Great new website
I'm late in telling you that I love the new City- Beat website [sdcitybeat.com]. I find that I can find much more stuff on it now than I could before. It's just like reading the hard copy that I'm able to get on Wednesday
B.J. Hills, Encanto
Belfer and the Chargers
Regarding “Number crunchers” [“Backwards and in High Heels,” Aug. 4], where Aaryn Belfer attempts to prove that a Chargers stadium is a bad investment:
Belfer's first problem is that she bases her entire argument on opinions of panelists on KPBS's Editors Roundtable, where they discussed the recent assessment of Petco Park by Conventions, Sports and Leisure international. I'm guessing that Belfer did not look into the assessment herself, since the six paragraphs that would've been better spent analyzing CSL's assessment were instead spent on how she balances her checkbook and why she didn't buy solar panels.
I understand that Belfer's specialty is fluff, and I have enjoyed a few of her articles in the past (her spelling-OCD notwithstanding), but if she's going to write an opinion piece based on the opinion of an assessment she didn't read, she needs to back herself up with real numbers rather than regurgitate the same opinion expressed on KPBS. Cheap comparisons of her accounting abilities to the city's financial drought do not count as evidence against a new stadium.
“That CSL is based in Texas is reason enough to pair its every utterance with a container of Morton's Sea Salt.” No, it's not.
I may just be a bit miffed that Belfer felt the need to insert a backhanded comment about our Chargers (“a new stadium for our crappy, loser-y, blacked-out, Alex-Spanos-is-a-narcissistic-opportunist football team. Pssst: Those throwback baby blues are dumb”), or maybe I'm just annoyed that she felt the need to finish with her predictable Helen Lovejoy impression (Someone please think of the children!).
Mostly, though, I'm just bothered that Belfer attempted to chime in on something she knows very little about. She should stick with the rants about common spelling mistakes, being a parent and wasting time on the internet.
Belfer's an excellent writer. She has a gift.
She shouldn't waste it on shoddy journalism.
Jason McKee La Mesa
The winning tax idea
Your Aug. 11 editorial suggested three alternatives to the sales-tax ballot measure to raise the same amount of money.
The first one, the trash fee,would probably lose at the polls, because homeowners, who now pay nothing, would vote against it. The second, raising the storm-drain fee on property owners, would also lose, because property owners would vote against it.
But the third, raising the property transfer tax, has the best chance of passing because it is only paid by sellers of real estate, a small percentage of the population.
Your suggested increase to the transfer tax would only raise $41.4 million of the $72 million needed, but that's not bad for a start.
Mel Shapiro, Hillcrest
About your Aug. 11 editorial: You are so wrong. You think that by giving the city more money, by raising my taxes, that then they will behave differently. Start by reading Don Bauder's column in this week's Reader (I wish you had a writer of that caliber). Nothing has changed; if you give the city more money they will piss it away. The best thing that could happen would be for the city to go bankrupt. Let a judge make the painful decisions that the mayor and City Council cannot.
Larry LeVine, Clairemont
This issue of CityBeat is dedicated to politics analyst Chuck Todd, who mentioned this newspaper, by name, on MSNBC's Hardball program last week.