Zapf, Sanders and a Shiny New City Hall

B-Daddy B-Daddy 4 Comments

Share

Last Friday, I received an email in response to my question about the a City Hall from Job Nelson, identifying himself as Lorie Zapf’s Chief of Staff. (None of her staffers names are yet up on the City Council Web Site for the District 6.) I must say that I am still not impressed that the council member’s staff took this long to respond (from December 27), did not issue a public statement (as far as I can tell) and is not actually responding to my inquiry “Please address the rumors published in the U-T that you might support building a new city hall without a vote of the people.” Read the response for yourself and decide.

The question of whether to put a new civic center on the ballot is beyond premature. We should not even be asking the question of council versus ballot for a new city hall, instead the Council and Mayor should be focusing on fixing our budget and pension problems. I heard loud and clear on the campaign trail that voters are distrustful of local government to spend their tax dollars wisely. Until we restore their basic confidence in local government- that we can fill their potholes, patrol their streets and keep their libraries open- we cannot even begin to think about building a new home for city workers. While the City is facing potentially significant costs to maintain city hall, we have higher priorities that we must focus on in the months to come. Until the city eliminates its structural deficit, resolves its pension problems and restores basic services the question about whether or not to place a new city hall on the ballot is a moot one.

Job Nelson
Chief of Staff
Office of Councilmember Lorie Zapf

So far, so good, as far is it goes, but there was wiggle room for a change in her position down the line, and nothing to preclude bypassing a vote of the people. Also, the discussion of how much it costs to run the old city hall has been part of Mayor Sanders standard line on the subject for some time. From yesterday’s U-T editorial pages, Q&A, Sanders responding:

Q: There’s been talk again about moving forward again on a new City Hall. What is your view of that?

A: I think we need a new City Hall. I think it saves us money every year, but I can’t educate the public. They’re not looking at it saving money. They’re looking at it as being some new monument.

Of course that’s how we are looking at it, Your Honor, because the savings for such projects always seem to evaporate. As an experienced manager, I would like to see the “return on investment” with hard numbers. Here is what the mayor was summarized as saying last July (from KPBS):


He has argued that building a new City Hall will save San Diego money by avoiding significant maintenance expenses at the existing 1960s-era building, and because the city would not have to continue leasing office space for workers at locations around downtown.

My problem is that the gleaming structure pictured in the artist’s rendition looks much more expensive than necessary to achieve the savings desired. The failure to educate the public is the mayor’s own fault. Put out the numbers and let informed members of the public take a good look at them. Given the track record of our city government, just don’t ask us to take this on faith.

Cross posted to The Liberator Today.

Share

Comments 4

  1. Hello, B-Daddy:

    May I appear here as a ‘Character Witness” for Job Nelson?

    I worked with a Job a few years ago in a very tough election
    contest and came away impressed by him (we won that race
    for a conservative candidate by the way ).

    Here’s what I saw then in Job Nelson’s character:

    (1) He is a Straight Shooter. His message tells you just
    what the position of District 6 is (get the City back on
    track and delivering basic services before condsidering
    any major new projects). That is direct and also valid.
    Job Nelson does not dance around the issues.

    (2) He is steady, reliable and a doer. This is a good hire for
    Councilwoman Zapf. He knows the ins-and-outs of the
    world of politics and of City Hall. That is a rare combo.

    As for the time-lag in responding…there are few things as
    demanding as assembling an all-new office and staff for
    a newly-elected official. I speak from personal experience,
    having done it! Job did well to reply to you, and I’m glad he
    did.

    I’m ALSO glad you are asking these pertinent questions,
    B-Daddy. Keep up the good work!

    Don’t hesitate to pose similar queries to people on the
    Democratic side of the street as you move ahead at SD
    Rostra.

  2. Pingback: This post mentioned on Temple of Mut: CALIFORNIA: It’s a Zoo!

  3. Post
    Author

    Jim,

    Thanks for the “character reference.” I have been tough on Lorie because I expect big things from her. I was disappointed by her campaign, frankly, despite my endorsement. My endorsement came out of my heartfelt belief that she was the best candidate to deal with the key issue of union pensions.

    After re-reading my post, I was concerned that I was being a little churlish, which I tweeted. However, my post was factually accurate, so readers can form their opinion based on the given facts.

    With respect to the Democrats on the council, I guess that I have lower expectations, but I take your point.

  4. Jim Sills is dead-on in his assesment of Job.

    As to the rest of your post, I’m confused. You state: “As an experienced manager, I would like to see the “return on investment” with hard numbers.” and “Put out the numbers and let informed members of the public take a good look at them.” I presume you include yourself in the catagory of “informed members of the public”, so you have clearly read and analyzed the several hundred pages of public financial analysis contained here: http://www.ccdc.com/projects/major-downtown-projects/projects-landing-page/civic-core/civic-center-complex/financial-analysis.html

    In addition to reading it all I presume you have some sort of thoughtful critique of the results that has more intellectual depth than “My problem is that the gleaming structure pictured in the artist’s rendition looks much more expensive than necessary to achieve the savings desired.” While I’m sure your skill at visually appraising high-rise building costs is second to none, I’m afraid you have violated your own call to “just don’t ask us to take this on faith”, by asking your readers to do precisely that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *