Loading Table of Contents...
 
 
 
 
 
 

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

As Bankruptcy Looms, Rider To Debate 3 New San Diego Projects

By Richard Rider, Libertarian and Tax Fighter Of The Year:

In today's San Diego Union-Tribune there's an article [by Craig Gustafson] about two contrasting meetings being held Thursday. I'll be attending both, and providing the "naysayer" opposition in the second event's debate -- which will be held before an audience intensely hostile to my point of view.

The irony is stunning. The first meeting is about municipal bankruptcy, with an emphasis doubtless on the city of San Diego. The second event is a pitch for the three downtown SD city taxpayer-subsidized pyramids the Establishment so fervently wants to build, build, build. Read the article and then go to the comments section below it and kick some Big Spender butt. Sub-debate there about city workers. Enjoy.

Excerpts from the article:
Two groups of San Diego leaders will gather tomorrow to discuss incongruous approaches to the city's future: building three grand civic projects and filing for municipal bankruptcy. Only in America's Finest City would both be considered alternatives for a public entity facing a $179 million budget deficit for next year.

The dueling panel discussions begin with a breakfast forum hosted by the San Diego County Taxpayers Association. The title: “Municipal bankruptcy: Is it a feasible option for cities facing fiscal disaster?”

Three hours later, the Downtown San Diego Partnership will host a luncheon with proponents of a new downtown library, a Convention Center expansion and a new City Hall. Sparring with them will be taxpayer advocate Richard Rider, who opposes the projects.

Supporters of the three civic projects say none will affect the city's budget. But many critics, including City Councilman Carl DeMaio, dispute those assertions and say the city should focus on its financial problems.

No comments:

Post a Comment

This is a letters-to-the-editor area, where LPCA members and guests can expect us to publish only civil and constructive commentary related to the page's contents. To be published, comments must 1) unambiguously identify the commenter, 2) be related to the article or the comments on it, 3) not conflict with the editorial mission, and 4) reflect the traditional civility and constructiveness of letters to the editor in the print edition of California Freedom.  Submitting a comment releases it under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License, thus allowing it to be published in print editions of California Freedom. Comments about this comments policy, or its application here, will only be accepted at the editorial mission page.