Connect with us

San Diego, CA

This budget season, San Diego asked the public to take a first-ever survey. It faced some limitations.

Published

on

This budget season, San Diego asked the public to take a first-ever survey. It faced some limitations.


As Mayor Todd Gloria has prepared his budget proposal for the next year, the city says its leadership has factored in a range of considerations for what to prioritize — including the results of a recent survey that led San Diego residents to give their own input.

The survey, which launched in February and closed Friday, asked San Diegans to weigh in on which city services they care most about and which ones they would feel comfortable reducing, especially as the city faces a $146 million deficit for the coming fiscal year.

It was the first time the city conducted a budget survey. But the survey, built by the city’s Performance & Analytics Department, faced some limitations.

There was no set limit to how many times a person could take it, although residents were asked to respond just once. It was technically possible for people outside the city to respond, though they weren’t supposed to. And the city only offered it in two languages, English and Spanish.

Advertisement

Some community members questioned how the results could accurately represent city residents and their different needs.

“Survey data can sometimes be taken as the word, but it’s not necessarily always reflective of what the full community is saying,” said Erin Hogeboom, director of San Diego for Every Child, when the budget’s first draft was released last month.

The budget the mayor proposed last month included cuts to several services, including $11 million from arts and culture and reductions to funding for parks, libraries and youth services. He is set to release his revised budget next Wednesday.

The city closed the survey on Friday. It will share a final report of the responses with the mayor early next week before the revised budget is released, said city spokesperson Nicole Darling.

By the time it closed, the survey received more than 13,000 responses from across the city, and just over 12,000 respondents included their council district. The largest share of responses, at about 2,600, came from District 3 — which covers the neighborhoods around Balboa Park and downtown. It was followed by Districts 2, 7 and 1.

Advertisement

The fewest responses came in District 8, which includes Barrio Logan, Grant Hill, Shelltown, San Ysidro and Otay Mesa, at 572.

Respondents were asked about which city services they most want to protect. They could also identify city services — from parks and open space to homeless programs to graffiti removal — that they would feel comfortable reducing, on a scale of very unacceptable to very acceptable.

The latest results through Wednesday show respondents are most concerned about poor street and sidewalk conditions, homelessness and housing costs. They want to protect street repairs and resurfacing, police and fire-rescue services from funding cuts, according to the city’s survey data.

Responses show that the biggest share of survey takers — 40% — prefer to see a mix of some service cuts and some new revenue to address the city’s financial crisis. Slightly fewer, 37%, said they preferred eliminating some city programs to preserve others.

Over 70% said they wanted to see new revenue come from hotel or tourism taxes. Just 15% said they want new revenue to come from additional parking fees.

Advertisement

The priorities recorded in the survey, centered around the city’s core services, haven’t changed in the months that the survey has remained open, Darling said.

But Bob Lehman, executive director of San Diego Art Matters, says he feels that the survey guided takers toward certain responses and didn’t provide enough context about the impacts of cuts.

The bulk of the questions listed groups of city services that survey takers could rate on whether or not they thought cutting funding for that service would be acceptable.

“It kind of shapes what your response is, when core services are listed alongside arts and culture,” Lehman said. “Without any context, people are nudged towards protecting the obvious essentials.”

The city says the groups of categories were random and that there was no limit to how many times the survey taker could select one of the ratings on the scale for those questions.

Advertisement

Mark Baldassare, survey director at the Public Policy Institute of California, said it’s a good sign that the city has asked for feedback from the public, especially when big financial decisions must be made. But he stresses that analyzing the survey should go beyond the top-line results.

“You have to be careful that it’s going to be representative and … that you’re looking at different age groups, different income groups and different parts of the city, to make sure that you’re not missing any important details about how city services need to be delivered in times when the budget is in stress,” he said.

The city’s survey included optional demographic questions, including a respondent’s age, income level and race and gender. But Darling says the survey wasn’t meant to be a “statistically representative sample, but rather a snapshot of resident perspectives.”

Most of the survey questions were optional. The only required response was a respondent’s ZIP code, though the survey could be submitted with a ZIP code outside of the city limits. In late April, the city said that fewer than 1% of responses were invalid or from outside the city’s ZIP codes.

On its webpage, the city asked respondents to take the survey only once — but there was no way to prevent them from submitting a response multiple times, which the city acknowledges was a limitation.

Advertisement

The city says the survey is just one of several factors informing the mayor’s budget decisions — with others including legal obligations, economic conditions, departmental needs and the city’s responsibility to maintain services like public safety, infrastructure and homelessness response.

“The survey is one tool to understand how residents are thinking about tradeoffs in a difficult budget year,” spokesperson Joya Patel said. “It does not drive decisions on its own.”



Source link

Advertisement

San Diego, CA

Opinion: More apartments eased rents. Townhomes could aid buyers.

Published

on

Opinion: More apartments eased rents. Townhomes could aid buyers.


