners testifying argued that tourism benefits both hotel owners and workers.They claimed that the TMD will keep the hotels busy and therefore create long term jobs. Many of their workers are part of low income communities, therefore the hoteliers argue, the money will “seep out” into poorer districts.

Members of the tourism industry talked about the potential their businesses could have if the government could help them market. “30 million people-- you’ve heard the number—come to San Diego every year,” Scott Hermes, an employee at the Sheraton Harbor Island Hotel said. “We need the money in order to convince them to come here versus the many other choices they can go.”

The Council, except for David Alvarez of District 8, were not swayed by the opposition’s testimonies and sided with the hotel industry. The council members stressed the importance of tourism in San Diego. “We need this industry,” Kevin Falconer said. The tourism sector is one that has the potential to make money for San Diego they argued.

Once the Council approves a plan for spending money and the hoteliers vote on the extension, the TMD is allowed to take affect. Once this is completed, how soon will San Diego be able to benefit from the TMD? Todd Gloria of District 3 believed the TMD has had a positive impact on his district and its extension will “create vitality in neighborhoods that need it.” However, the office of the Independent Budget Analyst Report admitted in 2007 that calculating benefits of the TMD is impossible. As of today,
no decisive quantifying study on this ordinance exists.

Tuesday’s meeting was disappointing to many in low income communities. Rottenstriech best voiced the thoughts of them and other dissidents: “this represents a paradigm shift to how the City is spending tax dollars in our City instead of helping our core city services.”

We can only hope this is not true.

by Lara McCaffrey, Community Action Reporter, EMPOWERStudents!

return to News

Mayoral Forum Press Conference Today

Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:57:00 -0500

return to News

San Diego Mayoral Forum Press Conference presented by A Better San Diego www.abettersandiego.org

Press Conference to promote A Better San Diego Mayoral Forum is being held on Wednesday, Oct. 19, 2011at Balboa Theatre starting at 6:30 p.m. San Diego mayoral candidates Congressman Bob Filner and Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher have agreed to participate in the Mayoral Forum, while Councilman Carl DeMaio and District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis have declined invitations.

Click Here to read press coverage of this issue.

Mrs. Norma Chavez-Peterson, Director/Lead Organizer for Justice Overcoming Boundaries, and other A Better San Diego coalition members will deliver a pre-forum address to call attention to Wednesday’s Mayoral Forum and call on candidates Carl DeMaio and Bonnie Dumanis to participate. Chavez-Peterson and coalition members will be available for interviews following the address.

Meet San Diego Mayoral Forum moderators:

Norma Chavez-Peterson (Justice Overcoming Bounderies)
Lorena Gonzales (San Diego Labor Council)

Preview the San Diego Mayoral Forum being held the following night at Balboa Theatre. Following with Questions and Answers session, and get the chance to discuss why other major mayoral canidates are not participating.

ADMISSION: This event is FREE and open to the general public. Call for details. To reserve your seat for the San Diego Mayoral Forum, go to www.abettersandiego.org.

"Once social change begins, it cannot be reversed. You cannot uneducate the person who has learned to read. You cannot humiliate the person who feels pride. And you cannot oppress the people who are not afraid anymore." -- Cesar Chavez

return to News

City Council Passes Preliminary Statement of Work to Contract out Miramar Landfill Operations

Wed, 12 Oct 2011 09:24:00 -0500

return to News.

return to City Hall Watch Project.

Council hopes that handing over operations to a third party contractor will save San Diego taxpayers money

written by Lara McCaffrey
Despite protests from environmentalists, landfill workers and community activists, the City Council decided to take another step towards contracting out Miramar Landfill operations to a private company. The statement of work will not come back the Council for final approval. They will not vote on the issue again until the vote to approve the final bidder. In the meantime, the final contract will need to address all details of landfill operations. Handing off operations to a private contractor is risky—they are more likely to cut corners to save money and increase production due to the lack of transparency. Any errors that result of sloppy work could have hazardous results for the environment and San Diegans’ health.

