Cleator on Growth

It’s easy for me, a 60-year-old native-born San Diegan, to appreciate the desire of other San Diegans to slow, if not stop, the onslaught of new residents to San Diego. Nevertheless, it strikes me as ironic that so many seem willing to stand back and allow the interlopers themselves to design our initiatives.

The Citizens for Limited Growth leadership appears determined to end growth in San Diego at any cost. But hasty solutions, more often than not, result in disastrous consequences. And, their precipitous remedy is to slam the door shut on all who would wish to become new residents or homeowners. The curious thing is that a majority of them are newcomers themselves, which makes them the problem they are complaining of. If my counterpart San Diegans and I had been of a similar disposition a few short years ago, they would have to be back in Hawaii, the Midwest or somewhere else delivering their death warrant.

And the death of San Diego’s vitality is most surely what they hope to accomplish if we can believe Linda Martin, co-chairman of Citizens for Limited Growth. For she says the very purpose of her group’s new initiatives is to “ . . . break the back . . . “ of the economic boom cycle San Diego enjoys. I am appalled that activists in our community would deliberately set out to nurture a recession (an economic boom whose back has been broken) in our city. How many more homeless do they want in our streets? Will they measure their success by the number of our neighbors who are rendered destitute by recession?

Ms. Martin has said that our economy draws a lot of outsiders and carpetbaggers, which she obviously views as a bad thing that must be discouraged. Since she and her husband are new arrivals--outsiders--also, I have to wonder what it was that drew them to San Diego and why she should believe her presence here is more acceptable or desirable than that of another.

These newcomers who abhor growth speak at length on the quality of life in San Diego but their actions tell us their concern is not for the good of San Diego as a whole; it is to serve their own purposes. For example, one of their number found fault with the County Island project. Not because it was a bad project--it had gained the approval of probably one of the most thoughtful community planning boards in the city; not because it was a high-density project--the density of County Island is less than in any other district and less than that of an adjoining project that gained unanimous council approval. County Island was objectionable because her backyard was adjacent to it, and she had something else in mind for her backyard, apparently.

San Diego’s development and progress is far too important an issue to decide on emotionalism. It is imperative that we understand all the ramifications of our actions and that the welfare of all San Diegans is taken into account. That cannot be the case if we allow a small group of uncompromising individuals, who have no training and little understanding of land use or our charter, to make our decisions for us behind closed doors, with or without the mayor’s sanction.

BILL CLEATOR

Councilman, District 2

San Diego