Connect with us

San Diego, CA

San Diego convention center’s roof and central plant are failing. New hotel tax hike comes to the rescue.

Published

on

San Diego convention center’s roof and central plant are failing. New hotel tax hike comes to the rescue.


Now that a hotel tax hike San Diego voters approved in 2020 is on firm legal ground, the city is preparing to start spending millions of dollars on some key civic initiatives this fiscal year — fixing up its aging convention center and addressing homelessness.

Although the city began collecting the added tax revenue authorized by Measure C in May, it held back on releasing the money until after the last of several legal challenges spanning four years finally ended late last year.

It is now estimated that nearly $77 million in revenue will be generated this fiscal year, with $45.4 million set aside for convention center expenditures and $31.5 million for homeless programs, according to Mayor Todd Gloria’s office.

Measure C raises the city’s previous transient occupancy tax rate of 10.5% to a maximum of 13.75% for guests staying in downtown properties, closest to the convention center. For hotels in mid-range locations, the rate is 12.75%, while those farthest away from downtown charge guests a rate of 11.75%.

Advertisement

While one of the main objectives of Measure C was to finance a long-planned expansion of the city’s convention center, moving forward on such a costly project, at least in the near term, remains tenuous, largely because costs have escalated tremendously since it was first conceived. As a result, there would not be enough funds from the hotel tax increase to pay for it.

In the meantime, more urgently needed improvements, like a replacement of the center’s central plant that houses the center’s entire cooling and heating system, should be undertaken, said Steve Cushman, special assistant to Gloria for the convention center expansion. He says that the measure’s reference to “modernization” of the center legally permits the city to use the revenue for infrastructure upgrades while it continues to explore an enlarged center.

Cushman has proposed expenditures of $21.4 million this fiscal year and a total of $118.7 million over five years, but those will need to go before the City Council for approval before they can be spent on the convention center upgrades, he said.

“I would anticipate that the expenditures would commence in this fiscal year,” he added.

Toward that end, the council did a bit of legislative housekeeping on Tuesday to reset new implementation dates and deadlines, given the years-long delay in legally confirming that the 2020 ballot measure had passed with a simple majority as opposed to a two-thirds threshold that voters were originally told was the requirement for special tax initiatives.

Advertisement

The new set of Measure C dates that the council approved Tuesday is meant “to fulfill the expectations of voters,” said City Treasurer Elizabeth Correia.

As an example, the new effective date for the measure is now May 1, 2025.

One of the provisions of Measure C is to allocate revenue from the hotel tax boost in varying percentages, depending on the use. The largest share — 59% — goes to the convention center, but for the first 5 1/2 years, homelessness programs will get 41% of the funds before decreasing later on to 31%. The smallest portion of the tax money is reserved for street repairs, at 10%.

Under the measure’s original timeline, the increased funding for homeless services was to end in 2024. With the new dates approved by the council, it will extend through Oct. 31, 2030, and street repair funds will now kick in on Nov. 1, 2030.

To monitor how the tax revenue is being spent, periodic audits for each of the three categories of uses will be required, with the first of those due in 2029.

Advertisement

Councilmember Marni von Wilpert said she was especially relieved to see that there will finally be taxpayer money available to address longstanding maintenance issues and the modernization of the convention center.

In an update provided last year by the Convention Center Corporation, council members learned that the facility is facing $200 million in deferred repair work over the next five years, plus $200 million more over the next 20 years.

“Every year, we hear from our leaders at the convention center that it has significant needs for maintenance, and we as the city of San Diego cannot fill all those needs (from the budget),” von Wilpert said.

She noted that the Measure C money could be used to support the issuance of an infrastructure bond to provide long-term funding for the convention center.

“I want the convention center to think about this because this is one of the biggest revenue generators in our region,” she said. “We shouldn’t let this chance go because every year I’m hearing more and more about the needs for maintenance in our convention center.”

Advertisement

Cushman’s proposed expenditure plan, assuming it gets the approval of the council, would be to spend $7.5 million this year on a new roof for the western portion of the center, which opened in 1989. More than $9.5 million has been budgeted for the first phase of a central plant overhaul.

