University of California refutes Gov budget: inuguration $100,000; Chancellor Birgeneau ($500,000 salary) hires $3,000,000 consultants to do work of his job and his many vice-chancellors.
University of California Chancellor Robert J Birgeneau’s eight-year fiscal track record is dismal indeed. He would like to blame the politicians, since they stopped giving him every dollar he has asked for, and the state legislators do share some responsibility for the financial crisis. But not in the sense he means.

A competent chancellor would have been on top of identifying inefficiencies in the system and then crafting a plan to fix them. Competent oversight by the Board of Regents and the legislature would have required him to provide data on problems and on what steps he was taking to solve them. Instead, every year Birgeneau would request a budget increase, the regents would agree to it, and the legislature would provide. The hard questions were avoided by all concerned, and the problems just piled up to $150 million of inefficiencies….until there was no money left.

We don't need a Redevelopment Agency for our city to be successful. Gary Brown is dead wrong on this and it's unfortunate that his statments regarding success cannot be backed up with good data. Before the citizens of I.B. dismiss the Governors plan they should learn about how RDA financing works from sources outside local government staffers and the California Redevelopment Agency. Both provide a distorted and incomplete look at a process that provides for a minority of special interests. Economic development is extremley important however the City Managers claims that RDA is the only way to realize financial independence is plain silly.

I agree with Mr. Teel that these projects have to move forward because we have already made our bed and have to sleep in it. Failure is not an option . Both must be successful. My point is in regards to how we move forward if RDA goes away. I personally doubt they will. To Mr. Teels point that Redevelopment Works I believe he's making the same point that Gary Brown will and the lobbyist group the California Redevelopment Agency. They always point to Horton Plaza as their poster boy. Development does work however it's the RDA financial model of accumulating large amounts of debt and the diversion of money away from esstential services that I don't see as creating true prosperit. RDA projects have done nothing to change the financial realities of the municipalities that have them. True San Diego has Hoton Plaza but they also looking at laying off police and fire fighters, their school system is in terrible shape, and they have some of the worst rated streets in the country. Mr Teels statment that "when properly managed Redevelopment works" is true however if you are a special interest or part of the privilaged few that receive that are on the recieving end. This money is better spent on education. That is the key to Californias and the nations success. Not strip malls

Just a clarification to Mr. Teels observation of my post. We do in fact need development in Imperial Beach. That is a fact. It’s the Redevelopment Agency financing and their practices of funding projects using public money is where I believe we disagree. Where it seems we both agree is that both the shopping center and the hotel need to be completed and more importantly successful. I believe they can if they adopt business models that work for Imperial Beach. The city already spent the money so we have to move forward. I will support both finished projects with my dollars. The point of the article was about how Redevelopment Agencies could be impacted if changes happen at the State level. I actually don’t see that happening. However if citizens where provided all the facts about how Redevelopment Agency’s have to accumulate large amounts of public debt with no guarantee of a projects return I believe they would be less likely to support them. As for Horton Plaza I’m not sure exactly what point Mr. Teel was trying to make. If the point is that RDAs can build malls with public money he’s right. If that’s the best way to spend public money then we probably disagree. San Diego is getting ready to lay off firefighters, police officers, their schools are struggling but hey they have a mall. The public money that RDA’s divert from education and essential services I believe is not well spent. That money is better spent on education which is the only way to true economic prosperity.

Ed, I don't think anyone would dispute that Horton Plaza is not a good thing for downtown San Diego. Your statement "think of how bad off they would be if they didn't have the mall and the gaslamp" may have made sense in the 70s when it was built however San Diego's Mayor considering laying off police, fire and other essential services seems to me as bad as it gets. The point being that RDA s do creat economic activity in a way that is limited however does not contribute to the economic stability in a way that you or City Manager Brown want the public to believe. Now I couldn't disagree with you more about the hotel. If there is truly a market, investors will invest. But the RDA creates an uncompetive enviornment as is the case in I.B. where one entity is supplemented by the government in building their business. Who would want to or have to compete against that kind of of money. Why should they. Many Citys in America and the world develop successfully without RDAs. They do it with innovation and education. Additionally I still have faith in capitilism and the free market. I don't rule out public private options in all cases however the RDA model is not one of them and I would urge others to take the time to understand how they work. Finally I also think its good stuff that we're having this discussion and hope others join in so thanks again.