San Diego’s most beloved neighborhoods, like North Park, Golden Hill and Sherman Heights, were built by people who needed a place to live and found one. But the bungalows, fourplexes and cottages that gave working San Diegans a foothold in those neighborhoods can hardly be built anywhere else in the city.

Rules written decades ago banned them. For 70 years, San Diego has been paying for that mistake in the form of a city its own workforce can no longer afford to live in.

Neighborhood Homes for All of Us is the city’s plan to fix that: family-sized townhomes, rowhouses and small duplexes built in the neighborhoods where San Diegans most want to live.

While San Diego rents are softening as new apartments are built, the cost of buying a home is not moving, and it won’t, because the rental and ownership markets run on entirely separate tracks. Renters benefit when more rentals are built, forcing landlords to compete for them.

Advertisement

However, a family trying to buy a home benefits only if more homes are available for sale. San Diego home prices now exceed nine times the median household income, among the worst ratios in the nation, according to Harvard’s Joint Center for Housing Studies. Building rental housing is important, but it does not change the math for a buyer.

The homes that would change it — family-sized, on the ownership track, in the neighborhoods where people most want to raise children — have been illegal to build for decades. San Diego produced roughly 7,000 condos and townhomes a year in 2005. By 2022, that number had collapsed below 500. Part of that drop is because of litigation rules that drove up insurance costs for builders, caps on pre-sales that finance these projects and high fees. Another major reason is that we simply do not allow starter homes on smaller lots. So, instead, builders default to rentals because that’s what current rules allow them to build profitably.

London Moeder Advisors, a San Diego real estate economics firm, finds that eliminating the city’s large-lot-size mandates could produce new townhomes at 42% less cost than surrounding single-family homes without taxpayer subsidies. While this price point is still high for many, it’s more attainable for young families starting out. And importantly, the price could drop further if the state advances reforms to address litigation rules and pre-sale caps that drive up costs.

The city’s program is also focused on adding homes in San Diego’s neighborhoods with the best-performing schools and most accessible jobs. These are also the neighborhoods with the most restrictive regulations on smaller starter homes. A teacher whose classroom is in La Jolla cannot afford to live there. A firefighter stationed in Mission Hills commutes from Santee. The homes that would let them stay are currently illegal to build in much of these areas. Neighborhood Homes changes that.

While critics may say San Diego already has the tools for adding homes to neighborhoods, why add another program? Because each of those tools was for a different purpose. None were designed to add more for-sale housing.

Advertisement

ADUs, the backyard homes now common across the city, typically top out at 750 square feet (because of fee cliffs) and entail intricacies when selling to own. Other tools, like Senate Bill 9, have been layered with requirements that make it far too complicated and expensive for many homeowners to split their lots to add homes. Laws like Senate Bill 79 are important for adding more housing near transit. But none of these tools focuses on family-sized, ownership-track townhomes in an established neighborhood.

The Neighborhood Homes initiative asks a simple question: Where do the families who can’t afford a million-dollar home but don’t want an apartment go? We can continue to say certain neighborhoods are off-limits to the teachers, trades workers and young families who want to live there, or San Diego can set its own terms for how they grow, with local standards in a form the city controls.

San Diego’s most beloved streets were not preserved into existence. They were built — a duplex here, a rowhouse there — by people who needed a place to live in the city they loved and found one. That is what Neighborhood Homes makes possible again.

Asad is a former board member of the YIMBY Democrats of San Diego County. He resides in Mid-City.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

San Diego, CA

Tom Krasovic: Justin Verlander’s announcement recalls Padres’ 2004 draft blunder

Published

on

Tom Krasovic: Justin Verlander’s announcement recalls Padres’ 2004 draft blunder


So Justin Verlander is calling it quits, effective at the season’s end.

There’s Padres-related history to explore with Verlander, 43.

With it comes many groans.

San Diego passed on Verlander as part of the infamous, franchise-rocking decision to draft Mission Bay High School’s Matt Bush with the first overall pick in 2004.

Advertisement

Had the Padres chosen Verlander and tweaked the Old Dominion alum’s delivery, as the Tigers did soon after selecting him No. 2 overall, the best innings-eater of his generation could’ve headed San Diego’s rotation for many years.

As a National Leaguer, Verlander would’ve pitched against pitchers, rather than designated hitters. His annual ERA would’ve fallen by about a half run, per DH and no-DH data of that time.

The Padres would’ve boasted a generational monster atop their rotation as soon as 2006, when Verlander won the American League rookie of the year award with Detroit, while the San Diego rotation featured next year’s NL Cy Young winner, Jake Peavy.

Recall also that Petco Park, from its opening in 2004 until its remodel in 2012, played as big as Yellowstone National Park.

Not that the DH rule greatly impeded Verlander, a nine-time All-Star.

Advertisement

Many times over, the ace rewarded Tigers general manager Dave Dombrowski and scouting director Greg Smith for drafting him one spot after Kevin Towers and Bill Gayton — their options reduced by Padres owner John Moores’ stated opposition to drafting Scott Boras-assisted prospects Jered Weaver and Stephen Drew — selected Bush, the easy-to-sign but troubled shortstop turned pitcher.

