All Boards

Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
Posts awaiting your approval 0
TMcC April 19, 2014 at 11:36 AM
Calling all investigative-journalists!! This screams for intensive fact-digging and historicalRead Morerep orting (sadly, more a thing of the past everyday--but defeatism never got anyone anywhere.) We need to know the facts about this land and just what's going on here since everyone seems to want a piece of this land that belongs to private owners. Hasn't it always been the case that demand & location puts the owners in the best position?
Stephen Goldfarb April 20, 2014 at 02:20 PM
Among the consequences of the City's plan to acquire the property to include in Mission TrailsRead MoreRegio nal Park or to use as a landfill is that this process has created a mess. Privately owned properties exist from west to east throughout the East Elliott Planning Area interspaced between land purchased by the City. It is a hodge-podge. The outside planner hired by the City says East Elliott is the most problematical area to deal with regarding incorporation into the park. There is a strong likelihood that the City will be unable to acquire all the property. Many owners will not sell. The City plan to possibly site an additional landfill in East Elliott creates an interesting hypothetical scenario. Landfills are high income earners. Industrial land for a landfill sells at high values. Why would a private owner sell to the City at low ball valuations when a landfill might come along and offer high prices for their land? The City's plan to incorporate the area into the park also causes other problems. It is a virtual invitation for the public to trespass on privately owned land. Interestingly, the outside planner has a solution to these problems. But he does not have the power to change the City's course of action. A prudent reader might wonder what the San Diego City Council's response is to this situation. The issues have been addressed to them many times. The response is to stonewall. Stephen Goldfarb
Stephen Goldfarb April 21, 2014 at 10:22 AM
Giving credit. Cogentrix, the Quail Brush power plant promoters, are once again at the CaliforniaRead MoreE nergy Commission asking for a second 1-year extension. They still want to install a massive power plant (longer than a football field, 3 stories high, with 11 gas fueled generators, and 100 foot tall smokestacks) in East Elliott. Cogentrix chose an area designated for open space conservation adjoining Mission Trails Regional Park to site their power plant. One may ask why Cogentrix did this rather than choosing an industrial site for the proposed power plant? The answer is not hard to fathom. A capable company doing its due diligence would soon learn that East Elliott property was cheaply available due to the City's artificially suppressing land value. Low land value is so the City can purchase the property for a park or landfill. The result has been the formation of two organizations to fight locating the power plant in the neighborhood, thousands of person-hours to mount a community action against the power plant, and engagement of several government agencies (City Council of San Diego, City of Santee, San Diego Planning Commission, community planning boards) vote on the power plant. Though an unintended consequence, and an irony, we should give credit for the Quail Brush power plant where credit is due: the City Council of San Diego and the park expansion interests on whose behalf they act. Stephen Goldfarb