Dear editor,

I am saddened and shocked that the level of journalism in your newspaper has now placed it on a level of a “fish wrap.” The article titled “Suit filed over drive-thru” written by Dave Schwab [Vol. 5, Issue 17] has portrayed your newspaper as a bias base of print rather than an informative source. …

With a little bit of journalistic research, Mr. Schwab would have found a larger group of residents who like the convenience of having the drive-thru feature associated with the Jack In The Box restaurant.

In the article, Mr. Schwab quotes heavily on the wish list of Mr. Roger Lewis, North Park Planning Committee member. Mr. Lewis gives himself up as being a non-native to the North Park area. He knows very little about the history of the neighborhood. …

In the article Mr. Lewis claims that Jack In The Box has violated the law and is the rationale for his future ill-fated lawsuit. The fact is Jack In The Box did everything right and within the law to assist in beautifying the neighborhood and hopefully keeping their profits intact. The best part of the article that shows Mr. Lewis’s ignorance is his statement that claims the drive-thru wasn’t there originally.

Well the true fact is that the drive-thru was always associated with that structure. If a little bit of research was done on the part of Mr. Lewis, he would not come off as sounding so ill informed. …

The fact is that it was Mr. Robert O. Peterson (the founder of the Jack In The Box chain) who brought the intercom system and the drive-thru combination to fruition to make his restaurant chain the cutting edge of technology. Oh, and did I mention that he did it right here in San Diego! The drive-thru is the brand of the Jack in the Box chain!

So Mr. Lewis, next time you want to get rid of a piece of San Diego history it would be better served for you to burn down a museum instead of attacking a San Diego icon! …

Councilman Todd Gloria weighed in on this matter also. With his profound nature, Mr. Gloria comes off as siding with the minority on this matter, the minority being the group that is against the drive-thru construction. These naïve individuals should have performed their due diligence properly before purchasing their homes in the area. …

In the article, Mr. Gloria is quoted as saying that the Land Development Code (Section 12.7.1) must be changed so that “this scenario cannot be repeated.” Mr. Gloria infers that once changed, the City Council will have approval of all future construction projects throughout the city. …

In the meantime, we have a building department that is responsible for sanctioning construction work to be done within the guidelines of the laws, as they are written today. In other words: the city does not need two factions doing the same job while being paid. We already have a system in place that functions adequately.

I happened to drive by the Jack In The Box on Aug. 5 and saw the picket party outside the structure. Of the 15 people that I saw demonstrating, I do not believe that these people represent the majority of the residents throughout the North Park area. If it did, then somebody needs to go back to math class. …

—Mark McDaniel, second-generation North Park resident via email

Our editorial, your responses

Editor’s note: our editorial “Mayor Bob Filner must resign,” published in the Aug. 16 issue (Vol. 5, Issue 17), received much feedback: some positive, but many critical of our opinion. While Council President Todd Gloria commended us on coming forward in asking for the mayor’s resignation because of Filner’s own admitted mistreatment of women, several online responders felt we were better off not saying anything. Below is a selection of your comments, for and against.

I have just finished reading your editorial on Bob Filner. I am so disappointed in Uptown News and your political stance on Mr. Filner. Why not write that he deserves a fair hearing on these charges rather asking he resign? I do not know Mr. Filner but do know a public hanging when I see one, and apparently you have joined voices with the vocal many who demand he resign.

I have cancelled my subscription to U-T [San Diego] because of their endless political tirade against Filner and have looked forward to reading your local paper for an honest assessment of what’s going on in my neighborhood. Now I am not so sure!

—Peg Pogul, Talmadge via sduptownnews.com

The 6th Amendment guarantees the accused the right to be confronted with the accusers, in the U.S court of law. I did not vote for our Mayor, Bob Filner. I campaigned and voted for Carl DeMaio, however I stand behind our mayor’s right to due process of law.

It is unethical, cruel and immoral to crucify, ruining someone life, solely on hearsay.

Don’t forget – we are a nation of laws. Everything else is just an opinion, especially media and social-media opinion. Just because the majority said it was true, doesn’t make it true. Sexual harassment is “he said, she said” and the truth.

I have met our Mayor numerous of times, and he was a perfect gentleman.

