Kilroy and Big Money

A San Diego Reader article: "Kilroy Realty throws one-million dollars at city lobbyists to help with permits for One Paseo". That's One. Million. Dollars. I've heard it was spent over about 3 years, or nearly $30,000 per month. And that's just registered lobbyists! Looking at Kilroy's own financial documents, I read they purchased the property in Q4 2007 for $89M, and as of Q4 2012 they've spent a total of $1.34M $134M on the property. That's $45 Million more Dollars spent on One Paseo over 5 years, or about $750,000 PER MONTH! Where is all this money going?!!

Of course, you do hear Kilroy complaining about the Town Center owners spending money to try to stop them. Here's a Reader article, "Shopping Plaza Owner and One Paseo neighbor spends $10,000 to lobby against project". Wait. $10,000? That's it? Really?

OK, the Town Center has spent more than $10,000, but nowhere near the $45 million spent by Kilroy. And, if you add everything spent by the WhatPriceMainStreet individuals, it's probably less than $1,000. The bottom line is that Kilroy is spending millions of dollars to convince Carmel Valley and the City of San Diego that One Paseo is a good thing. They're hiring lobyists, lawyers and consultants. They're hiring marketing firms, public relations people, and (it appears) firms that specialize in gaining grassroots support in the local community.

If One Paseo is such a good thing, why do you need to spend so much money to convince us?

6 Comments

How does any of this matter -

How does any of this matter -- if it is even true, which I believe it is not true? (BTW You hurt the cause with inflated or made up numbers. Please stop.)

The only question is whether this project is good for Carmel Valley. 

It costs money to run a business and create housing, retail, and office space that we all need and enjoy. Duh! Lobbying is lawful advocacy so long as there is disclosure. California, and especially San Diego, has some of the strongest "sunshine" laws and regulations in the country. This post only demonstrates your naivete, not nefarious actions.

Let's discuss something truly nefarious, however. Donahue Schriber, a public opponent of One Paseo, has paid Southwest Strategies for lobbying representation. That's fine as long as they own up to it by reporting. Let's not pretend they come to the table with clean hands, however. There is something far more troublesome in the opponents' camp.

Donahue Schriber appears to have paid some of the most vocal opponents (who admittedly are Carmel Valley residents) to oppose this project. When asked directly in front of witnesses whether he was paid, one of the opponents  -- who spoke at length at the Jan. 24th meeting -- sputtered about, began cursing, and refused to answer the question. The question was directly asked three times.

I would like to see Donahue Schriber and One Paseo opponents disavow, under penalty of perjury, that no individual residents are being paid to essentially lobby -- absent compliance with SD Ethics Commission lobbying regulations -- against the project to benefit Del Mar Highlands' owner.

 

 

How does any of this matter -- if it is even true, which I believe it is not true? (BTW You hurt the cause with inflated or made up numbers. Please stop.)

The only question is whether this project is good for Carmel Valley. 

It costs money to run a business and create housing, retail, and office space that we all need and enjoy. Duh! Lobbying is lawful advocacy so long as there is disclosure. California, and especially San Diego, has some of the strongest "sunshine" laws and regulations in the country. This post only demonstrates your naivete, not nefarious actions.

Let's discuss something truly nefarious, however. Donahue Schriber, a public opponent of One Paseo, has paid Southwest Strategies for lobbying representation. That's fine as long as they own up to it by reporting. Let's not pretend they come to the table with clean hands, however. There is something far more troublesome in the opponents' camp. 

Donahue Schriber appears to have paid some of the most vocal opponents (who admittedly are Carmel Valley residents) to oppose this project. When asked directly in front of witnesses whether he was paid, one of the opponents  -- who spoke at length at the Jan. 24th meeting -- sputtered about, began cursing, and refused to answer the question. The question was directly asked three times.

I would like to see Donahue Schriber and One Paseo opponents disavow, under penalty of perjury, that no individual residents are being paid to essentially lobby -- absent compliance with SD Ethics Commission lobbying regulations -- against the project to benefit Del Mar Highlands' owner.

 

magic development

So after buying land, the developer should not have spent their money planning a project, pushing the project, replanning, and pushing again again and again until it either becomes reality or they give up trying?  Unrealistic.

This is how things get done (or not done).  Perhaps in some fantasyland you can squat on your property and just wait for good things to magically happen, but in reality it takes actual money and hard effort.  And also in the real world, an opposition will often spend money trying to stop you.

I wouldn't cry for either side, nor villainize them for trying.

 

 

Janette,

The data for the plus $1M is all available publicly at: https://ssl.netfile.com/pub2/Default.aspx?aid=CSD Kilroy is registered with Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory and Natsis LLP, Atlantis Group LLC, Urban Housing Partners, Leppert Engineering and San Diego Land Lawyers (although the last two are not related to One Paseo). In fact, here you go: Name qtr or date amount 
Atlantis (Escobar Eck) 1st 2012 $4,000
Atlantis (Escobar Eck) 2/23/12 $11,698
Atlantis (Escobar Eck) 3/29/12 $1,650
Atlantis (Escobar Eck) 4th 2011 $15,000
Atlantis (Escobar Eck) 12/7/11 $500
Atlantis (Escobar Eck) 12/19/11 $500
Atlantis (Escobar Eck) 12/7/11 $3,370
total $36,718
Allen Matkins et al 1st 2013 no data yet
Allen Matkins et al 4th 2012 $89,469
Allen Matkins et al 3rd 2012 $79,845
Allen Matkins et al 2nd 2012 $67,557
Allen Matkins et al 1st 2012 $115,544
Allen Matkins et al 1st 2012 $250
Allen Matkins et al 1st 2012 $250
Allen Matkins et al 1st 2012 $250
Allen Matkins et al 1st 2012 $250
Allen Matkins et al 1st 2012 $250
Allen Matkins et al 1st 2012 $250
Allen Matkins et al 1st 2012 $250
Allen Matkins et al 4th 2011 $101,014
Allen Matkins et al 3rd 2011 $106,073
Allen Matkins et al 2nd 2011 $92,038
Allen Matkins et al 1st 2011 $33,000
Allen Matkins et al 4th 2010 $49,000
Allen Matkins et al 3rd 2010 $56,000
Allen Matkins et al 2nd 2010 $23,000
Allen Matkins et al 1st 2010 $25,000
Allen Matkins et al 4th 2009 $18,000
Allen Matkins et al 3rd 2009 $31,000
Allen Matkins et al 2nd 2009 $22,308
Allen Matkins et al 1st 2009 $27,000
total $937,598
Urban Housing Partners 1st 1012 $19,500
Urban Housing Partners 4th 2011 $19,500
Urban Housing Partners 3rd 2011 $19,500
Urban Housing Partners 2nd 2011 $19,500
Urban Housing Partners 1st 2011 $19,500
total $97,500
Grand Total for these years $1,071,816

City of San Diego - Electronic Filing System
https://ssl.netfile.com/pub2/Default.aspx?aid=CSD
PS Akeelah--With respect, I see that you have a relationship, or at least "like" Callidus Consulting; kudos to Janette Littler for her excellent relationship with Kilroy; perhaps we can work together to come up with a plan that the community support. I reassure you that none of the residents of Carmel Valley and environs working with WPMS are paid. More to the point, we find it hard to believe that Kilroy has our best interests at heart, and based upon our many unpaid, volunteer interactions with the community, believe that most in Carmel Valley don't either. We support a mixed use project, but not this one.

City of San Diego - Electronic Filing System
https://ssl.netfile.com/pub2/Default.aspx?aid=CSD

City of San Diego - Electronic Filing System
ssl.netfile.com

 

Carmel Toe (great name btw):  It would have been nice if Kilroy had started with the existing entitlement in the first place; they wouldn't have had to lobby the city (or the community) at all.  I personally support a mixed use project at the site, and it may be that their current entitlement does as well--up to the approved total square footage of 500,000--just not one as massive as they are proposing.  

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <p>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.