Though they decline to say where it came from, boosters trying to prop up the edifice are claiming to have received more than $15 million in new pledges from private donors.
Add that to the $3 million boosters have already raised and they're only, of course, $67 million short of their fundraising goal.
Mel Katz, the vice chairman of the city's Library Commission and the chief booster, told me many months ago that I would soon enough be "surprised" by their fundraising success in the seasons to come.
I am shocked.
But not about the $15 million. I'm more just stunned that Katz and Co. are still sticking with the $185 million estimate about how much the library is supposedly going to cost to build. CityBeat at least mentioned that the estimate was suspect. The U-T, though, couldn't muster one word of skepticism or conceive of the possibility that an estimate of construction costs for the library might need updating after, oh, two years of sitting on the shelf.
I've gone through all this before but let's just sum this up. There's absolutely no way that costs of building a new main library downtown haven't gone up significantly since late 2005 when they last estimated the costs of the project. And though library boosters express some kind of perplexity about why people aren't donating to the project, I really don't know how you could see that as some kind of mystery.
Would you donate to something when its architects refuse to realistically estimate its costs? Katz told me this summer that they had no plans to update the estimate until they had raised enough money to get final go-ahead to build the library. In other words, if you want to know how much the library will cost before you donate to it, you have to donate to it.
And they need a lot of donations.
Yes, of course, I'm bringing back the pizza pie.
See, there's a reason nobody wants to provide a full estimate of how much this thing is going to cost. It's the unifying theory of major project development in San Diego: Inertia. Once you can get a project rolling, no matter what surprises come up, you've got the momentum and nothing can stop it. In other words, if they break ground on the library, start building and then quietly reveal that CCDC or the city is going to pay $30 million more than planned, what are we going to do?
And then there's my favorite of all jokes in this routine: Mayor Jerry Sanders' position that he supports it as long as no city funds are used to build it. The mayor's staff repeated it in the CityBeat piece. It's classic San Diego: The mayor gets his cake (credit for not spending money and being fiscally responsible) and eats it too (he gets to support the library).
Too bad it is just a hideous argument. The plan now, as is clear in the pizza, calls for CCDC to pay $80 million toward construction of the library. The city likes to pretend that CCDC is some kind of outside corporation that benevolently can shower its riches on downtown infrastructure and that we should all be grateful for whatever they decide to do.
But all CCDC decisions are subject to approval by the City Council. And the mayor is the executive director of the redevelopment agency -- CCDC's boss.
The city could, tomorrow, have CCDC funds redirected to, for example, pay off the debt the city owes on the downtown ballpark.
If we did that, millions would be freed up in the city's general fund. The city paid more than $19 million in 2007 for the ballpark.
This is money we could use to, say, pay for a new firefighting helicopter, which the mayor estimates will cost $16 million.
In fact, the other day, the mayor announced that we definitely needed a second firefighting helicopter. But, he said, the city couldn't afford it so we'd have to beg local wealthy people and their businesses to give City Hall some money -- a sort of charity cause.
So, in effect, the corporations that haven't yet been willing to give to the library are going to be asked to subsidize the city's purchase of a helicopter. This, when the mayor could pay for his own helicopter if he had different priorities.
The corporations might as well just give their money directly to the library boosters.
The only problem is, the library boosters still wouldn't have enough.
Comments so far on this story:
1. Tigershark wrote on December 12, 2007 8:29 PM:
"Let's just have a big bake sale!!! This is so stupid. It is time to repeal the People's Ordinance of 1919 and free up about $60 million a year for other things. This city's priorities are all screwed up; free trash pick for some, instead fire protection, or parks or pothole repair or paving or police or....."
2. Fed Up wrote on December 12, 2007 10:05 PM:
"Of course your pie chart is accurate -- the Library will cost more if it ever gets off the ground, and even I will admit that a new, needed and wonderful Main Library probably cannot be launched now because the city is such a political and fiscal shambles. Billionaire John Moores, beneficiary of so much San Diego largesse, ought to finance the whole damn thing and then take a deserved bow. Jerry Sanders ought to be replaced as Mayor. A civic-minded City Council should be elected, and there ought to be another term for City Attorney Mike Aguirre. When we finally get people in public office who have a public agenda, we will get a new public library downtown."
3. JF wrote on December 12, 2007 11:09 PM:
"Once again, the city's priorities need an overhaul.My suggestion?Concentra on what will save lives first... then move on to saving minds.Maybe sell one of the four brand spankin' new PD helos in favor of a larger, but used FD helo.Quit spending city money on artwork for just now.But a fire engine instead.And for (insert favorite deity here) sake, give up on the library."
4. Mel Shapiro wrote on December 13, 2007 9:31 AM:
"Your story makes the same mistakes as the Union Tribune,namely saying that CCDC funds the library. CCDC never funds projects nor does it buy real estate.Only the city council, acting as the Redevelopment Agency funds projects. You can check this with their lawyer or accountants.CCDC can only recommend actions to the city council.The council owns CCDC. About the lack of funds for our fire department,it seems odd that the city council found $26 million to remodel the Balboa Theatre,which is obviously more important than fire protection.You can bu a lot of fire trucks and helicopters for $26 million. Readers should be told that the Redevelopment Agency,which is the city council, owes the City general fund over $200 million,but the council refuses to pay back, so that they can continue to fund redevelopment frills like the Balboa."
5. Jeffrey Davis wrote on December 13, 2007 10:13 AM:
"Scott, I couldn't tell from your reporting if you contacted anyone in construction for a sense of where construction costs are now versus 2005. Can anyone here comment?"
6. JR wrote on December 13, 2007 10:52 AM:
"The main branch of the library was intended to take another 3 storeys; the architects who designed it planned for expansion. This has since been nixed because of updated seismic safety concerns. I say the SDPL ought to get the same waiver the rest of the unreinforced death traps in gaslamp got and add on to the building. It would be a stopgap for another half century, but it might be done for the amount they have now. As for Sanders, what can one say? He's the empty suit owned and worn out by those who own this burg and they've done such a poor job of city managing that their permit ought to be revoked. Sanders could be first in line for a one way ticket on a rail, tar and feathers at no extra charge."
7. Billy Bob Henry wrote on December 13, 2007 1:04 PM:
"Once again we get City workers like Tigershark and Jim F. going around saying we need to raise every tax in the City, all this why these City workers are in the top 1-10% of the highest paid workers in the nation. It gets me sick when I read comments like theirs day after day, time after time. They will continue to try to put their hands into the taxpayers pocket and steal from us, a reverse Robinhood syndrome, where the rich and well off steal from the poor and middle class. It is pathetic. All wee have to do is FREEZE all government worker wages, that is it. No cost of living allowances, no raises, no DROP, no buying service year credits, no pension increases, that would cure the red ikn problem."
8. Tigershark wrote on December 13, 2007 2:19 PM:
"Billy Boob, I do not work for the city."
9. David Miller wrote on December 13, 2007 2:43 PM:
"I agree with many of the fundamental points you make in your piece; however, there is an item that is notoriously absent from your article related to the existence of uncommitted City funds, as well as a point related to charitable donations, which I think needs some clarification. First, you indicate that the City could "tomorrow have CCDC funds redirected..." Where are these funds that are to be redirected? Do you know of an audit showing a pool of money, which currently exists that could be "redirected." And, more importantly, if such pool of funds does exist, are there contractual (bond) or legal restrictions on the use of such funds? Please research this. Next, why wouldn't the City take advantage of donations to purchase a helicopter after the devastation caused by the fires? Surely, you aren't saying not to accept money or that such a use is inappropriate or unwise."
10. No Nothing Party wrote on December 13, 2007 2:54 PM:
"BBH, can you please tell us where you get your stats from? There is no reason for city employees to get that much (top 1 to 10%) but I would like to find out if it's true."
11. Renovate Golden Hall wrote on December 13, 2007 3:21 PM:
"There is and has been only one answer to this issue: Turn Golden Hall (the disused Concourse building) into a new library. It would save gazillions, put people in the area where people should be, and make the city nicer. Plus, after this housing disaster is finished, the City can sell the current Taj Mahal library site, and make some dough from it."
12. Dale Peterson wrote on December 13, 2007 5:42 PM:
"Inertia, San Diego style. Get projects approved in segments. Never present the entire project as a complete concept, to be voted up, or down. Throw some grant money in, to make it look like it is partially "free." Roll out a few corporate benefactors who will be benevolently helping out the project, du jour (declare with a strident publicity angle that "no strings" are attached). Trash the personalities of the skeptics by using the public service component of the U-T's op. ed. dept. Play a shell game with the real financing by never revealing true costs, or the majority of the financial sources. Pretend to listen to the public during council hearings when 95% of the people in the room know that the decisions have already been made weeks ago. Increase our city's debt and leave it for someone else downline."
13. Don wrote on December 13, 2007 5:58 PM:
"Why are we obsessed with the helicopter? Its basically an airborne bucket brigade what was totally ineffective during the fires. Name one house saved or one foot of fire line held by Copter 1. The fire air force can fly in high winds but the cannot effectively attach fires. And the County has two copters, the Fores Service has one. Thats 4 more than the Cedar fire - no difference on the ground."
