Foisting responsibilities onto the public
The following is a copy of a letter to Councilman Scott Peters:
Yet another scam against the City appears to be occurring in our neighborhood. A pedestrian ramp is being installed at city expense, at 8976 Cliffridge Ave., La Jolla. According to Street Division, it is being charged to the City of San Diego and to taxpayers as part of the power line undergrounding.
However, that pedestrian ramp should have been required by the current property owner/lease holder at 8976 Cliffridge Ave., who did renovations on that property. It should also have been paid for by that owner or leaseholder. The property owner did renovations to convert that residential property into a business, illegally, without permits, has apparently refused to make the required ADA changes, thus totally skirting its civic responsibilities, and leaving San Diego taxpayers to pick up the bill.
Other homeowners, like ourselves, who did renovations legally, with the appropriate permits, were required by the City to put in pedestrian ramps at our own expense. While you and other City officials are well aware that the property owner at 8976 Cliffridge Ave. did not get the required permits, and still does not have them, why has the owner not been required to pay for the ramp at the corner adjacent to its property, at Cliffridge and La Jolla Scenic Drive North?
Specifically, please tell me why HIllel of San Diego, and its patron-property-owner, the Potiker Family Trust (whose name, by the way, appears nowhere on the registered deed to the property, though it is required that all owners provide such information!) can foist their responsibilities onto the public with impunity, while others of us cannot get our permits signed off until we have complied with San Diego’s regulations? Why is the City of San Diego paying for this apparent scam against the taxpayers? So much for Hillel’s constant public claim of “being a good neighbor.” Apparently even for its own disabled members, Hillel of San Diego has not complied with safety requirements.
Penelope Bourk, La Jolla
Please censor opinions
I was really, really disappointed that you published the letter by Albert Frowiss from Rancho Santa Fe asking to endorse Brian Bilbray (“Back Brian Bilbray now!”, UC/Golden Triangle News, April 27, page 6).
For some reason I thought you weren’t affiliated to any political party. I hope it was a mistake and that you will rectify it, because come June 6, I’ll be voting for Francine Busby!
Pia Mantovani-Sud, University City
No maverick he
Re: “Back Brian Bilbray Now! (Letter to the editor, UC/Golden Triangle News, April 27, page 6), Brian Bilbray a maverick? I don’t think so. After all, a maverick “resists adherence to a group”; a maverick is a dissenter. Bilbray would join the support of the administration’s economic plans, which have resulted in America’s largest deficit (currently approaching $9 billion!), and discretionary spending higher than any administration in history; Bilbray would support the administration’s foreign policy, which some are already calling the “worst disaster in American history”; and he is of the same ilk as other ex-Congressmen who make their living as lobbyists for Indian gaming interests.
Oh, and let’s not forget Bilbray’s relationship with Jack Abramoff. Bilbray was an outstanding proponent of keeping U.S. labor laws off the Marianas Islands after his own all-expense-paid junket to the islands. He also wrote letters to federal officials on behalf of a campaign donor, a dietary supplement distributor, whose banned ingredient was connected to more than 150 deaths.
Bilbray a maverick? Not a chance! He’s just like the rest of them.
Michael Brau, La Jolla
Student center at Site 653 not appropriate
The following is an open letter to San Diego city officials regarding the Site 653/Hillel Project No. 6098.
In his Vision for 2006, Council President Scott Peters sets out a list of admirable goals. If these objectives are applied to every council action taken, the public’s interests would well be served.
Protect our Families and Children
Improve Parks, Trails, Beaches and Bays
Enhance our Neighborhoods
Fund Streets, Sidewalks and Street Lights
Serve our Older Communities
(Ensure) A City Council Responsive to Taxpayers
When the criteria listed above are taken as a whole and applied to the Site 653 land-use matter, it becomes clear that the proposed development of a student center on this site is not appropriate. Uphold city codes and zoning regulations. Vote to deny the proposed Hillel student center project on Site 653.
J.W. Kramer, La Jolla
