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
City Advertising for Redistricting Support Services
Great comments, I can't outdo! But hope the city doesn't pay too much for consultants, because there is free stuff already available. Try this: https://sites.google.com/site/sdrn2011/ SanDiegoRedistricting.Net was put together by Vince Hall, Vice President of Public Affairs & Communications for Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest, in collaboration with Empower San Diego, Foundation for Change and other progressive leaders and organizations. The goal of the site is to share information and practical redistricting tools with those who wish to empower underrepresented communities and advance a progressive vision for San Diego. Questions, suggestions, requests, comments and constructive criticisms are invited. Email Vince Hall at [email protected].— March 25, 2011 9:03 p.m.
Fight Over North Park Bar Spills Into the Streets
eyeheart, As I suggested below to Founder, why should property owners be expected to foot the bill to police bad business owners? The only property owners that should pay would be those that rent or lease their buildings to bad business owners. The Bluefoot twosome do not own the property in which they run their bar, so a MAD property assessment costs them not one penny! They will love it if they get free security, courtesy of the unhappy residents and other property owners! You know that they should pick up all of the costs related to their business themselves. They can charge the drinkers more, if that's what it takes, and maybe the drinkers will go home, broke, a little earlier. Sounds good! I feel like you should be earning part of the $20K-worth of propaganda that will be coming the way of NP property owners. Before you say anything else, please report back on the opinion of the owner of the property where Bluefoot does business. How much more does he want to pay into a new NP MAD (he already pays $194/year)? Does he think that Bluefoot's security costs should be paid for by him? Does he think that the neighbors around the bar should pay for security for his tenants? PBIDs and BIDs posing as MADs are a fraud, and one more unfair blow to the little guys, the individual property owners.— March 16, 2011 10:13 a.m.
Fight Over North Park Bar Spills Into the Streets
Thanks, RodneyK. Seems like I would enjoy having you as a neighbor.— March 16, 2011 9:50 a.m.
Fight Over North Park Bar Spills Into the Streets
Founder, What is allowed to be included in an Engineer's Report is limited to what Maintenance Assessment law allows. Security is not a legally allowed activity of a MAD. If you want property owners to pay for security, you need to form a PBID or a BID. State law is very specific and it has been settled at the Cal Supreme Court level (Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association, Inc. v. Santa Clara County Open Space Authority). If Park and Rec and Andy Field want to risk embroiling the City in a lawsuit, then they will allow this to go forward with an illegal Engineer's Report. In recent years there has been much intentional obfuscation of the MAD law, thanks in large part to influence by Ben Hueso and Marco LiMandri, and their friends in City Planning. By the way, has anyone asked the owner of the property that Bluefoot leases (APN 4534150700) whether he would like to pay an even larger assessment because his tenants need policing? Mr. Mohtadi, like other property owners, might not want to be forced to pay for the trouble that their tenants bring to the neighborhood.— March 16, 2011 9:39 a.m.
Fight Over North Park Bar Spills Into the Streets
Dear eyeheart: You really need to study the State Law governing how MAD property assessments can be spent. Legally. The money assessed on property owners will not, cannot, resolve the late-night noise and disruption of a bad bar's clients. Not legally, anyway. This is San Diego, however...— March 15, 2011 5:21 p.m.
Fight Over North Park Bar Spills Into the Streets
RodneyK, Excuse me, sorry. I wasn't giving a lesson. I think I got your point; not sure you got mine. The weight of "getting along," what constitutes "better," and for whom, and the concept of "respect," ... the burden of these issues is too often placed singularly on the little guys, in the most lopsided, unfair way. In this case it is clearly up to the bar owners to get along and respect the neighborhood. They DID choose to come here, because it was cheap, easy, ...why? They are NOT making the neighborhood better. They could, if they really wanted to. But ...why not? Money? Selfishness? Greed? Maybe you could find out? Thanks to their money and connections, these bar owners have a disproportional advantage in the disagreement of what is acceptable in the adjacent residential area. Where the bar owners live, and comments and speculations on their lifestyle, which they publicly display, serve well to illustrate how unlikely it is that they, or any of the Planning Commission members, would accept in their own neighborhoods the type of disruption their bar brings to North Park. And they would win that battle, too.— March 15, 2011 5:08 p.m.
