Politics Report: City Lost Height Limit Fight, Again

Judges do not like to reverse things voters do. They are reluctant to void ballot measures the public approves. And yet, now, to the complete shame of the city of San Diego, its leadership and the city attorney’s office, the Court of Appeal has once again thrown out a ballot measure that lifted the height limit for building construction in the Midway District.

Friday, in its ruling, the court agreed with the activist group Save Our Access, which argued that the city had, once again, failed to do a full report examining the environmental impacts of raising the height limit in the neighborhood.

Background: The area is subject to the 1972 voter-approved 30-foot coastal height limit. Like SeaWorld did 25 years ago, the city put up a ballot measure in 2020 to remove the heigh limit for the area.

Save Our Access argued then that the city did not do a special, required environmental impact report on the project. The city said the report it did for the whole neighborhood when it updated the community plan was sufficient. The court supported Save Our Access.

So the city did a new, supplemental environmental impact report. But city leaders only added an analysis of the impact of the change to views and neighborhood character. They believed that, because the community plan still limited density, regardless of the change of height, it didn’t need to analyze anything more than it’s impact on the way things look. Again, Save Our Access sued. And again, they have now won.

Here’s the ruling:

“The issue before us now is limited: whether the City complied with the CEQA requirements to adequately inform the public of the potential environmental impacts of approving the second ballot measure to remove the height limit in the Midway-Pacific Highway area, to identify possible mitigation measures, and to disclose the reasons for approving removal of the height limit even if there are significant environmental impacts. We conclude it did not.”

The Court of Appeal said the earlier ruling had expressly anticipated the city would study not just the impact of the change to views but other “potential impacts” to things like noise, air pollution and biological resources. The city did not do this.

The ruling is an extraordinary and embarrassing setback for the city. I was not able late Friday to get reaction from the mayor or city attorney. If you assumed that obviously they would make sure they didn’t screw it up the second time the way they did the first time, you were wrong.

What about the big sports arena development? Midway Rising, which promises thousands of affordable and market-rate housing units plus a new sports arena, plans to go well above the 30-foot height limit. It’s the project about which the mayor is most proud.

Reached late Friday the development team said they have a plan to argue the state and city density bonus laws (laws that allow builders to build higher and more densely if they provide affordable housing units in their project) will make it possible for them to continue with the project.

Battle Lines Drawn on Vacation Rental Tax

Wednesday, the Rules Committee for the San Diego City Council will consider Councilmember Sean Elo-Rivera’s push for a tax on empty second homes and vacation rentals. He and his supporters have polled the issue and asked whether voters supported an up-to $5,000 per bedroom annual tax on vacation rentals.

The business community and AirBnB seem to see it as an existential threat.

First, the argument for: As announced at Politifest, Elo-Rivera wants the city to start seeing tourism differently: not as a precious industry that needs to be coddled and nurtured but instead like oil in Norway: An incredibly valuable resource that the city should extract more social benefits from.

“The city needs resources to provide residents the things they want and need,” he said. “That conversation should begin with those with most means who do not live here.”

He said we have not even captured the cost of serving tourists, pointing out, for example, that most of the rescues lifeguards must perform every summer are to save visitors. And he’s aiming at vacation rentals in particular because of their impact on neighborhoods.

“We have neighborhoods that are not neighborhoods because speculators and investors see every home in them with dollar signs and have detached themselves from the impacts of what they’re doing to them,” he said.

The tax would bring in money the city could use for its essential services and it would provide incentives for owners to put the homes back onto the market.

The argument against: The Chamber of Commerce started sending text messages to voters this week asking them to call members of the City Council to oppose the tax.

“We, the chamber, are tired of the targeted attacks on industries, particularly tourism,” said Chris Cate, the CEO of the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce. He said short-term vacation rentals have always been a part of San Diego’s tourism industry and the city spent years finding the right balance between taxing them and regulating them and allowing them to thrive.

AirBnB’s public policy senior manager Justin Wesson also released a written statement:

“More than 81 percent of Airbnb hosts in San Diego are local residents, and more than half say the income earned through hosting has helped them stay in their home. Airbnb supports meaningful solutions that help generate and protect local revenue across the state, but a hefty tax that significantly raises costs for residents who occasionally share their home to make extra money is not the right approach. We welcome the opportunity to work with City Council on legislative efforts that would actually help bolster affordability in the city.”

Elo-Rivera took issue with the idea that this was an attack on the tourism industry in general. Vacation rentals are a small slice of the industry and the public does not feel like they pay their fair share.

“If anything narrow like this we do is going to be received as an attack on the tourism industry as a whole, that is a posture that will force everyday San Diegans to unfairly bear the burden of that industry extracting tremendous wealth and not giving back to San Diego,” Elo-Rivera said.

AirBnB’s implied threat: The company did a poll recently asking voters if they supported the 2022 ballot Measure B, which allowed the city to begin collecting a fee for trash collection. This year, the City Council and mayor implemented the fee at a much higher rate than they said it would be when Measure B passed.

The implication is that AirBnB and others may strike back try to put a measure on the ballot repealing the trash fee, which would blow a massive hole in the city’s budget.

The suggestion that could happen made Elo-Rivera irate. Repealing the fee would lead to the closure of parks and libraries, massive layoffs at the city and the browning out of fire stations and more.

“Anyone who suggests this should be completely ashamed of themselves should be a pariah in any serous San Diego circle and not be considered a member of the problem-solving community,” he said.

A June vote: He hopes the measure would make it on the June primary ballot. You may remember a movement to ensure major ballot decisions do not go on primary ballots because they should be weighed by the most voters possible. It became Measure L in 2016.

“Special interests and political insiders attempt to exert more influence during the primary when decisions can be made by small fraction of registered voters,” said then City Council President Sheri Lightner.

Elo-Rivera pointed out that was for ballot initiatives from signatures not for Council actions.

He said he has the support of the advocates of Measure L, most prominently Alliance San Diego.

“It’s not a community concern,” he said. And they need the money. “We are doing it for the very practical purpose that the problems we’re solving for need to be solved as soon as possible.”

Totally Unrelated: AirBnB Investing in San Diego Politics

AirBnB recently announced it was spending $15 million to support friendly political candidates in California. It also donated $1 million to the California Democratic Party.

The company told me that a big part of it is coming to San Diego.

“San Diego is a top focus of our broader California political strategy in 2026, and we plan to significantly back candidates who champion home sharing and tourism for the community,” said Wesson, in a written statement.

If you have any ideas or feedback for the Politics Report, send them to scott.lewis@voiceofsandiego.org.

The post Politics Report: City Lost Height Limit Fight, Again appeared first on Voice of San Diego.