NEWS FROM PAGE 3 PARTNERSHIP


look at doing more projects in more neighborhoods.” And I think there came to be a great awareness of how much money there was and what it could be spent for.


BALTIC: It’s interesting that a lot of the organizations – and even some of the individuals – that are so critical now of the board and the numbers and that sort of thing were supportive of that strategy back then. I spoke extensively with a past chair of the Uptown Planners organization. He was a member for 20 years and a chair for six years. The Partnership would go [to Uptown Planners’ meetings] every month, talking about the garage and the project and everything, and he said there was no opposition in the community to that strategy. And so if the board’s job is to respond to the community, it certainly was doing that then. Now I know Uptown Planners has changed all their staff, they’ve changed their focus and all that, which is fine and that’s a good thing. But this board has changed as well and we’ve changed our focus. No longer is it dominated by one neighborhood and the projects reflect that.


Q: THE GRAND JURY REPORT CENTERED ON AN ALLEGED MISUSE OF FUNDS. YOU SUBMIT YOUR EXPENSES TO THE CITY MONTHLY, CORRECT?


SCHULTZ: Yes, we do.


Q: DID ANYONE EVER QUESTION YOUR EXPENSES?


SCHULTZ: No, certainly not in the five-plus years I’ve been here there’s never been a question about what we’ve submitted or any hint of that.


Q: HAVE YOUR EXPENSES INCREASED DRAMATICALLY?


SCHULTZ: For the five years I’ve been here I think that there’s been relatively slight increase, perhaps, but you would expect that with cost of living.


Q: THE GRAND JURY’S FOREWOMAN ACCUSED THE PARTNERSHIP OF CREATING ONLY 20 PARKING SPACES BUT IN SOME MEDIA REPORTS YOU’VE ARGUED, CAROL, THAT THE PARTNERSHIP IS ADDING AS MANY AS 90.


SCHULTZ: Neither of those is exactly right. There are 25 new parking spaces on San Diego Avenue in the Five Points neighborhood. There are 15 new spaces on Normal Street. We are looking at expanding the parking in the next block of Normal Street where that median that the farmers’ market currently uses is. IT?? It would still accommodate the farmers’ market but we are looking at probably a minimum of 90 new spaces and we’re working with the city on a design for that right now.


Q: WHEN DO YOU PROJECT Baltic


THAT PARKING TO BE AVAILABLE?


SCHULTZ: Best-case scenario is a couple of years.


Q: EVEN USING 90 PARKING SPACES AS YOUR BASE, THE PARTNERSHIP SPENT $12,000 PER SPACE. HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THAT ANALYSIS?


SCHULTZ: If you only want to accept the standard of creating parking spaces as the only thing we do, that’s a mistaken idea about what the Partnership does. We’re managing parking but we’re also improving mobility and traffic flow. If you look, for example, at the intersection of Washington and Goldfinch (in Mission Hills), a significant portion of that funding also came from meter revenues. So it’s a false measure to simply say the only thing we do is create parking spaces.


Q: THOSE WHO LIVE IN OR OWN BUSINESSES NEAR METERED AREAS COMPLAIN THEY AREN’T SEEING ANY RESULTS, NOT JUST THAT THERE IS A LACK OF NEW PARKING SPACES.


BALTIC: I would say that that has to do with the history, where the consensus of the community was “we want one big project.” And there is a lag time (for new projects). If there’s a finger of sloth that needs to be pointed anywhere, we’ll just look at those 15 spaces on Normal Street. Fully funded by the [decision of the] board, it took the city over two years just to produce the drawings. We’re as frustrated with making things happen as the rest of the community.


RAST: The other thing is, we can’t put in enhancements. The policy is very restrictive in terms of what we can do with that money.


BALTIC: We have projects for bicycle parking. We have projects for motorcycle parking. It’s not just four-wheeled vehicles. And pedestrian safety and mobility. We say we want it now, here’s the money, and it’s two, three, four years down the road before it shows up.


Q: BUT EVEN WHEN YOU ADD ALL THAT UP, $3.6 MILLION IN OPERATING EXPENSES VS. $1.1 MILLION IN PROJECTS APPEARS IMBALANCED.


SCHULTZ: We have 31 projects proposed for the coming fiscal year. Ninety-five percent of the


Rast


available funds are allocated to projects. I think that’s a pretty good number.


Q: BUT CAN YOU SEE HOW PEOPLE LOOKING AT THOSE NUMBERS MIGHT SAY YOU’RE JUST REACTING TO THE GRAND JURY REPORT AND SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR A PAST MISUSE OF FUNDS?


BALTIC: Absolutely and I was one of those people when I walked into the first meeting (of Uptown Partnership’s board).


Q: WHAT CHANGED YOUR MIND, BEN?


BALTIC: First of all, I attended the meetings for a year and I saw the roadblocks – what they were trying to do, the restructuring process. It just doesn’t happen overnight. But what I also saw was a core of people that are really dedicated to getting results for the community and striving to get things done. I don’t see a better organization anywhere out there to do what this board is trying to do right now in the community. The focus has changed. They’ve responded quickly to the change. But the lag, of course, is in the results.


Q: SOME GROUPS ARE ORGANIZING TO BREAK AWAY FROM THE PARTNERSHIP, SUCH AS FIVE POINTS. WHAT IS YOUR REACTION TO THAT EFFORT?


RAST: Our challenge is to continue to look at things from a regional perspective. We have to balance between individual interests and the community interests, and that’s what we’re attempting to do. So there’s always going be people who want more of the pie.


BALTIC: When I was sitting on the outside looking in, I was saying, “How hard can it be to change those five parking spaces to seven angled ones?” Well, did you know you have to go all the way to the City Council to do that? And that’s going to be the same for them. They’re going to find that it takes them two and a half years to get a set of drawings for a crosswalk. That part of the equation isn’t going to change.


SCHULTZ: And the city would have to work with five entities instead of one. So that’s a transfer of costs, not a savings.


BALTIC: That’s why I think this organization is unique because there will be times when we


can leverage the funds from the Uptown community. The Five Points project is a good example of this. If Five Points had been its own little parking district all these years and it saved every single nickel it had ever gotten in parking meter money, they couldn’t have done the project that’s happening right down there now. If [Uptown Partnership] wasn’t able to take just a little more money and make it happen, we wouldn’t get that. So if you dissolve this and make five little neighborhood things, the community will lose the option of the overall view of everything.


Q: SOME BUSINESS OWNERS SAY UPTOWN’S PARKING METERS SHOULD BE


REMOVED, THAT THEY ARE A TAX ON CUSTOMERS.


BALTIC: The 15 new spaces on Normal Street were metered because the business people wanted them, so they see the value in that.


Q: BUT HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO A BUSINESS OWNER WHO SAYS, “I CAN GO OVER TO NORTH PARK AND OPEN A BUSINESS AND MY CUSTOMERS WON’T BE SUBJECT TO PARKING METERS”?


RAST: I might say that in North Park you might have an employee parking in front of


see Partnership, page 10


San Diego Uptown News | June 25-July 8, 2010


7


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28