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.