Last year, Convention Center Corp. Chief Operating Officer Corey Albright told council members that the No. 1 question from clients is whether the city is investing in its center. “It is weighing on booking decisions choosing San Diego as a destination,” he said at the time. “The answer simply cannot be, year over year, no significant capital investment.”

In addition to higher costs, a convention center expansion is also hamstrung by the city’s lack of control over a key waterfront parcel that would be needed to complete the project.

Fifth Avenue Landing currently holds a lease for that parcel, which expires in mid-2027. The city and San Diego Convention Center Corp. worked with Fifth Avenue Landing off and on for years to work out an agreement to regain control of the leasehold, and ultimately, a settlement agreement was reached in 2018, although it was conditioned on what was expected to be a November 2019 public vote. That didn’t happen until March of the following year, and it was believed at the time that Measure C had failed.

That agreement, however, remains in place, and it is preventing city officials from talking openly about the expansion project or taking steps to move forward with some kind of plan until 2027. Cushman, however, remains optimistic, but considerable work needs to be done.

Advertisement

“In light of the settlement agreement with (Fifth Avenue Landing), in 2026, we cannot do anything to plan for the project,” Cushman said. “However, I anticipate by January of 2027, when we can start working on the expansion part of the project, I will be looking for additional sources of funding.”

In addition to updating Measure C’s timeline, the council also agreed Tuesday to set up a special citizens advisory committee to the mayor and council on how to best spend the money set aside for homelessness programs, as required by the initiative.

David Rolland, spokesperson for the Mayor’s Office, explained that the money budgeted for this year will help fund existing homelessness programs, including those that provide more than 2,600 shelter options, including what he described as traditional beds, safe parking and safe sleeping.

“I am absolutely delighted that this long dream of providing enough money to help with our homeless is finally over,” said Councilmember Jennifer Campbell. “This time has given us a lot of space to learn what is working and what is not. So the oversight of this committee hopefully won’t be too difficult, and they’ll be able to see from the auditing of the funding that things are going in the right direction.”

Advertisement



Source link

San Diego, CA

More Thoughts on ‘Yes on A’

Published

on

More Thoughts on ‘Yes on A’


By Dave Rice

Is Measure A going to affect a significant number of properties? Is it going to affect affordable housing in any meaningful way? Come now, let’s not be dense – this hits a handful of rich people who can absolutely afford to drop $10K in the city coffers if they’re leaving a vacation home vacant on purpose – let’s say that’s their civic contribution that would be realized in other ways if they actually lived, worked, and shopped here full-time.

Or it hits STVR hosts, who can either factor the cost into their business model or give it up if margins are really that thin (maybe not everyone needs to fancy themselves an amateur hotelier). But let’s not kid ourselves and believe the kind of housing this will free up will be plentiful or affordable.

In the exceedingly rare instances where someone might be eligible for an exemption, will it be too hard to apply for? That’s something we can argue and refine but that’s the bathwater, or just the little bit of it that splashes out of the tub, not the baby. An argument that the whole proposal is DOA because military members are too stupid to file for an exemption is either dismissive of or telling tales out of school about what we really think of military intelligence.

Advertisement

Poor, poor grandma who needs a home near her doctor? If she’s really poor why does she have multiple houses, and if she’s not does this really affect her? I live in a neighborhood where “aren’t you afraid you’re going to get shot?” is the first thing outsiders ask me about where I’m from, and if Grandma has owned her mostly-unoccupied vacation house for any significant time I probably pay a lot more property tax than she does. You couldn’t trip over the limbo bar to gain my sympathy, it’s buried a few feet deep.

This is a tiny nod toward taxing the rich, but that’s all. It’s not significant or meaningful, it won’t do a lot, most of the housing stock in question even if returned to actual residents won’t make a dent in the astronomical cost of living in or anywhere near this city. But it’s a tiny step in the right direction – and watching how hysterical the moneyed class is about the rest of us asking for even the tiniest drop in the goddamned bucket we’re trying to fill without their help is telling.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

San Diego, CA

Annual Rock ’n’ Roll races bring 30,000 runners to San Diego streets

Published

on

Annual Rock ’n’ Roll races bring 30,000 runners to San Diego streets




Annual Rock ’n’ Roll races bring 30,000 runners to San Diego streets – NBC 7 San Diego



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

San Diego, CA

Dining Out — series Part 1: A look at the evolution of La Jolla’s restaurant scene

Published

on

Dining Out — series Part 1: A look at the evolution of La Jolla’s restaurant scene


This is the first installment in a series of stories on the history of dining out in La Jolla, how it’s changed and how it continues to evolve.