The City Chambers were almost filled completely at the City Council meeting on September 26th where the statement of work was presented. Protesters of the statement of work held up neon signs and wore stickers reading “KEEP OUR LANDFILL PUBLIC”. Twenty three speakers gave testimonies warning the Councilmembers of the potential hazards of contracting out operations to a third party. The speeches given were backed by statistics and facts that were hard to ignore. There were very few supporters of the statement of work—only three spoke in favor.

When it was time for Councilmembers’ questions and comments, tensions were running high between the eight politicians. The argument focused on allowing managed competition although the “ifs” in the contract were overwhelming.

Councilmembers David Alvarez, Todd Gloria and Marti Emerald all agreed that if “it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” and opposed contracting out operations of the landfill. Alvarez quizzed Mr. Hill and the staff presenting the statement of work on data and statistics. When they could not provide the answers he was looking for, he answered his own questions with information his staff had provided earlier. “I understand you say that ‘you think that’ but we like to make data driven decisions,” said Alvarez, who was disappointed with the lack of data presented.

Gloria deemed the potential costs and hazards too great to pursue the statement of work. He argued that the council should find ways to extend the life of the landfill by increasing compaction and make changes to the fee booth even if operations were contracted out. The fee booth currently only accepts cash and check—Gloria believes credit cards should also be accepted. He also argued that the booth should have cameras installed to increase security because sums of $25,000-$30,000 are handled at the booth daily.

Although Sherri Lightner expressed her doubts with the preliminary statement of work she surprisingly voted “yes”. Young also voted “yes” expressing that he believes contracting out operations will save San Diego taxpayers a lot of money.

The preliminary statement of work passed five to three with Gloria, Alvarez and Emerald voting “no”. The chambers were filled with groans of disappointment.

For those unhappy with the outcome of the meeting, there is still hope for a turn around. The Navy, who owns the landfill, could reject the statement of work. Also, companies vying for control of landfill operations could fail to put up an acceptable bid. This happened when Mayor Jerry Sanders had tried to privatize the landfill earlier this year. Allied Waste, Waste Management and Austin-based Texas Disposal could not agree to a bid with the city of San Diego. Texas Disposal reportedly told the Union Tribune that “the deal had a great deal of financial risk.”

Currently, the lack of supporting data has not convinced the opposition—even if they do support managed competition.

“We’re making policy without data,” Alvarez told the council. “We can make gain with managed competition but we’re not going to gain anything here.”

return to News

The Allies of CIU during Redistricting

Wed, 12 Oct 2011 09:14:00 -0500

return to News

The Communities in Unity (CIU) Coalition formed in January, with participation from the LGBT Redistricting Taskforce, the 4th District Town Councils Redistricting Committee, the Latino Redistricting Committee, Coalition of Asian Pacific Americans for Fair Redistricting (CAPAFR), and community leaders from areas including: City Heights, the Historical Barrio District, Rolando, and East County, National City, and South Bay. Also present were key community allies from Labor, CPI, JOB, League of Conversation Voters, CSA, ACLU, and Latinos y Latinas en Acción.

A detailed list of successes of the Communities in Unity Coalition are viewable on the Redistricting San Diego page here.

Backround on Strong Mayor Form of Government

Tue, 11 Oct 2011 09:00:00 -0500

The Passage of Proposition D

In November 2004 a five-year trial of the Strong Mayor system of government was approved by voters and initiated on January 1, 2006. Previously, a City Manager form of government made decisions regarding the City of San Diego. In the City manager form, the City Council held more power with a mayor whose role resembled that of a CEO on a board of directors.

With the passage of Proposition D in the June 2010 Primary, the Strong Mayor form of government became permanent. As a result, a ninth council district--with an estimated cost of $1-1.5 million per year--has been established. Each district will allocate 18,000
people to the newly created ninth, and all district boundaries will be redrawn. With the use of collected 2010 Census data, a citizen Redistricting Commission will redraw the district boundaries of San Diego.

Gloria Penner, host of KPBS program San Diego Week, discusses the passage of Proposition D with senior metro reporter Alison St John

Opinion piece from 2010:

Strong Mayor/Strong Council Form of Governance

The current form of city government is literally on “trial.”

In June 2010, voters will decide by special ballot whether to continue the current form of government, which gives the Mayor the duties previously assigned to the City Manager and removes her or him from the City Council. Most simply, the public vote will decide these three things:

1) Shall the “Strong Mayor” Form of Government remain permanent? (And shall the City Charter be reformed to reflect this?)

2) If yes, shall the City Council add a 9^th district (to compensate for the loss of the Mayor and provide an odd number of council members, which facilitates majority voting)?

3) If yes, shall the City Charter be amended to require that the Council produce a two-thirds majority to override Mayoral decisions?

More than merely a tidy separation of legislative and executive powers, as some continue to argue, rather this decision requires the public to understand, analyze and vote on a complex nexus of issues that continue to baffle and perplex city officials as they attempt to gather the information necessary to educate themselves and then the public.

When City Council re-opened this conversation, Empower San Diego board member Quiroz spoke during public comment and pointed out that the ballot initiative’s title communicates a bias that should be avoided when producing an impartial analysis. That is, continuing to refer to the “Strong Mayor” Form of Government leaves voters to assume that a weak form of government is the alternative. The City Council’s current preparatory actions focus on how to make the necessary changes to accommodate this form of government, rather than a balanced approach, such as budgetary and legal analyses that explore what might occur should voters decide that the trial form of government fails to adequately address the problems that precipitated it.

On October 28, when this “information item” was discussed, the representative from the city attorney’s office insisted that the “Strong Mayor” wording should be retained to avoid confusing voters. The remaining legal analysis focused primarily on the preferred nature of revisions to the Charter—either a short version amending Article 15 or an “interlineated” version that would distribute changes throughout the document. Some emphasis also was placed on the presentation of the ballot and the scheduling of future ballots to approve the amendments.

During the discussion, Councilmember Gloria emphasized that the “Strong Mayor” wording fails to represent the legislative and executive branches as “co-equal” branches of government, and that previous information gathering and assessments should be consulted. Councilmember Frye concurred that a rigorous analysis would investigate how the reassigning of powers reflected an intention to balance legislative and executive powers. Councilmember Faulconer attempted to historicize the trial form of government in terms of creating more accountability in city government by assigning executive powers to an elected official, namely the Mayor, rather than to an unelected official, namely the City Manager.

The deadline for preparing the ballot is in late February, and the ballot will be subject to the vote in June 2010. A host of questions remain.

Will voters receive balanced, unbiased and timely information? What are the alternatives to “Strong Mayor”? What is the plan for providing that information?

by Annie Lorrie Anderson-Lazo, Ph.D.

Home Defenders League to Battle Foreclosure

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 15:07:00 -0500

return to News

return to City Hall Watch Project

The Home Defenders league becomes the first San Diegan grassroots effort to step up to the challenge of battling unrestricted foreclosing

written by Lara McCaffrey, EMPOWERStudents! policy intern

Few San Diegans have tried to convince the government to put an end to the foreclosure crisis. Organized groups that are battling foreclosures, mortgage fraud and other homeowner related issues are few in numbers. Fortunately, the newly formed Home Defenders League made up of the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE), Center on Policy Initiatives (CPI) and like-minded San Diegans have begun their own battle against foreclosures. Their mission is to bring attention to the issue, get more people on board, convince the government to step in and let the banks know that their days of unchecked foreclosing are over. Although in the stage of catharsis, this movement has the ability to spread with the right steps.

At the planning meeting on August 31st at the City Heights Public Library, participants discussed possible strategies to move forward with the foreclosure battle. This session was led Home Defender’s League members Carlos H. Mejia and David Lagstein and attended by homeowners facing foreclosure, predatory lending and mortgage fraud victims, members of other local activist groups and concerned San Diegans that wanted to help put an end to foreclosures. Although their numbers were few, their passions were high and due to the large scale nature of the problem—their plans were lofty.

Some ideas discussed were straightforward such as picketing banks and sending letters to pressure public officials. However, some suggested strategies that were more complicated and required more planning meetings. For example, filing an injunction which requires an attorney or entering in a dialogue with the banks. These difficulties were discussed during the planning meeting and ultimately the majority in attendance agreed that these could be feasible as well, it was just a matter of taking baby steps. “Our research must be good, be patient…” Lagstein told the anxious group. “Organization takes time.”

The leaders already had opportunities for action planned. Their first action opportunity occurred the next day, Thursday, September 1st at Make Wall Street Pay to Heal America event sponsored by the California Nurses Association. On Wednesday, September 14th, ACCE plans to bring a large group of supporters to the Land Use and Housing Committee’s hearing on the Property Value Protection Ordinance. Introduced by Councilmember David Alvarez of District 8, this ordinance will require banks to upkeep houses they foreclose to in order to protect the house’s property value. In the long run, this will discourage banks from foreclosing homes because it will force them to spend more money and energy keeping these vacant homes up to to code.

Another meeting participant had plans of his own concerning battling predatory lending. Ishmael Rodriguez organized a private lending protest with other local homeowners Rafael & Nina Navarro after becoming a victim of predatory lending. He claims that predatory lenders in San Diego are targeting low income neighborhoods such as Sherman Heights and Logan Heights. The protest is set to take place September 27th at 10:30AM at 13038 Maritime Place and will be supported by Congressman Bob Filner.

These events are just the beginning for the Homeowners Defenders League. This budding organization is the first of its kind in San Diego but will hopefully help spur a greater movement throughout California and eventually to the United States. Perhaps it will help answer a concerned Home Defenders League member named Laurie’s question:

“We’re reaching a peak!” she told the group. “What’s happening to our country?”

Hopefully we’ll find out.

SIGN THE PETITION HERE

City Council to Consider Property Value Protection Ordinance

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 14:43:00 -0500

The San Diego City Council will consider pursuing an ordinance that will place responsibility for foreclosed homes in the hands of the banks that own them

written by Lara McCaffrey, EMPOWERStudents! policy intern

At the September 14th Land Use and Housing Committee meeting, the City Council encountered a bigger crowd than usual. More than forty people turned up to listen to a report from the Center on Policy Initiatives (CPI) and Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE) regarding the Property Value Protection Ordinance, also known as the Foreclosure Ordinance. So many people lined up to speak in support of the ordinance that Committee Chair Sherri Lightner of District 1 had to limit public comment to one minute instead of three. The Committee could not take action on the ordinance that meeting, but its supporters’ presence and words convinced the Committee to pursue possible adoption of the ordinance in the future.

The ordinance would make banks responsible for the grounds keeping of homes they choose to foreclose and require a registry of all foreclosed homes in the city of San Diego. Often foreclosed homes are uncared for eventually become run-down and when this happens, the home is a public nuisance to a neighborhood—an eye sore that can encourage crime. If the ordinance is enacted, banks will face a fine of $1,000 per day if they fail to care for the home. Although proponents admit it does not solve the foreclosure crisis, they say the fines will slow foreclosures because the banks will now have to put more money into a foreclosed home.

Council member David Alvarez of district 8 was inspired to introduce this ordinance to the committee after listening to residents in his district complain about a nearby vacant home’s increasing state of disrepair. He found out that Bank of America owned the home—it had been foreclosed. After attending an event on foreclosures hosted by ACCE and CPI, Alvarez felt the Property Value Protection Ordinance was worth pursuing.

Although Alvarez sympathized with speakers’ concerns regarding foreclosures, he warned the supporters that this would not bring an end to the foreclosure crisis. “I don’t want to give false hope of what the ordinance would do,” he told the hopeful crowd. However, he expressed he would like to give city attorney Jan Goldstein the ordinance to draft.

Council member Todd Gloria was also interested in pursuing adoption of the ordinance. “I was living in a complex where there was a foreclosure,” he said. “It became occupied by squatters who refused to move… I hate to make this about me, but politics is personal.”

Council member Kevin Faulconer of District 2 was more wary. He grilled ACCE Executive Director David Lagstein on the costs of adopting the ordinance and its similarities to the Abandoned Housing Ordinance previously introduced by Gloria. “I’m reluctant to move forward on another ordinance…” he said. “Why didn’t we include the registry in Mr. Gloria’s ordinance?”

Lagstein explained the Property Value Protection ordinance was more aggressive in battling foreclosures than the Abandoned Housing ordinance was. “There’s a piece that’s missing with dealing with foreclosed homes,” said Lagstein. This new proposed ordinance contains elements that will directly address problems associated with foreclosures better than the previously proposed ordinance would have.

To conclude discussion on this item, Lightner announced the committee could not take action on the ordinance right away but would work on getting a report out from the City Attorney.

For now, those in neighborhoods with foreclosed homes will have to sit tight—but how much longer can they wait? In between the years of 2008 and 2012 there will be 56,689 foreclosures. That number will only increase if laws monitoring foreclosing are absent.

SIGN THE PETITION HERE

2010 Progressive Champions Awards

Thu, 22 Sep 2011 23:43:00 -0500

In May, Empower honored awardees for their contributions to the san Diego region as "progressive Champions" San Diego Councilmember Todd Gloria, served as emcee, as we honored Colin Parent, founder of the New Leaders Council, and Lorena Gonzalez, CEO and Secretary-Treasurer of the San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council, AAFL-CIO.

In August, Empower held yet another awards ceremony to honor 'Progressive champions" in the South Bay. Hosted by Chula Vista Councilwoman, Pamela Bensoussan, the event honored Laura Hunter, Associate Director for Programs at the Environmental Health Coalition and the members of Friends of Friendship Park.

Empower would like to thank the recipients of the "2010 Progressive Champions" Awards for their efforts on behalf of our community.

Empower Supports Voter Empowerment!

Thu, 22 Sep 2011 22:24:00 -0500

Empower San Diego supported two voter empowerment bills this year- SB 397, Same Day Voter Registration carried by Senator Ron Caleron, and SB 641, Online Voter Registration carried by Senator Leland Yee. Same Day Registration would have allowed eligible citizens to register and vote all the way through election day. Currently, citizens must register to vote 15 days before an election to exercise their right on election day.

Online Voter Registration would allow our state and counties to implement a system for people to register to vote via the internet. Both Bills have the potential to increase turnout in the state, especially with younger voters, and also decrease costs and administrative headaches to the state and counties.

Unfortunately, Same Day Registration failed to pass this year. However, Online Voter Registration still lives on and now awaits Governor Brown's signature to be passed into law. Please read and sign the petition here requesting his signature.

Action Alert: Tell the County About Your Community!

Mon, 29 Aug 2011 17:46:00 -0500

return to SD Redistricting

Action Alert!  

Tell the County Board of Supervisors to respect the voting rights of Latinos in North County!  
Advocate for your community of interest in mid-city/District 4!

 The County Board has decided to redraw their redistricting map to account for the voting rights of Latinos and African-Americans in the First District in South County. The Board, however, does not seem interested in making changes to other districts as mapped in its original plan.

Unless we speak up, Escondido will continue to be split off from the rest of the Hwy 78 corridor and remain in District 3 with more affluent communities to the South and West with which it has little in common. One of the many negative results of this split is the fracturing of Latino voting power in North County.

In addition, La Jolla is poised to be moved into District 4 with Mid-City communities, and Lemon Grove and Spring Valley will be in District 2, divided from similar communities of interest.

Please email or send a letter to each of the Supervisors today to ask them to:  1) unite the Hwy 78 corridor communities of Oceanside, Vista, San Marcos, and Escondido; and/or  2) unite Lemon Grove and Spring Valley with similar communities of interest in District 4.

You can start with these sample letters: (Mid-City/District 4 Letter; North County Letter), using one or more of the sample sentences and adding your own personal knowledge of these communities. We want to avoid form letters.

Where to send letters:

District 1, Greg Cox: greg.cox@sdcounty.ca.gov 
District 2, Dianne Jacob: dianne.jacob@sdcounty.ca.gov 
District 3, Pam Slater-Price: pam.slater@sdcounty.ca.gov 
District 4, Ron Roberts: ron-roberts@sdcounty.ca.gov
 District 5, Bill Horn: bill.horn@sdcounty.ca.gov

County Administration Center
1600 Pacific Highway, Room 335
San Diego, CA 92101

return to SD Redistricting

Empower San Diego Repudiates Inaccurate KUSI Report on City Redistricting

Tue, 19 Apr 2011 15:39:00 -0500

April 19, 2011

Empower San Diego Repudiates Inaccurate KUSI Report on City Redistricting

On April 18, 2011, KUSI News aired a grossly inaccurate report (“Controversy surrounds latest redistricting effort”) about Empower San Diego’s role in the City of San Diego’s redistricting process. Relying on false information, the report suggested that Empower has improper influence on two commissioners whose appointments the organization endorsed.

The report featured the San Diego County Republican Party’s chairman falsely stating that Empower was “created for the sole purpose of lobbying the [redistricting] commission,” even though the organization was incorporated in 2008 as a 501(c)(3) non-profit, non-partisan organization and has worked on a variety of community-based initiatives, including census
outreach and an award-winning “get out the vote” effort. The report also described Empower as a “union-backed group,” when in fact Empower has received less then one percent of its funding from unions. The report went on to claim that Empower influenced the appointment of the redistricting commission’s chief of staff, but the organization had no involvement in that decision.

Additionally, the report falsely suggested that Empower is a political group trying to influence the outcome of the redistricting process. “The only effect Empower is trying to have on the process is increasing public participation. We want to see members of the public--average citizens rather than the usual political insiders--learning about the issues and making sure that their voices are heard by the commission,” explained Empower president Graham Forbes. In this regard, the report failed to mention that Empower has encouraged the commission to take steps to increase the transparency of the redistricting process and the opportunities for public participation--all without taking any position on how district boundaries should be drawn.

The report’s inaccuracies are also troubling because Empower’s treasurer called KUSI News several days before the report aired and offered to provide information about the organization’s activities and financial resources in order to ensure that the report would be accurate. The call was not returned.

In response to the report, Empower is asking KUSI News to go on the air and immediately correct the inaccuracies.

Empower is proud of the work it does to increase public participation in government decision-making, especially on matters like redistricting. Empower looks forward to continuing its work to ensure that the commission operates transparently and that every member of the public, regardless of political affiliation, has a meaningful opportunity to participate in the redistricting process.

For more information on KUSI’s report, please contact Empower treasurer Cory Briggs (619-221-9280 or cory@briggslawcorp.com).

You can view the story here: http://www.kusi.com/story/14470377/controversy-surrounds-latest-redistricting-effort

Miramar Landfill Privatization

Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:17:00 -0500

by Jenevieve Bayaua

In February, Mayor Sanders had acknowledged the fact that a possible sale of Miramar Landfill was unattainable and instead decided to outsource operations to private firms. To get a better idea of the landfill's condition, the city spent half a million dollars towards consultant firms. Because this effort was ideally supposed to reduce the city's $56 million budget deficit, workers were running on a rapid time line. Additionally, the U.S. Navy, the owner of the landfill site, had also mentioned previously that at least a year was needed to sign off on raising the volume of the landfill. In the end, it was concluded by the hired consultants that the landfill only had ten years at best until it reached maximum capacity. Through these numerous complexities, the deficit has been raised to $61.9 million and nothing has been finalized in terms of the landfill's future. However, it is projected that the Mayor is in fact planning to move forward with managed competition for the landfill, regardless of the compact timeline The Rules Committee is scheduled to meet on April 27^th to debate public utilities customer service and street sweeping.

