Vote Signals Major Shift on S.D. Council

Tuesday’s elections produced a philosophical shift of dramatic proportions on the San Diego City Council, sweeping out a conservative, generally pro-development majority and installing a managed-growth, environmentalist leadership for the first time in at least two decades.

Environmentalists expect the landslide victory of Linda Bernhardt and the narrow reelection of Councilwoman Abbe Wolfsheimer to give them a solid foundation of at least four--and usually five--votes on many environmental and development issues, and they say it will shift the general tenor of the council’s outlook on the high-priority growth issue.

They expect Tuesday’s winners to join Councilman Bob Filner and Councilman-elect John Hartley as strong environmental votes on many issues, and to pick up Mayor Maureen O’Connor, Councilman Wes Pratt or Councilman Ron Roberts as the crucial fifth vote needed for a majority on the nine-member council.

“I think it’s a historic moment,” said Ron Ottinger, chairman of the Sierra Club’s Committee on Political Education. “For the first time, we have an environmental majority on the council. It’s never happened before, and we wouldn’t have had it if district elections hadn’t passed a year ago.”

But, before the Sierra Club prepares to confiscate the keys to every bulldozer in town, it must be recognized that the environmental coalition of strong, sometimes clashing personalities tethered together by ideology can be a fragile one.

Moreover, coalitions on the nonpartisan council form and crumble with each new issue. Filner, for example, wants the city’s major airport moved to Miramar Naval Air Station in Bernhardt’s district, a concept with which Bernhardt will never agree, she said Wednesday.

“You may have a managed-growth majority, but the managed-growth majority may not be in favor of everything,” said J. Gary Underwood, chairman of the Save Miramar Lake Committee, many of whose members worked for Bernhardt’s election.

There are old feuds to be patched up--Filner and O’Connor have been sniping at each other since Filner’s inauguration nearly two years ago--and newer insults that may stand in the way. O’Connor was incensed at what she considered a low blow against her Soviet arts festival in a Bernhardt campaign mailer this fall. Bernhardt said Wednesday that the two have put the mailer behind them.

And, for many, there is the question of whether O’Connor, stymied for the past three years by the conservative “Gang of Five,” will step forward to lead and promote an environmental agenda.

“She has a tremendous opportunity to establish an agenda, to develop an agenda with the council members who are philosophically in sync with her,” said Councilman Wes Pratt.

The mayor’s emergence could cause more conflict with Filner if the councilman attempts to mold and lead the majority. Filner actively campaigned for Bernhardt and Hartley and aided Wolfsheimer, dramatically strengthening his position on the council with their victories. Victories by incumbents Ed Struiksma or Gloria McColl would have left Filner wide open for retribution by them.

As a sign of the rapidly changing times, the leaders of two managed-growth organizations that had been gearing up to petition initiatives onto the June, 1990 ballot said Wednesday that they will ask the new council to enact the measures itself or place them directly on the ballot. The idea would have been unthinkable before voters removed pro-growth Struiksma and McColl from office.

“There has been a seismic shift here in perceptions about what the electorate wants, and therefore all members of the council are much more receptive about a tough and fair and comprehensive growth-management plan,” said Peter Navarro, chairman of Prevent Los Angelization Now.

Navarro said PLAN will ask the council either to consider its growth-management proposal or to place it directly on the June, 1990, ballot, bypassing the costly process of gathering more than 50,000 signatures to put it before voters.

The Save Miramar Lake Committee, which is seeking to prevent construction of more than 600 homes on the northern shores of the reservoir, will request the same thing, Underwood said. To be safe, however, the group will continue preparing its initiative, which would restrict development in the watersheds of Lakes Miramar, Hodges and Murray, for the June ballot.

What’s more, some environmentalists believe that the shift in the council’s center of gravity will make even generally pro-growth council members such as Bruce Henderson and Judy McCarty hesitant to vote those sentiments, especially now that growth and environmental organizations have demonstrated their electoral muscle in the Wolfsheimer and Bernhardt races. Both candidates were aided by sizable forces of single-issue volunteers.

“What I see is a very strong environmental coalition,” Bernhardt said. “People like the mayor and Abbe and John and Bob, and, even to a large degree, Ron Roberts will be very receptive to my environmental position.”

Environmentalists, who have long suffered in the minority position and have tired of costly ballot initiatives, will be demanding action soon after the new council is sworn in next month.

“The council needs to act. They need to legislate,” Ottinger said. “They need to do something about sensitive lands immediately. They need to get the wetlands trust fund up and running. They need to start dealing with the whole transportation issue immediately and really come up with a growth-management plan that makes sense.”

But sobering realities will confront the new council. To begin with, it already has approved contracts called “development agreements” that allow construction of more than 20,000 homes from 1988 to 2007, according to figures provided by the Construction Industry Federation.

The agreements cover large chunks of the city’s already burdened northern tier, and could add as many as 2,400 homes annually, even if the council does not approve another new home.

“The big pieces of land in the suburban areas, the 200- or 300-unit subdivisions, are essentially past the point of the council denying them,” said Tim O’Connell, O’Connor’s land-use adviser.

Reducing the densities of upcoming housing projects could reduce the development fees the city requires to build the roads, parks, schools and fire stations needed in urbanizing areas, O’Connell said.

Robert Morris, vice president of the Building Industry Assn., cautioned that limits on growth in the face of continued economic and population expansion will send home prices up and exacerbate current housing problems.

The city will continue to face an acute shortage of funds for its infrastructure and for other major facilities such as its planned new central library. The shortage is estimated at about $1 billion. The new council’s challenge will be to guarantee that public facilities are available concurrent with their need by new residents.

A commission headed by former Assistant City Manager John Fowler is exploring ways to finance the need.

In addition to financing facilities, the council is expected to face other environmental and growth questions, including construction of the city’s $2.8-billion secondary sewage system, a more aggressive water conservation program, protection of environmentally sensitive lands and protecting open space.

It may receive requests to open up the city’s 52,000-acre urban reserve, which is off-limits to development unless voters approve a new project.

Pratt predicted easier passage for human service-oriented programs, such as a $54-million Housing Trust Fund designed to promote construction of low-income housing, and an anti-discrimination ordinance known as the Human Dignity Ordinance.

Several proposed charter changes, including measures on redistricting and enhancing the mayor’s power, that were sidetracked by the “Gang of Five” may be resurrected for consideration by the new council, others said.

“There is a much more progressive bent on the City Council” that takes office in December, Pratt said.

DAY AFTER--A look at the changes resulting from Tuesday’s election. B1