Mayor Urges Port Board to Support Her Plans for Waterfront Library

Acting on behalf of San Diego and four other cities, Mayor Maureen O’Connor appeared before the Board of Port Commissioners Tuesday to argue the need for a “regional” library at the foot of Broadway and for an extensive capital improvement program.

The latter would benefit the five port cities--San Diego, Coronado, National City, Imperial Beach and Chula Vista--so the mayors of each city appeared before the commissioners Tuesday to represent, in O’Connor’s words, “our clear consensus.”

Dr. Robert Penner, chairman of the Board of Port Commissioners, appointed two separate ad hoc committees, one to study the library proposal and the other to weigh the five-year capital improvement plan for port properties, of which the library would be a part.

After the meeting, O’Connor said she was pleased with “the first step” toward building a library at the Lane Field site, referring to the waterfront area at the foot of Broadway where the San Diego Padres’ minor-league team once played.

Lane Field “is the best site in this city,” the mayor said. “It’s the last remaining opportunity, in my opinion, to have a truly signature cultural library center in the city of San Diego.

“San Francisco has a major library. Chicago has a major library. Los Angeles is building a new library, and we’re still talking about it. This is the opportunity, so, we should take it. I’m very pleased all of the other mayors support this concept.”

At O’Connor’s request, the San Diego City Council recently endorsed the Lane Field library concept unanimously. Port officials then raised doubts about whether land at the foot of Broadway could legally be used for a library.

But, on Tuesday, the pros or cons of the library issue were left for future meetings. The only argument was whether the mayors of the five cities could be members of the ad hoc committees. The port’s legal counsel concluded that they could not.

At the urging of O’Connor, Commissioner Lynn Schenk, one of three representing the city of San Diego, called for the port to actively solicit the mayors’ views at each stage of the process. O’Connor said the mayors would form their own committees to consult with the port.

O’Connor first revealed her desire for the Lane Field library during her State of the City address in January, proposing “a storybook library of legendary chapters and fabled ingredients.”

Almost immediately thereafter, the State Lands Commission called the mayor’s proposal “inappropriate and unacceptable” because state law requires that tidelands be used for recreation, commerce, fishing and navigation.

O’Connor has publicly acknowledged that the city lacks the estimated $70 million to $84 million needed for the library but said Tuesday that private contributions and free land from the port will be imperative. She called it a “public-private partnership.”

Backers of the Lane Field site noted at Tuesday’s meeting that O’Connor is supported not only by the local group, Friends of the Library, but also the Sony Corp. of America, which has promised library-related “gifts” if the building is built at the foot of Broadway.

After the meeting, O’Connor was asked if a compromise had been arranged, whereby mayors of the other port cities agreed to support the waterfront library in exchange for her backing on a port-wide capital improvements program.

“We decided to get together and be united,” she said. “We all agreed that we want the capital improvement program, and that we want a regional library.”

O’Connor’s side was represented by more than a dozen speakers, who extolled libraries as beneficial to the intellectual life of an individual and the cultural and educational enrichment of a city.

Only one naysayer was heard.

Wayne Raffesberger, executive director of San Diegans Inc., said his group is opposed to the Lane Field site because of fears that it would adversely affect plans for a large municipal park at the foot of Broadway.

O’Connor said the ideas were “complementary, not competitive.”

“The broad-based consensus necessary for such a plan is still lacking,” Raffesberger said. “Despite the numbers of (pro-Lane Field) speakers here today, do we really know what such a library will cost? We’ve been told that it would be between $70 million and $84 million.

“But the size being talked about is comparable to that of the new library in San Francisco, which is roughly 400,000 square feet. That one is costing more than $100 million, and theirs offers an easier site for construction. This is a very expensive project.”

Raffesberger questioned the wisdom of storing books on a waterfront site, which poses complications in terms of the many restrictions affecting the bayfront water table.

“There are far more accessible sites in the Centre City East area,” he said.

After Raffesberger’s remarks, O’Connor went to the lectern for rebuttal.

She said there had never been talk of funding for a library in the Centre City East area--only for a new City Hall in that location--and that Lane Field had long been considered as the best site for a new library.

“This is not a new issue,” she said. “If we followed the vision of San Diegans Inc., we wouldn’t have a new library for 100 years. San Diegans Inc. was uncomfortable with the trolley. They were uncomfortable with the trolley on Broadway, so we moved it to C Street.

“Now they admit that was the biggest mistake they ever made. Please think of the future and not the past. Make a decision based not on the bottom line but on what’s best for the interests of our children.”