Fight Over North Park Bar Spills Into the Streets
RodneyK, personal lives should be private. But when business owners use the power of the government to negatively impact the personal lives of residents near the business, .... then the business owners have made it personal. Much unfairness comes down from the top in our local government and people are angry. We all know how powerless we are if we aren't backed by the "decision-makers" because we lack personal connections, money, and influence. Try influencing a Council member without a big, powerful, connected group behind you. Why is that? Isn't a small, local issue as deserving of the right, ethical decision as a huge issue is? No one here wishes ill on the bar owners, who could have done much more than they have done to act like good neighbors. Instead, these bar owners act like bullies. They make their living by coming into the neighborhood, as outsiders, and bring in unwelcome behavior. They could control it if they really cared to. Are they uncaring? Is their profit margin really so fragile that they have to do what they've done or their lives will fall apart? Or are they just greedy? I don't know. Given everything, what you read here is the normal reaction of the e-villagers to the presence in their village of an unruly and disruptive neighbor. It's normal venting, probing, and gossiping, and to be expected. It's also informative, as to who has success, and how they do it, in getting what they want from the decision-makers.— March 15, 2011 2:43 p.m.
Fight Over North Park Bar Spills Into the Streets
Safe & Clean is creepy! But seriously, I think that Andy Field needs to be sure he is on solid legal ground, giving Studebaker $10K of the NP property assessment, and loaning another $10K that doesn't have to be repaid if the reballoting vote fails. A reballoting of the entire NP district property owners failed in 2008, and the money spent on implementing that balloting and PR was wasteful. Phyllis Shess was devastated at the loss; she had appeared before Council to speak in favor of the reballoting, claiming that ~80% of the property owners were in favor of paying a higher, new assessment. Nowhere near that, when the vote went down. Is Studebaker targeting ALL of the properties inside her BID area? I'm not hearing that she is targeting only properties in which a business is located. The assumption is that her NPMS will oversee the money. I don't know if Park and Rec will be involved, as in the NP MAD. Perhaps the Planning Dept group under Beth Murray, Economic Development, will be the City interface, with NPMS determining how the money is spent, and paying themselves 15-20% to do so. I think there are issues here that could lead to lawsuits. Of course, Goldsmith will write a memo saying it's all legal. But. Just saying. Keep an eye on this.— March 15, 2011 9:52 a.m.
Fight Over North Park Bar Spills Into the Streets
Curious, ONO: if you were at the hearing, were there lots of people there? The Facebook page for Bluefoot posted this, and paid for a van, I guess: _____________________________________________________________ THIS Thursday, March 10th, at 9am--Bluefoot is facing its FINAL hearing in the battle to renew our Neighborhood Use Permit! The support we had at the last meeting was incredible, and this is the final decision--PLEASE come to this meeting if you can!! We've arranged for a van to take supporters downtown--there will be shuttles leaving... _____________________________________________________________ What kind of van and how many people?— March 14, 2011 5:51 p.m.
Fight Over North Park Bar Spills Into the Streets
Well, sort of sad. I'm not in the hipster-insider loop, but Adam, lovely Mira, and baby-face Cuong do have public pages showing their prettiness, coolness, and their beautiful-people friends, including Ms Studebaker. You'd think they would have at least made the exterior of the ratty Bluefoot look like a place where they would be seen hanging out. Cook and his wife had lived in a beautiful, large house out in La Mesa since 2001, far, far, far from ugly puke bars, but defaulted last year and the house was sold at a trustee sale. Bad karma, bad luck, bad something.... Back to the bar wars, though: Cook and Nguyen will be very supportive of Studebaker's latest project, to re-ballot the NP MAD and impose new, bigger assessments on residential properties inside her NPMS commercial boundary. The NP MAD, under co-control of Park and Recreation and various community overseers, already GAVE Studebaker $10,000, and loaned her another $10,000, of NP MAD money for this purpose. That money is money straight from the local property owners' pockets. If you own a typical residential property, you now pay about $18/year on your property tax to the NP MAD. NPMS wants some of that action, for themselves. And it'll be more than $18/year. Pay attention. It's coming.— March 14, 2011 4:41 p.m.