Verlander helped Detroit reach its first two World Series in decades. He led the league in innings three times as part of chewing up 200-plus innings in eight consecutive seasons.

Dombrowski had displayed an unwavering faith in betting big on hard throwers.

Unfazed by power-righty Kyle Sleeth breaking down soon after he took him third overall in 2003, Dombrowski and Smith, a former Padres scout, became dead set on taking Verlander if the Padres didn’t.

Why didn’t Towers and Gayton choose Verlander?

Advertisement

Foremost, the Padres generally didn’t like him as much as the Tigers did.

In fact, they preferred Weaver and Drew.

But Moores all but blocked his scouts there. He was openly critical of their adviser, Boras, saying he didn’t trust him. The two had clashed in the Kevin Brown talks that ended with Brown joining the Dodgers, months after Brown had led the Padres to the 1998 World Series.

Moores was subjected to other kinds of pressure, too. Legal complaints had delayed Petco’s construction. Those complaints all failed in court. But in the interim, the price of steel rose. Padres ownership bore that cost.

Even though Moores’ baseball staffers whiffed on Verlander and failed miserably in choosing Bush, Moores put them in a tough spot. He in effect removed two players who would both pan out as big leaguers.

Advertisement

Someone with the Tigers correctly foresaw that shortening Verlander’s stride would sharpen his control. Untroubled by his 21-18 college record and bursts of subpar accuracy, the Tigers’ duo touted the 6-foot-5, 240-pounder’s “electric” combination of size, velocity and a powerful curveball.

Signing Verlander wasn’t easy.

David Verlander, the pitcher’s father and a union organizer with experience in sticky negotiations, said a contractual impasse led him to negotiate directly with Smith, leading to a deal, per CWA-Union.org.

The sides agreed on a $3.12 million signing bonus, which was less than the $3.15 million bonus the Padres paid to Bush, who was advised by Jeff Moorad.

The Boras-advised Weaver and Drew, who went 12th and 15th to the Angels and Diamondbacks, respectively, got $4 million apiece — but they and Verlander each got major league contracts, increasing the value of all three deals.

Advertisement

It wasn’t until close to the 2005 draft that Weaver was signed. He nonetheless returned great value to the Angels.

Verlander went on to pitch for the Astros after GM Jeff Luhnow obtained him at age 34 from Detroit.

Verlander became a better pitcher with Houston, benefiting from the tech-and-data-driven edges the Astros provided him. Verlander embraced high-speed camera data, eventually dropping his two-seam fastball and limiting his rising fastball to high in the zone. Prodded by high-speed imagery, he adjusted his slider grip.

He won his second and third Cy Youngs with the Astros, and now stands 266-159 with a 3.33 career ERA in nearly 3,600 innings.

For baseball’s hungriest fanbase, he represents a case of what might have been.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

San Diego, CA

San Diego Humane Society Releases 4 rare western spotted skunks into the wild

Published

on

San Diego Humane Society Releases 4 rare western spotted skunks into the wild


RAMONA (CNS) – Four rare western spotted skunks were released back in the wild after weeks of rehabilitation and socialization at the San Diego Humane Society’s Ramona Wildlife Center, officials announced Wednesday.

The successful release marks a major milestone for a species rarely seen in wildlife rehabilitation. The group included one orphaned skunk that was flown more than 400 miles by Flying Tails Animal Rescue from Sierra Wildlife Rescue in Northern California to join an orphaned group in Ramona, according to the SDHS.

The four skunks were returned to a carefully selected, remote habitat in Valley Center after reaching the necessary weight and developmental milestones to thrive on their own.

Western spotted skunks are a rare sight for the Humane Society’s Project Wildlife team. While the wildlife center typically handles hundreds of striped skunks each year, admitting six spotted skunks from different litters in one season is unusual. Spotted skunks are generally found in remote forested areas and are not as common in urban neighborhoods, officials said.

Advertisement

“We have never seen this many western spotted skunks in a single season before,” said Autumn Welch, wildlife operations manager at the Ramona Wildlife Center. “Because they are more reclusive than striped skunks, they require very specific care and even more secluded release sites to ensure they can stay wild.”

Socialization is critical for orphaned spotted skunks. During their stay at the Ramona Wildlife Center, the group became a bonded unit — exploring, digging and sleeping together, according to SDHS officials. Experts say these social cues prevent habituation to humans and teach the orphans natural skunk behaviors.

While four members of the group have returned to the wild, two spotted skunks remain in care at the facility. The smallest skunk was moved to an outside pre-release habitat and introduced to a slightly older skunk in late June.

Wildlife officials said by keeping the pair together, the wildlife team ensures the younger skunk will have a companion to learn from until they are both ready to be released, likely within the next month or two.

Anyone who finds an injured, sick or orphaned wild animal is encouraged to visit sdhumane.org/wildlifehelp or call 619-299-7012.

Advertisement

Copyright 2026, City News Service, Inc.





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending