Connect with us

San Diego, CA

Michael Smolens: Could push to change fire ratings spur development in hazardous areas?

Published

on

Michael Smolens: Could push to change fire ratings spur development in hazardous areas?


For years, California policies have sought to limit or at least discourage new construction in areas designated as high fire hazard zones.

When that hasn’t worked, the courts have stepped in. In San Diego, legal action and county reversals have stopped thousands of previously approved homes targeted for the region’s rural areas characterized by highly flammable chaparral and grasslands.

Just last week, a court again blocked the 3,000-home Fanita Ranch project in Santee. The judge concluded the city didn’t follow the proper procedure in greenlighting the proposal. But the larger context of whether the development would threaten habitat and put residents in the path of wildfires was motivation for the lawsuit.

When a bill to revamp fire-hazard designations surfaced in Sacramento this summer, critics said it could increase development in fire-prone areas, according to Hayley Smith of the Los Angeles Times.

Advertisement

Senate Bill 610 initially was an unrelated measure regarding the California Energy Commission that passed the state Senate and then was gutted and amended in June to become the fire-zone bill in the Assembly. Eventually, the bill was held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee, which means it’s dead for this year. However, advocates suggest the measure or a version of it will be back next year.

The main thrust of SB 610 is to do away with state rules that classify areas as “moderate,” “high” and “very high” fire-risk zones. That can influence development patterns and building safety standards.

Those categories would be replaced by a single “wildfire mitigation area” designation, which advocates say would lead to a uniform set of precautions rather than various levels that match the severity of threat under the current classifications.

The legislation also would shift responsibilities for maintaining fire safety standards from the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection to the California fire marshal. The fire marshal would be required to review fire safety laws and update fire hazard and safety standards every five years.

State Fire Marshal Daniel Berlant said the legislation will make communities safer and the process more clear, and that the single state designation would likely result in more areas falling under a fire hazard designation, not fewer, according to the Times.

Advertisement

Opponents disagreed.

SB 610 “will fundamentally reshape California fire and housing policy and make Californians more vulnerable to wildfire,” dozens of environmental and housing groups and local governments said in a July 25 letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leaders.

Among other things, they contend the measure would shift authority away from local governments and give it to the state — a common criticism of past state legislation aimed at boosting housing development.

While some supporters of the bill said it’s about fire safety, not expanding development, the short list of supporters on the bill analysis seems telling: California Building Industry Association, Housing Action Coalition and the pro-housing group YIMBY (“Yes, In My Backyard”) Action.

Environmental groups, the California Farm Bureau and city and county associations are among the 19 opponents listed.

Advertisement

The amended SB 610 was authored by state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, who has carried some of the state’s most aggressive housing development bills in recent years.

The bill has become emblematic of the push-pull over development in Sacramento. Legislation also was introduced this year to limit housing construction in fire- and flood-prone areas.

Meanwhile, bills aimed at allowing more dense development along the coast — including bills by Assemblymember David Alvarez, D-San Diego, and Sen. Catherine Blakespear, D-Encinitas — did not succeed this year.

Restricting development at the coast and on the urban fringe builds pressure to increase density in communities in between, where many planning experts say growth should be targeted to cut down on vehicle congestion and tailpipe emissions that contribute to global-warming greenhouse gases.

But in reality, residents in those less-restricted areas typically don’t want more development, and building enough housing to meet demand has proved difficult throughout the state.

Advertisement

Officials in some communities, particularly along the coast, welcome development limits. But others, like those in Santee, say restrictions make it more difficult to meet state housing goals.

Legislation to spur development comes amid an affordable housing crisis in California and skyrocketing prices of market-rate homes. In 2022, Matthew Adams, then-vice president of the Building Industry Association of San Diego County, gave his take on the consequences of actions that blocked developments in East County.

“Let me be clear,” Adams told The San Diego Union-Tribune. “This is going to have a devastating impact on our ability to produce middle-income or market-rate housing in vast portions of the unincorporated area.”

Some pro-development groups say advances in planning, evacuation strategies, fire-retardant building materials, landscaping and buffer zones have made some higher fire-risk areas safer for development.

Nevertheless, the increasing intensity of wildfires and the human and property destruction they have caused resulted in discussions going in the other direction. Should development be limited? Should homes be allowed to be rebuilt? Should a methodical retreat of existing communities from high-risk fire areas be considered?

Advertisement

In the end, what can be built and where increasingly may depend on whether state policies align with practices acceptable to insurance companies, which have been leaving California, in part because of increased wildfire risk.



Source link

San Diego, CA

Letters: A selective immigration policy ultimately fails us all

Published

on

Letters: A selective immigration policy ultimately fails us all


How interesting that Donald Trump is deporting Brown people who pay taxes and contribute to our economy (though they will never reap any benefits from those taxes) and instead is using our tax money to import and set up South Africans (none of whom are anything but White) who have never contributed to our economy. Could skin color perhaps have something to do with this policy?

— Nita Herpolsheimer, San Diego



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

San Diego, CA

Did California’s assault weapons ban save lives in San Diego mosque attack?

Published

on

Did California’s assault weapons ban save lives in San Diego mosque attack?


California’s assault weapons ban may have helped limit the ability of two attackers to take lives at the Islamic Center of San Diego last week, according to a prominent gun control organization.

But the executive director of a San Diego gun rights group said the fact the attack even happened is proof the ban failed.

What the two don’t dispute is that the video from the attackers’ livestream shows one of them using a rifle that appears to comply with California’s strict gun laws. While authorities have not confirmed what models of firearms were used in the attack, representatives of the two organizations identified it as a semi-automatic Ruger Mini-14 rifle.

