Every week, we try to give you a sampling of the interesting back-and-forths our commenters are having about our stories. Haven’t registered to comment? You can do so here and join the lively discussions about important issues in San Diego.
Here are five comments from the week:
It’s really disgraceful that Councilmembers don’t visit this part of their district. This peaceful valley is a classic diamond in the rough. The closed Verger Dairy sits right on the San Dieguito River Trail, which you should have mentioned in your article. It should have the full support and subsidies provided to be a destination for school kids on a field trip, to learn where their milk comes from. Instead of providing near-free water to the “last thing we need in San Diego” sod farms and palm farms, there could be small heritage farms, producing organic foods, and educating kids about the most honorable and necessary career of farming. There will someday be a trail connecting the Valley to Ramona, up the Santa Maria Canyon to the Ramona Grasslands. The history of the Battle of San Pasqual should be better told: even many kids today have heard of Kit Carson. And the San Diego Archaeological Center continues to do serve a unique purpose. There is so much there, and it could be a major tourist attraction, beyond Safari Park, and still be preserved.
Bottom line is if you don’t want to shop there don’t. That’s why the original business isn’t there anymore.
While I like Fletcher’s background and would otherwise find him acceptable to be the next mayor, that midnight deal was so outrageous that I cannot, in my own small way (one vote), vote for him.
As for Carl (DeMaio)’s comments, well, they make no sense. There is nothing private about this. The City is using its Charter powers to impose a tax on a particular type of business and allowing those businesses to decide if they want to pay the tax. There are reasonable legal arguments on both sides of the issue. That’s why the City isn’t going to actually levy the tax until after there’s a judicial validation. If the court says it doesn’t work then we’ll have an answer. If it does work this will open up a world of possibility for raising revenue for specific purposes. I don’t know if that’s good or bad but it is interesting.
I support the goal of environmental protection, but I believe that it must be balanced against the needs of our cities and economies. It often seems that environmentalists aren’t willing to strike this balance, and instead simply oppose growth and development at all costs. This is a losing strategy because it ignores the inevitability of population growth. Zero harm to the environment simply is not possible in a civilized and growing society. It would be much wiser for environmentalists to acknowledge the existence of growth and the need for development to support it, and instead to advocate for the least-harmful growth patterns. The Regents Road bridge (in addition to the trolley, which Friends of Rose Canyon already killed) contributes to this smarter pattern of growth.
Statements have been lightly edited to fix spelling errors and typos.
Want to contribute to discussion? Submit a suggestion to Fix San Diego.
Dagny Salas is the web editor at Voice of San Diego. You can contact her directly at firstname.lastname@example.org or 619.550.5669.
Like VOSD on Facebook.
Value investigative reporting? Support it. Donate Now.