Here's something you might be interested in.
Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
And now a message against SoccerCity
From U-T panelist Gary London, whose consulting firm got money from opponents
Gary London:"SoccerCity is a terrible deal for the taxpayers of San Diego."
On February 3, the Union-Tribune’s business page asked, “Would a soccer stadium give the economy a boost?” Real estate consultant Gary London of the Union-Tribune’s EconoMeter panel of business experts replied: “It would be an economic boon, but it is a terrible deal for the taxpayers of San Diego, as the initiative is dramatically light in setting aside costs for infrastructure improvements, and in underpaying for the property.” On June 16, the column’s question of the day was “SoccerCity: Is delay economically wise?” London responded with the identical words, though he allowed the project “creates an appropriate level of density, mix of uses, and open space.” Regarding the November 2018 popular vote that will determine Soccer City’s fate, London commented, “The initiative process is the wrong way to do the business of land use, as these complicated issues ought to be vetted through the filter of our elected (officials).”
Now comes the revelation via a legally required financial disclosure by Public Land, Public Vote, a political committee created to oppose SoccerCity, that London’s consulting firm, London Moeder Advisors, received $11,250 from project opponents during the period between April 1 and June 30 of this year. According to the filing, the committee has thus far been financed with a total of more than $1.3 million furnished by Mission Valley landowners and developers Sudberry Properties and the H.G. Fenton Company. “I never tailor my opinion to the client,” said London by phone last week, adding that neither Sudberry nor H.G. Fenton had attempted to infuence him. “If they had I wouldn’t have taken on the assignment.”
Here's something you might be interested in.
And now a message against SoccerCity
From U-T panelist Gary London, whose consulting firm got money from opponents
And now a message against SoccerCity
From U-T panelist Gary London, whose consulting firm got money from opponents
Gary London:"SoccerCity is a terrible deal for the taxpayers of San Diego."
On February 3, the Union-Tribune’s business page asked, “Would a soccer stadium give the economy a boost?” Real estate consultant Gary London of the Union-Tribune’s EconoMeter panel of business experts replied: “It would be an economic boon, but it is a terrible deal for the taxpayers of San Diego, as the initiative is dramatically light in setting aside costs for infrastructure improvements, and in underpaying for the property.” On June 16, the column’s question of the day was “SoccerCity: Is delay economically wise?” London responded with the identical words, though he allowed the project “creates an appropriate level of density, mix of uses, and open space.” Regarding the November 2018 popular vote that will determine Soccer City’s fate, London commented, “The initiative process is the wrong way to do the business of land use, as these complicated issues ought to be vetted through the filter of our elected (officials).”
Now comes the revelation via a legally required financial disclosure by Public Land, Public Vote, a political committee created to oppose SoccerCity, that London’s consulting firm, London Moeder Advisors, received $11,250 from project opponents during the period between April 1 and June 30 of this year. According to the filing, the committee has thus far been financed with a total of more than $1.3 million furnished by Mission Valley landowners and developers Sudberry Properties and the H.G. Fenton Company. “I never tailor my opinion to the client,” said London by phone last week, adding that neither Sudberry nor H.G. Fenton had attempted to infuence him. “If they had I wouldn’t have taken on the assignment.”
Comments