—Gwen Coronado, via sduptownnews.com

My major concern is that a local newspaper that I have supported and enjoyed has jumped on a TV/U-T bandwagon to destroy a man whose career has been dedicated to supporting the people, that is, those who are in need of public support. I am surprised that you buy into the monied interests, the developers, who have intended, since January, to rid our city of a man who has done all he can to make it possible for the underdogs among us to have a decent life in a city that is “finest” only for those with wealth.

Please reassess your stance. Have the courage to speak for the people who have no voice, who need your voice. Surely you recognize that the harassment issues are an orchestrated play to grab the masses. I know the mayor, have seen what he has done, and am aware of his flaws. They pale in comparison with the crucifixion of his life and work that you are now, sadly, perpetrating. Please respond, in the spirit of good journalism.

—Bonnie Bekken, Normal Heights via sduptownnews.com

I am a woman in Uptown. Please do not speak for me. I support due process for everyone. Each of these allegations must be judged on its own merit. There is little if anything there.

Did Todd Gloria get to you?

—Christine, via sduptownnews.com

Amen, Peg [Pogul, from above]. I cannot even begin to express the disgust I feel toward this editorial. I have no clue what really motivated this attack, but they sure aren’t being honest about it in their stated reasons. Surely their readership is intelligent enough to know that, and to think for themselves what’s really going on here. And I hope that they will continue to be fair and open and unbiased toward our mayor, unlike this scurrilous rag.

—Katherine Lopez, via sduptownnews.com

I understand that there is disappointment in having a restraint placed on the funds coming from the hotel tourist tax, and that limiting its use makes Downtown businesses upset. But if distribution of that tax to hotel associations is determined by a court to be illegal, the city would, again, be paying to defend it or the consequence of losing a lawsuit. Hoteliers were asked to sign a release of responsibility for the use of these funds that would protect the city. Not many agreed to do so! Why not?

This is what is at the heart of this recall effort, not any sexual harassment by the mayor. I am disappointed that I see one less alternative to a local news provider as a result of this editorial. I had hopes!

—Cliff Beck, via sduptownnews.com

I see several reader comments opposing the editorial and stating that Filner is entitled to due process. I get the due process part – Filner is entitled to stand and fight if he so desires. I cannot, however, understand the comments that hint at opposing the very existence if the editorial.

We are a nation based in part on the right to free expression. Commenting in opposition to the editorial views expressed makes perfect sense, but opposing the very right to express a viewpoint is just un-American. I applaud San Diego Uptown News for expressing an opinion – and I agree with it.

Further, those in positions of leadership and authority know full well this isn’t about his or her rights as an individual; it goes far beyond that. They must consider the impact of their actions on their constituents and do the right thing for those they represent, even if it means not availing themselves of all rights afforded narrowly to them as individuals. Unfortunately, politics seems to attract those with narcissistic personalities, and as such they think only of themselves at the expense of the very people they are charged to protect. Sadly, this seems to be another one of those cases.

—Rob via sduptownnews.com

I’m surprised and disappointed that many have commented here lambasting [San Diego Uptown News] for this editorial. Asking for Filner to resign is not denying him the right to due process. He can and will be afforded that opportunity when he is charged with the crime of sexual harassment as having the chance to confront his accusers.

Those are his rights but his ability to serve the public as mayor is compromised by these numerous and serious allegations. All of Filner’s good work in the past doesn’t exempt him from the law.

As someone who has apparently had a long and varied career in politics and one who cares about San Diego, he should recognize that stepping down is the best thing he can do for the community. The best thing readers can do is support this paper for being willing to say “the emperor has no clothes.” The rest of the nation has been waiting for someone to step up and say it.

—Geoff Pritchard, via sduptownews.com

Saying that the Mayor has the right to due process and, at the same time, saying he should step aside if he uses it seems to be a bit of twisted logic. If he stepped aside, and was then vindicated, he would have suffered a penalty undeservedly. That, certainly, is not the intent or purpose of due process.

The accusers deserve satisfaction, if the complaints are valid. What they do not deserve is the ability to destroy a person’s life and political career through mere accusation. Let the court system pursue this matter as these complainants wish. After all, it was a lawsuit that was filed. I am certain it was “the law” that they wanted to be the arbiter in this matter, not the press inciting the populace to force punishment through its editorials, constant and daily printed articles, and advertisements for recall petitions (citing time and places).

—Cliff Beck, via sduptownnews.com