It’s hard to imagine La Jolla without its restaurants, from the lines stretching down the block at The Taco Stand to the iconic views at George’s at the Cove.

But the way La Jollans eat and where has changed dramatically since the area’s founding in the 1800s.

In this first part of the new month-long series “Dining Out,” the La Jolla Light looks at local restaurants from the 1880s (when La Jolla was first developed and settled) to the early 1920s.

Advertisement

“La Jolla had very few people at that time,” according to local historian Carol Olten. “There weren’t a lot of restaurants, as far as we know.”

Olten said she gets information about La Jolla’s earliest days from the diaries of local pioneer Anson Mills.

“He kept track of where he went and what he did … but he did a lot of home cooking,” she said. “So when they went to a restaurant for dinner, it was a big occasion. It was something people mainly did on holidays or … a social occasion.”

One restaurant Mills would go to — believed to be one of the first in La Jolla — was Montezuma Cottage. Olten said it is believed to have opened in 1895 near the intersection of Prospect and Jenner streets.

Mills described the restaurant as a popular eating and gathering spot for locals and tourists, Olten said. He wrote an entry about a Thanksgiving dinner there with about 60 people.

Advertisement

Montezuma Cottage later became known as the Seaside Inn and Ocean View restaurant. It was torn down in 1931.

Culturally, eating at a restaurant was a more formal occasion at the time, Olten said.

“You didn’t go to a restaurant just to hang out with friends like you would today. It was purposeful then,” she said.

Around 1900, a restaurant known as the White Rabbit opened near the corner of Girard Avenue and Prospect Street. In addition to a rooftop garden, it featured a tea room, joining a national trend.

“Tea rooms went with the suffragette movement because in those days, [women] didn’t have a place to gather without an escort, so tea rooms started opening in hotels and women could go there and sit down and have a social tea or lunch,” Olten said. “La Jolla got in on the tail end of that thanks to [Green Dragon Colony founder] Anna Held and [La Jolla philanthropist] Ellen Browning Scripps.”

Advertisement

One of them, called The Cricket, opened in the early 1900s with white tablecloths. Olten said it was near what it is now Eddie V’s restaurant.

“It was originally part of the Green Dragon Colony … and was sold to a British woman named Daisy Mitchell,” she said. “It stayed a tea room for many years, and she kept a guest book that was decorated with reds and greens and had a medieval theme. So it was very British.”

Joining a trend toward more upscale dining, one of La Jolla’s “most well-established and well-known restaurants” opened in 1912 at 1227 Prospect St. The Brown Bear had “stylish, fashionable service and a menu to please the gods,” Olten said.

A house specialty was Welsh rabbit served in a silver chafing dish. The restaurant was in operation until 1941.

Several restaurants opened around 1915, about the same time as the Panama-California Exposition, a world’s fair-type event held in 1915-16 that brought 3.7 million people to San Diego.

Advertisement
The Panama-California Exposition in San Diego’s Balboa Park in 1915-16 coincided with several restaurant openings in La Jolla. (San Diego History Center)

One of La Jolla’s new restaurants, the Spindrift Inn, opened in 1916 and was considered a “last stop” out of town.

“Most restaurants at that time were located in the immediate Village area,” Olten said. “The one that was astray would have been the Spindrift Inn [in La Jolla Shores]. This was in the very early days of automobiles, so not very many people had cars, but those that did would … drive their cars and the last stop before you got out of town was Spindrift Inn.”

The Spindrift Inn later became The Marine Room, which still stands.

Olten said the restaurant was operated by the Hannay family for about 20 years. Their “rambunctious” fox terrier, Jiggs, would roam the dining room.

Another Expo-era restaurant was the Dining Car, which operated in an old trolley car parked near Goldfish Point. Dinner was $2 per person. It burned down on Halloween night in 1923.

Advertisement

Next installment: With new hotels being built in La Jolla in the 1920s came new hotel restaurants. But later, World War II would have an impact on La Jollans and San Diegans in general and on where and how they ate. ♦



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending