Fusion Real Estate and Home Loans Inc Sacramento Ca by tys21886


More Info
									LISC and City of San Diego: Community Leadership Focus Groups
Summary Report
April 2010

Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC), in partnership with the City of San Diego, held a series
of eighteen focus groups during the month of February, 2010. The purpose for these discussions was
to create an opportunity for local leaders to come together to discuss and share ideas about the state
of community and economic development in San Diego neighborhoods.

The key topics and findings identified during these focus group discussions would determine the
content for the San Diego Neighborhood Innovation Forum in May, 2010. In this way, the focus group
discussions were the beginning of an ongoing dialogue with key stakeholders on ways to help San
Diego communities meet the needs of all citizens.

A total of eighty one (81) individuals participated in these sessions, representing a wide spectrum of
stakeholders of the community. Each group targeted a specific industry including; affordable housing,
healthcare, banking and investment, community based development, redevelopment, business and
economic development, military, energy, and education. Facilitators from TrustWorks Group, Inc. led
each group through a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis – identifying
the issues facing San Diego's low and moderate income communities, and by extension the
community and economic development industry.

For additional information on the focus groups, please see the following:
        Addendum A: “Raw Data” from SWOT exercise
        Addendum B: List of Focus Group Participants
        Addendum C: Sample Invitation Letter to Participate in Focus Groups

Structure of Report
The report begins by proposing an overarching framework that emerged from the series of
discussions, followed by an analysis of the primary contributing factors identified by various
participants in the focus group discussions. Finally, the report ends with recommendations for the
Neighborhood Innovation Forum.

Overarching Framework:
While reviewing the focus group discussions and raw data, a gap between regional opportunities and
neighborhood-level success emerged. Namely, during the various focus groups, participants:

   1. Easily identified strengths and opportunities facing the San Diego region as a whole, and
   2. Provided inspiring examples of neighborhood-level success, albeit in often narrow and
      isolated terms.

Further, there was a general sense of frustration permeating many of the focus groups discussions.
The SWOT analysis seemingly exposed the gap between regional economic opportunities and the
circumstances facing San Diego neighborhoods, and identified emotions surrounding that gap. This
came through in a number of ways. Some participants identified opportunities to build better
connections between regional opportunities and neighborhood efforts. Other participants focused
instead on the threats and weaknesses that create and contribute to the gap (When looking at the
SWOT analysis, it is worthwhile to note that the identified weaknesses and threats could also be, and

often were, considered opportunities. For example, comments on the lack of leadership were also seen
as an opportunity to focus on strengthening this void).

Focus group comments generally fit into three broad categories. These categories, shown below, are
viewed as contributing factors that need to be addressed to overcome the gap between regional and
neighborhood opportunities:

     Leadership
     Capacity
     Funding

The need to strengthen connections between neighborhood-level efforts and regional opportunities -
through focused attention to the contributing factors - serves as the overarching framework for the
remainder of the report. This framework is diagrammed below:

                                                Factors                           Examples:
        Defense Industry
                                             - Leadership Neighborhood
                                 Regional                                         Engaged residents
        Military                                                                  Community-based
        Biotech                Opportunities - Capacity   Opportunities
        Climate                                - Funding                          Etc.
        Border Opportunities

Further, it should be noted that the contributing factors themselves are interrelated. Although the
report discusses each factor in isolation, this structure can oversimplify the more complex nature of
these factors.

Analysis of Contributing Factors:
Leadership: Many participants lamented that the community development industry lacks influence
within the political and corporate/business communities. Further, it was commonly felt that, in order
to develop the dedicated resources needed to bring about systemic change, this influence needs to be
actively cultivated. Many participants expressed a belief that the lack of consistent advocacy for
neighborhood needs contributed to a lack of political imperative for this issue.

Indeed, on a most basic level, there was concurrence that the region lacks a consistent vision or
definition for what community development is, and what it should/could become. There was a
desire to have civic, business and governmental leaders, community volunteers, educational and
military leaders, and developers come together to develop a common vision, understand mutual
strengths and determine the most efficient process to harness resources.

Lack of influence and common vision were two weaknesses that arose in various focus group

discussions. Some of the perceived negative consequences include: a lack of integration between
community planning groups and local initiatives, City policies that impede community development
and physical development, a government bureaucracy that is less oriented toward neighborhood
needs, and lack of competitiveness for state and federal resources.

Universally, focused leadership was seen as the fundamental issue necessary for a cohesive,
collaborative, and organized effort to improve San Diego neighborhoods.

Capacity: Focus group participants easily identified a number of strengths and opportunities facing
the community and economic development industry in San Diego. Participants pointed to the
impressive human talent working in this industry, the existence of strong affordable housing
developers, and the existence of an infrastructure that could support neighborhood-level community
development (e.g. community planning groups, BIDs, etc).

However, many of the strengths and opportunities identified were isolated examples of success
and/or identification of assets that could be tapped to achieve greater success. The comments seemed
to point to a lack of capacity to bring these strengths and opportunities to greater scale and impact.
In many ways, the comments seemed to suggest that the industry has a certain level of untapped
talent and potential that could be mobilized if we focused on developing the capacity of these
institutions. Further, there was an expressed need to continue to build self-sufficiency within
institutions so they are not over-reliant on foundations for long term funding.

Funding: Funding challenges were a common theme throughout the focus group sessions. In
particular, there was considerable attention paid to the dire fiscal challenges facing local, regional, and
state governments, and consequent impacts on community development, redevelopment, and housing
development. Furthermore, there was a perception that the lack ofregional leadership on this issue
impeded the ability of the region to change state and federal policies or access state and federal

At the same time, there were significant discussions about the untapped opportunity to mobilize the
private and philanthropic investment sectors, given that governmental resources are so limited.
Indeed, the need to mobilize the private sector to support this work had seemingly become more

Recommendations for Neighborhood Innovation Forum
Perhaps one of the most prominent themes of the focus groups was the desire to have a call to action.
There is the belief that the tendency is to “talk and talk” without creating a viable plan that will get
measurable results. It is the lack of results that has led to a “civic cynicism” that nothing will happen.
This attitude then evolves into a lack of trust.

Focus group participants want to see the various stakeholders make a mutual commitment to make
necessary changes to policies and practices to help build collaboration and move the community
development industry forward rapidly. This will require listening, working together, addressing the
tough perceptions, e.g. racism, gentrification, community apathy, and building a realistic plan that will
generate excitement and commitment from all community constituencies. To be successful, this
process must result in a prioritized actionable game plan with a clear agenda to move forward that
excites local leaders to engage regionally and bring resources and funds into our communities.

Further, participants offered a number of recommendations for the Neighborhood Innovation Forum.
The list below highlights some of the common ideas for a successful Forum:

   Share the wisdom of the community from each others’ “lessons learned”
   Engage policy makers and City staff in the process to demonstrate a shared commitment to do
    things differently.
   Define community and what an innovative neighborhood look like
   Engage the participants, not just talking heads
   Connect with “like-minded” people: get smart, motivated people in the same room
   Have wide representation of community participants: investors, funders, educators, military
    leaders, community developers, community activists, civic leaders, 501c3s, city leaders, etc.

Coalescing on the key contributing factors (Leadership, Capacity, and Funding), creates opportunities
to leverage the multiple strong points within the region (environmental benefits, higher educational
institutions, military/defense industries, biotech and high tech businesses, and proximity to the
border) for both the benefit of San Diego’s low and moderate income communities and the region as a
whole. The relationship between housing and wages is a critical component to achieving healthy
communities and regional stability and growth. Indeed, participants often cited the need for a real
commitment to the concept of community development for the overall benefit of the region.

In order to connect neighborhoods to the regional opportunities and vice versa, it will require focused
attention on the contributing factors. But, focus group participants also recognized that it will also
require new and enhanced partnerships at many levels in order to do so - between neighborhood
residents, community-based organizations, government agencies, elected officials, private sector
businesses, and the philanthropic community. No single group can do it alone.

Addendum A: “Raw Data” from SWOT exercise (note: comments indicated with an * were
repeated more than once)

S: Regional EDC is working for a quality of life infrastructure on the ballot.
S: America’s finest City and everyone wants to move here.
S: As a region there is more of a sustainable vision
S: Beginning to plan better and understand what we need to do
S: Big city, small town and opportunity to make decisions that are manageable
S: Bi-national vibrancy and cultural events
S: Changing political system seeking ideas from the grassroots movement
S: Climate
S: Connections to Pacific rim
S: * Cultural diversity and different perspectives
S: Desirable place to live
S: Desire to deal with issues as a larger region like in Tijuana
S: Diversity
S: Drive for green technology, green building
S: * Educated population and conglomerate of many universities
S: Education system is strong
S: Funders in the community are engaged in all levels and they have the willingness to get things done
S: Geography and transition from Navy town to Tourism
S: Geography is great because of the resources (ocean, border, military)
S: Good active small foundations
S: Good regional leadership and civic leadership like the Council advocating new civic center, library,
chargers potential stadium, infrastructure bond.
S: Great for profit universities
S: History of collaboration in dealing with scarce resources
S: Immigrant communities add to local economies with energy and hope in them creating locals jobs
with laundromats, restaurants
S: Immigrant population provides diversity and progress
S: * Industries like biotech and hi-tech growth
S: * Jacob’s center model should be replicated
S: Level of organization at grassroots level
S: LISC resources and leadership
S: Local funders convene meetings and they are active
S: Local funders engage in policy development and this is unusual
S: Major financial institutions that can do low income housing and new market tax credits
S: Major league sports that create demand
S: * Mayor starting to take a stance on major infrastructure issues
S: More discrete pool of affordable housing developers
S: More open dialogue amongst non-profit organizations and banks
S: New Council members and supervisors with fresh ideas