Please sign this petition to take action against privatizing this landfill and other utilities that are meant to be public: http://action.foodandwaterwatch.org/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=6551

EMPOWER San Diego Facilitates Refugee Involvement in Redistricting

Fri, 08 Apr 2011 23:36:00 -0500

San Diego’s redistricting process will have to keep a large community of refugees in mind as it looks to re-draw the lines. EMPOWER San Diego helped facilitate conversations among local refugee leaders on redistricting. Out of those conversations came the Refugee Redistricting Taskforce.

Click here for the story from KPBS.

Redevelopment: Abolish or Reform?

Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:41:00 -0600

The Affordable Housing Coalition and the Grantville Action Group
present a community forum:

Redevelopment: Abolish or Reform?
A Community response to Governor Brown's proposal to abolish redevelopment
agencies

Date: Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Time: 6:30 pm
Place: The Salvation Army's Door of Hope in Birdland (Serra Mesa)
2799 Health Center Drive (Vista Hill Avenue & Health Center Drive)
San Diego 92123

We will discuss the Governor's budget proposal to eliminate redevelopment agencies, and what that means for San Diego.

Speakers:

Abolish? - Dr. Brian Peterson DVM, President of GAG
Reform? - Brian Trotier, former Acting President/CEO of SEDC

We look forward to seeing you there. Much of the event will be an open forum, so please be
sure to bring your opinions and stories of redevelopment successes, failures and
abuses.

City Council Planning Commission Recommends Creation of New Homeless Shelter

Mon, 21 Feb 2011 01:46:00 -0600

By Devon Corman

On February 10, during a meeting of the San Diego City Council Planning Commission, Lucy Contreras, an associate planner with the Centre City Development Corporation, issued a report which lead to the Commission’s recommendation to the City Council that the historic downtown World Trade Center building be rehabilitated into a new homeless shelter. The altruistic project was engendered when the San Diego Housing Commission, in collaboration with the CCDC and the City, issued a request for the proposal with the goal of redressing homelessness by providing housing coupled with supportive services. The project was originally conceived and is planned to be managed in part by the Los Angeles based organization People Assisting the Homeless (PATH). Contreras’ report propounds a one-stop service center that would provide seventy-five permanent supportive living units, one hundred and fifty transitional housing beds, and a primary health care clinic to be leased and operated by the Family Health Centers of San Diego. The center would host multiple service providers and administer information, service needs assessment, case management, referrals to housing, legal services, employment services, and other personal care. On October 5th 2010 the City’s Redevelopment Agency approved an exclusive negotiation agreement with the developer to negotiation the terms and conditions of a disposition and development agreement.

The twelve-story WTC building, currently occupied by office as well as vacant spaces, is located at the southwest corner of Sixth Avenue and A Street in the civic core neighborhood of the downtown community plan area. According to Councilmember Todd Gloria, the site is ideal to serve San Diego’s homeless, approximately eight thousand of whom reside in the downtown area. Some local business owners operating in proximity to the WTC building have expressed concern that the proposed shelter will have deleterious effects on their businesses. Jason Markowitz, who owns Downtown Shoe Biz on Sixth Avenue, one block distant from the WTC building, posited while speaking to San Diego News Room in September of 2010 that the proposal was a good idea, just not for downtown. Don Petros, who owns Hines on B Street, voiced at the February 10 Commission meeting that he desires the proposed center’s security plan to be more complete in order to address the quality of life issues that would result from placing this facility in the downtown central business district. That security plan currently includes one twenty-four hour guard, plus one additional guard to operate one hour before and during service center and health clinic hours, in addition to twenty-four hour video surveillance.

This project requires three different permits: a conditional use permit requisite for the onsite provision of social services, a plan development permit, and a neighborhood use permit. The project has been before the Centre City Advisory Committee, which voted in favor of recommending that the City Council approve the permits subject to conditions. The proposed rehabilitation would incorporate green building measures wherever possible to make it environmentally sustainable, would be consistent with the downtown community plan, and comply with all the requirements of the Centre City Planned District Ordinance as well as the City’s land development code.