Council Votes To Oppose Prop B

The San Diego City Council voted Monday to formally oppose a measure on the November ballot that seeks authority to build a deck over a downtown San Diego shipping terminal for a new sports stadium.

The City Council voted 7-1 to reject Proposition B.

Councilman Jim Madaffer was the only member of the City Council who cast his vote in favor of the proposed deck over the 96-acre 10th Avenue Marine Terminal for development.

Madaffer applauded the developers for "looking outside the box," but acknowledged the idea needed more vetting.

His colleagues, however, were all against the idea, arguing that the project was inconsistent with the port's master plan; wouldn't work with existing uses and would lead to additional traffic.

"There are so many things wrong with this," Councilwoman Donna Frye said. "This is not in the best interest of our city," she said. "It is not in the best interest of the port."

Supporters, led by developer Frank Gallagher, said the project would create land that could be used for the development of a stadium, hotels, a new cruise ship terminal and cargo operations.

Gallagher also testified it would also preserve maritime freight operations. "We would not have written this initiative if it was our intention to do away with marine freight," he said.

Gallagher was part of a private group that collected more than 34,000 valid signatures to get Proposition B on the Nov. 4 ballot.

The proposal has been vehemently opposed by the Port of San Diego, along with other bayfront users, including the military.

Michael Bixler, chairman of the Board of Port Commissioners, told the City Council this initiative was a "threat" to high-paying jobs and the economy. He also argued it was incompatible with the existing cargo operations at the 10th Avenue Marine Terminal.

"The reality is the types of uses this measure proposes cannot possibly coexist with a working cargo facility," Bixler said.

According to port authorities, the proposal would lead to the loss of port capacity for cargo ships, resulting on a $1.8 billion loss in revenues.

If the initiative passes, the port would be forced within 60 days to enter into an agreement with a private developer to redevelop the 10th Avenue Marine Terminal.