The alleged suspect’s Ruger Mini-14 rifle is seen in this screenshot from a livestream obtained by KPBS of the attack on the Islamic Center of San Diego on May 18, 2026.

KPBS is not publishing the video, which authorities have not released, the names of the two teenage suspects or their writings, where they wrote they were motivated to conduct the attack by a number of sex and race-related grievances. They wore emblems associated with white supremacists and neo-Nazis and lashed out in their writings against women, Jewish people, Muslims and LGBTQ+ people.

Advertisement

They wrote they were inspired by the 2019 attack on two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, that killed 51 Muslims. In their writings, the suspects said they wanted to replicate the Christchurch attack in San Diego.

The attack in Christchurch prompted New Zealand to change its gun laws.

Semiautomatic rifles sold in California have to meet certain criteria that other states don’t require.

The barrels must be at least 30 inches long and may not have collapsible or folding stocks. They cannot have a pistol grip behind the trigger, nor one attached at the forward part of the rifle.

And they cannot have a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds.

Advertisement

“From everything I saw from the video, (the rifle) looked like it met those criteria and looked like a very stock firearm that you could purchase at many dealers here in California,” said Steve Lindley, a policy advisor for the Brady Campaign.

Lindley spent almost 30 years in law enforcement, according to his biography. He worked for the National City Police Department and spent eight years leading the Bureau of Firearms at the California Department of Justice.

Lindley said features such as pistol grips make rifles more lethal.

“Over time it makes it easier for the shooter to have the firearm to their shoulder and in their hands,” he said. “Less fatigue, and it lines up a little bit better with your eyesight. The capacity of the magazines and other features on the firearm make it more accurate and easier to use in close quarters.”

The video shows the body cam operator firing the Mini-14 until it appears to jam. He struggles to clear the chamber and appears to remove and reinsert the magazine. He works the bolt, apparently unable to chamber a new round.

Advertisement

As the video continues, he continues to struggle with the bolt of the rifle before giving up, drawing a handgun and stepping outside.

The attackers never made it beyond the lobby, where about 100 schoolchildren and staff were inside the center. Authorities say they were delayed by the three men killed in the attack: Mansour Kaziha, 78, Nadir Awad, 57, and armed security guard Amin Abdullah.

From left to right, Mansour Kaziha, Amin Abdullah and Nadir Awad.

The Islamic Center of San Diego

Undated photos of (left to right) Mansour Kaziha, Amin Abdullah and Nadir Awad.

“Looking at the reality of this, a good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy with a gun from killing a lot of kids. Full stop,” said Michael Schwartz, the executive director of the San Diego County Gun Owners PAC.

Advertisement

“The assault weapons ban that California has implemented clearly failed — it didn’t stop these two people,” he said.

Schwartz described the features banned by California as “cosmetic” and that the semi-automatic rifles function the same regardless of their stock, grips or magazine size.

“The idea that … the (high-capacity) magazine ban stopped them from getting a high-capacity magazine … there just isn’t any evidence or proof,” he said.

While high-capacity magazines can’t be bought or sold in California, Schwartz said anyone can travel to the next state over and buy as many as they want.

Although the Mini-14 used in the attack is capable of accepting 30 or 40-round magazines, said Lindley, the shooters appeared to only have a California-compliant 10-round magazine.

Advertisement

“If you have ten round magazines, you have ten rounds to shoot before you need to change magazines,” he said. “If you have a 30- or 40-round magazine, you can shoot 30 or 40 rounds before you need to reload.”

That’s important, Lindley said, because when shooters stop to reload, it gives victims time to either escape or attempt to subdue the attacker.

Schwartz said that didn’t affect the Islamic center attack.

“If he had a bigger magazine or he had a pistol grip or whatever, it wouldn’t have changed the outcome of this at all,” he said.

Lindley played a part in crafting more than 100 gun bills, according to the Brady Campaign. He said with so many guns in the United States, authorities can’t stop shootings — all they can do is try to limit the damage.

Advertisement

“We can prevent a lot of victimology by lowering the capacity of the magazines,” he said.



Source link

Continue Reading

San Diego, CA

Alleged San Diego Gunman Had Violent Obsessions

Published

on

Alleged San Diego Gunman Had Violent Obsessions



Police were so unsettled by one of the teens later accused in the deadly shooting at the Islamic Center of San Diego that they took his guns away more than a year before the attack. Court records show Chula Vista police secured a gun violence restraining order against then-high school student Caleb Vazquez in January 2025 after classmates and staff reported he idolized mass shooters, talked about a “day of retribution,” and came to school dressed as mass murderers and the TV serial killer Dexter, per NBC News and KGTV. The school had shared social media posts in which Vazquez praised killers, including those behind a 2011 attack in Norway and a 2019 shooting at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, NBC reports.


Vazquez allegedly admitted an infatuation with mass killings and an idolization of Adolf Hitler and was put on a 72-hour psychiatric hold. His father—initially uncooperative, according to a police affidavit—removed 26 weapons from the home and arranged for therapy before the restraining order was dismissed that March. Just over a year later, police say Vazquez, 18, and a 17-year-old he’d met online killed three people at the mosque—security guard Amin Abdullah, caretaker Mansour Kaziha, and neighbor Nadir Awad—before wounding a landscaper and dying by suicide. FBI officials say writings left behind were steeped in extremist hatred. In the aftermath, community members are questioning how so many warnings failed to prevent the attack and calling for stronger, earlier interventions on mental health and homicidal ideation.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending