Letters: Reactions to the U-T's Waterfront Plan

Some readers’ thoughts on the U-T San Diego’s waterfront plan editorials.

Frederick Jackson:

When Mr. Manchester bought the paper it was, in my opinion, the end of “free journalism” here in San Diego. Now this week, the ugly head emerges. But it’s not anything new for the idle San Diegan unmindful of the “doins” of the alleged caretakers of our city. Yes, tourism is a vital industry and needs support, but this picture of a mega city looks mighty suspect. Meanwhile, the infrastructure crumbles and our schools lack funds, but the Chargers get their new downtown ball park and continue to lose.

Larry Christensen:

A couple of thoughts on Manchester’s grand opinion:

One, if he loves it so much, how much is he willing to put into the pot? Notice the Spanos clan is only willing to put in $200 million. Secondly, he proposes selling the Sports Arena and Qualcomm property to help pay for it, I guess so he can swoop in and develop that land. Can’t trust the guy!

Dan Lazzaro:

Who owns the property where these plans are being proposed? Who will build all this? How will Manchester personally benefit? The news is gone from print in San Diego!

Donna Cunningham posted on our Facebook page:

I read both editorials in the San Diego Union Tribune. Some questions remain unanswered. What about the people of San Diego? How much would we pay to see events in these sports venues if a $10 charge is added to all tickets? What plans does Manchester have for the land in Mission Valley and the Sports Arena area? What about the homeless who live downtown? Where will he “put them”? And do we really want neon signs making downtown look like the Vegas strip? On the brink of canceling my subscription!

Want to contribute to discussion? Submit a suggestion to Fix San Diego.