Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
Archives
Classifieds
Stories
Events
Contests
Music
Movies
Theater
Food
Life Events
Cannabis
January 8, 2025
January 1, 2025
December 25, 2024
December 18, 2024
December 11, 2024
December 4, 2024
November 27, 2024
November 20, 2024
November 13, 2024
November 6, 2024
October 30, 2024
October 23, 2024
Close
January 8, 2025
January 1, 2025
December 25, 2024
December 18, 2024
December 11, 2024
December 4, 2024
November 27, 2024
November 20, 2024
November 13, 2024
November 6, 2024
October 30, 2024
October 23, 2024
January 8, 2025
January 1, 2025
December 25, 2024
December 18, 2024
December 11, 2024
December 4, 2024
November 27, 2024
November 20, 2024
November 13, 2024
November 6, 2024
October 30, 2024
October 23, 2024
Close
Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
Carpenters Union at 6th and B
Associated Builders and Contractors, the group pushing the anti-union Prop G in Chula Vista, lists Pacific Building Group as having a seat on its Board of Directors. If Prop G passes we can expect to see many more violations like these. Only through binding union contracts will workers be guaranteed protection from such abuse. VOTE NO ON PROP G!— May 10, 2010 12:49 p.m.
Spirited Debate
It’s nice to hear some ChulaVista politicians and the city’s Chamber of Commerce speak out against Prop G, but their arguments miss the real problem with the proposition. They only seem to care about Prop G’s potential interference with their bayfront development plans. Not a word is mentioned about the welfare of the workers who will build the hotels and condos that will make a few very rich. Proponents of Prop G, mostly profit greedy contractors, claim they can save taxpayers money by hiring non-union workers, (cheaper labor). However, being less greedy and cutting their profits would have the same effect. Paying union wages and benefits promotes healthier, happier families, which in turn makes for a healthier local economy and community in general. Proposition G is written and endorsed by those who want to squeeze as much as they can from workers and line their own pockets, making them much wealthier and happy instead.— April 22, 2010 8:58 a.m.
Suspect Solution
Keep the bayfront a more natural, lower key attraction. Maybe a Seaport Village type of atmosphere. A place where Chula Vistans and tourists would like to spend an afternoon or evening. The idea of high rise apartments/condos is totally out of place there. Also, why should taxpayers, through the Redevelopment Agency, pay for cleaning up the pollution mess that Rohr/Goodrich has made. Pacifica is developing I.B.'s oceanfront as well as Chula Vista's with our money.— April 10, 2010 6:16 p.m.
Walkability's Price
Narrowing Chula Vista's Third Avenue and widening the sidewalks to accommodate excessive foot traffic would be a good idea that wisely followed what other cities have done to alleviate such a problem. However, as anyone who frequents "downtown" Chula Vista knows, too many people buzzing up and down the street is certainly not a problem. To spend over three million dollars on this unnecessary and potentially harmful project is an irresponsible use of taxpayers' money. About the only justification would be if the city's workers, who have been hit hard by budget cuts, actually gained from the hours of work that would be created.— March 29, 2010 7:17 p.m.