14. Billy Bob Henry wrote on December 13, 2007 6:21 PM:
"10. No Nothing Party wrote on December 13, 2007 3:54 PM: "BBH, can you please tell us where you get your stats from? There is no reason for city employees to get that much (top 1 to 10%) but I would like to find out if it's true.... It is certainly true of the SDFD, and many of the SDPD, because the value of their benefits/pensions is almost as much as their yearly pay. This is something they always forget to mention when they ask for more money-that their benefits are worth tens of thousands of dollars yearly. Links here to income distribution of all Americans link"
15. BBH wrote on December 13, 2007 6:25 PM:
"And here is a link to what is happening with the growing gap between the highly paid/compensated, under educated government employees and the private sector link"
16. Feeling Hopeful wrote on December 13, 2007 6:49 PM:
"I would like to hear from somebody authoritative whether Golden Hall really is big enough for a full-service public library with an auditorium for community gatherings. If it is, that is not a bad idea, as long as a real architect is involved in the makeover (as at the San Francisco Public Library at the Civic Center) since the parking garage is adjacent, public transit is present and the plaza would be better used than it is now. But no storing books off-site: does Golden Hall have sufficient room?"
17. Edgar wrote on December 13, 2007 7:26 PM:
"What do we have to do for the "final solution" to kill off the idea of the Taj Mahal/St. Peter's Basilica/Kremlin/For City main library in downtown SD? It just won't die. JF and I are not known to be bestest buddies forever, but I stand in lock-step agreement with him in his assessment of this insanity. You can't even get into a branch library except for a few hours a week, yet some boneheads want to build a palace (but a VERY UGLY palace) so that the homeless of SE downtown will have a daycare center to call their own. Don't forget to install some showers in the lavatories or, believe me, they will be using the sinks for that purpose. How about buying the necessary fire engines and calling it a day or do you want to raise another $200 million for the SD Ballet, too?"
18. JF wrote on December 13, 2007 7:44 PM:
"Boy, that's something, a lawyer and real estate agent talking about stealing from people.Want to post your W-2 form before you start talking about how much people make?The FD's salaries have already been frozen for the past three years.How has that helped the city fund additional fire stations?Answer: it hasn't because every time the city gets some spare cash it goes into pork.I said nothing about paying firefighters more, and in fact have in the past stated that I'd give up next year's pay raise if the mayor funds half of the additional equipment and staffing that this city needs.I think it's a pretty safe bet, don't you?"
19. Christopher Hall wrote on December 13, 2007 8:06 PM:
"What amazes me is the disregard the philanthropy community has for the City of San Diego. The non-profit La Jolla Playhouse blew past their last capital campaign and raised some $46 million and the Globe is going to blow past their $75 million fundraiser. No doubt Ms. Harris and Mr. Katz are the premier fundraisers in the region, they should be able to blow past this goal too. Why won't the community support the library? If it were a purely private or non-profit effort, it would rival the world's best libraries. The fact that it is a public project in a tax averse and broken city is the reason it does not get built. The economic/ philosophical history of the region for fiscal stinginess coupled with the corrupt management of city government leading to near bankruptcy has brought about the demise of the Library project."
20. Happy Bunny wrote on December 13, 2007 8:07 PM:
"Fire Copter? Library? Forget both. Let people protect their own homes/apartments. My garden hose will put out 8 gallons per minute - that's all I need. Speaking of dwellings, who would be the biggest user of the main library? You guessed it, the homeless. They might as well build in showers and beds, plus microwave ovens for their food. Fix my sewer and water pipes first, and fix those potholes while you're at it!"
21. JF wrote on December 13, 2007 9:44 PM:
"As usual, BBH just can't seem to keep himself from exaggerating.BBH wrote, "because the value of their benefits/pensions is almost as much as their yearly pay."It's been well documented, by BBH's buddy DeMaio that benefits are about .6 of salary, or 60%.That's not quite "almost as much".Oh, and his "they make in the top 1-10%" bit is bunk as well.According to the mayor 34% of firefighters made over 100K, but that included OT, so benefits weren't 60% of that.Also remember that "benefits" includes Worker's Comp insurance, which tends to be high for firefighters.That doesn't go in our pocket.(Yes, the city is self insured, but they still have to budget for Worker's Comp)Maybe in a good year 30% reach the top 10%, but the top 1% is at the 364K level.We're certainly not there."
22. joe user wrote on December 15, 2007 12:13 PM:
"The Various price tags discussed ad-nauseum for the new main library are for construction costs only. What about furniture? The current plan is to use the furniture from the existing library. I guess a white-horse riding donor will appear after it is built."
23. gordon wrote on December 17, 2007 9:50 AM:
"I drove by La Mesa's new library, currently under construction. Price tag: it was either $5 million, or $8 million. $185 million? I hope that includes a bunk house for homeless. If it does, I'm all for it!"
24. gordon wrote on December 17, 2007 9:50 AM:
"I drove by La Mesa's new library, currently under construction. Price tag: it was either $5 million, or $8 million. $185 million? I hope that includes a bunk house for homeless. If it does, I'm all for it!"
25. gordon wrote on December 17, 2007 9:50 AM:
"I drove by La Mesa's new library, currently under construction. Price tag: it was either $5 million, or $8 million. $185 million? I hope that includes a bunk house for homeless. If it does, I'm all for it!"
PRINT 
E-MAIL STORY
SHARE
FACEBOOK
REDDIT
NEWSVINE
DIGG
DEL.ICIO.US
BLINKLIST
