Port Board Opposes Proposed Ballot Initiative

The Board of Port Commissioners has voted unanimously to oppose a proposed ballot initiative that seeks to amend the San Diego Unified Port District's master plan to allow hotels, restaurants and possibly a sports stadium at the Tenth Avenue Marine Terminal cargo facility. The Board unanimously agreed that the initiative threatens the viability of the terminal by allowing non-maritime uses.

"I'm one thousand percent opposed to this initiative," Commissioner Stephen Cushman said.

The Board, along with its outside legal counsel, questioned the legality of the initiative while raising a concern that the proposed changes could compromise security at the Tenth Avenue Marine Terminal.

"There is no question, I believe this initiative is misleading," Commissioner Sylvia Rios said.

Commissioner Michael Najera said he had first-hand knowledge of the misleading nature of the signature-gathering effort. While attending a Cinco de Mayo event, he saw a sign encouraging people to sign the petition so the Port of San Diego can create thousands of jobs. For a moment, he thought the Port might be recruiting, until he saw that the sign was carried by one of the signature-gatherers for the initiative.

"People are being deceived," Commissioner Najera said. "I was even misled."

The proponents of the initiative were invited to attend a May 6 Board of Port Commissioner's meeting but no one was in attendance.

"I am disheartened not to hear the other side," said Commissioner Robert "Dukie" Valderrama.

Commissioners left the door open for the proponents to address the Board at a future board meeting.

In taking the action, Board members expressed concern that the initiative would harm the Tenth Avenue terminal and actually jeopardize maritime uses.

"Although the initiative title pretends to preserve maritime trade in San Diego, closer analysis reveals something quite different," Sharon Cloward, the president of the San Diego Port Tenants Association, told the board. "The initiative mandates private development of the Tenth Avenue Terminal in the form of hotels, and other commercial development, most of which is not compatible with waterfront cargo operations."

The initiative, "The Port of San Diego Marine Freight Preservation and Bay Front Redevelopment Initiative," was proposed by a group known as San Diego Community Solutions, LLC. The County of San Diego Registrar of Voters has calculated the number of valid signatures needed to qualify the measure for the November ballot.

The Port of San Diego is considered a strategic port by the military, which often uses the Tenth Avenue terminal for classified operations. Removing the Port from the military system of ports would be problematic for the military.

Additionally, the San Diego Unified Port District is part of a network of ports across the country and world, particularly in the Far East and Europe. Reconfiguring the way cargo is delivered to the Port of San Diego and others could complicate cargo handling at other ports, particularly along the West Coast.

Besides taking the action opposing the initiative, the Board will express its opposition in letters to virtually every elected and appointed office holder in the county, members of the state Legislature, the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General and the state Lands Commission and the California Coastal Commission.

The proposed initiative, whose language commissioners believe is vague, confusing and ambiguous, also states that the Tenth Avenue terminal is under used, a claim they argue is unsupported.

Pete Litrenta, executive director of the Ship Repair Association, characterized the initiative as nothing more than a land grab by developers and out of town investors.

"This is bad for the region and upsets the economic diversity of our regional economy by replacing maritime businesses with more hotels and retail business," he said to the board.

Much of the region's building material, for example, sand and cement, come through the Port's Tenth Avenue terminal. In the past five years, the terminal has processed 12.6 million tons of maritime cargo. That represents $1.6 billion to the region's economy. More than 14,400 jobs are tied to the cargo operation, and the average pay is roughly $54,000 a year. Despite the current economic downturn, the Port is projecting future growth.

That growth is based on the upswing in the global market. Imports to the United States, due in part to the off-shoring of U.S. manufacturers and the increased output of the China market, are expected to grow by upwards of 60 percent by 2020. The Port expects to see double-digit growth as well.

The Port also questions the legality of the initiative because it seeks to amend the Port Master Plan. The initiative's language, commissioners believe, appears to be inconsistent with the state's mandate and the master plan, which is a guide for Port operations and development. The Port of San Diego was created by the state Legislature in 1962 to manage San Diego Bay and the waterfront property and the initiative raises questions over state pre-emption.

While the Port is prohibited from spending public money to influence an election's outcome, the law permits the board, which is a legislative body, to take a position on a Port-related ballot measure.

CORRECTION: Due to information from a source, a May 6 release announcing the Board of Port Commissioner’s opposition to “The Port of San Diego Marine Freight Preservation and Bay Front Redevelopment Initiative” incorrectly said at least 75,000 valid signatures are needed to qualify the measure for the November ballot. This number was an initial estimate and is incorrect based on the current calculation by the County of San Diego Registrar of Voters. We apologize for any inconvenience.