S: Non profits working on financial literacy etc. do well and can do better
S: * Organizations like the Jacobs community sought feedback and made it into action
S: Price charities in mid-city
S: Professors and professionals in the area due to great place to live
S: Public leadership is better than in the past
S: Redistribution of funds is managed well
S: Relationship with the military
S: SD has worked well together
S: Sitting around and electing who will create and push the best plan.
S: Technology cluster around UCSD and cooperation among those institutions. Capacity to look at
neighborhood development to create models that work
S: Three touch points SBA, micro lending (ACCION), and LISC
S: Two national models (City Heights and Market Creek) to community development
S: Universities provide resources, interns and a great labor force
S: University level education system presents opportunities for people to stay in San Diego and
contribute to it
S: *Weather and tourism even in economic down times
S: Well defined neighborhoods and pride in the neighborhoods
S: World class city, cultural amenities, sports, diverse economy
S: Young diverse population
S:* Border city
S: ethnic businesses taking risks and filling gaps
S: immigrant communities and their entreprenurial spirit; others might not take same risk
S: Targeted resources for targeted neighborhoods
 S: A lot of creativity and resourcefulness in order to survive in this economy.
 S: Ability to train a lot/ Stimulus money for job training
 S: Academic community
 S: Ambitious learners
 S: Better economic mind when it comes to reemployment of laid off individuals
 S: Better educated region
 S: BIDs if they can reach their potential
 S: Big town with small town attitude
 S: * Bio/technology businesses
 S: port of San Diego
 S: Border issues are causing people to stay in SD longer and not cross over and spend in Tijuana
 S: Casinos
 S: City Heights is a model
 S: Clean tech, universities, strong demand for quality of life, great potential for new urbanism, tourism
and conventions, US Mexico border and imports/trade.
 S: Clear direction as to where people want to go
 S: Collaboration b/w Chamber and non profits. Generosity created through networking
 S: Collaborations. Great neighborhoods fabric. People and their ideas and creativity. Great group of
housing and community dev. minds. More political will.

 S: Community center projects
 S: Community development field has conglomerated amazing people. We have to be able to create new
 S: Community development organizations
 S: Community groups willing to get involved
 S: Community involvement and opportunites that exist for planning groups to improve the quality of
 S: Culture and diversity in neighborhoods. Mom and pop shops and small businesses surviving.
Universities are a strength because they support with interns and conferences and speakers to local
 S: Different political strength.
 S: Diversity of people and ideas
 S: Entreprenurial edge
 S: * Environment (weather, no smog, great beaches) make community
 S: Experience of organizations that have been around a long time
 S: Faith communities are strong and there are dynamic leaders coming out of there. SD has high
investment potential. Real estate in SD is still viable. We are still selling tax credits in SoCA.
 S: Good change has happened in communities
 S: Good development fundamentals allowing projects to stand alone.
 S: Good weather and environment and resource preservation. Strong diversified economy. Tourist
industry and technologies economy.
 S: Great charter school (Gompers) and other elementary schools
 S: Healthy City
 S: Ideal size for a City
 S: Infrastructure of non profits that are community based
 S: Intellectual stimulation (technology)
 S: Jacobs foundation
 S: Knowledge base to organize
 S: Large work force to help each other
 S: Leadership of SD Housing federation
 S: Local Economy is relatively strong and real estate economy is strong.
 S: Many industry clusters
 S: More acceptance of differences
 S: More headquarter companies in SD
 S: * Multicultural place and diversity
 S: Neighborhood improvement organizations
 S: Neighborhoods! SD is not viewed as a city of neighborhoods. They are great at engagement and
participation in planning process. Non-profits are forced to think outside of the box and be creative.
 S: New culinary school at City College opening up in one month.
 S: New visionaries
 S: Our environment, protecting it can tie into commerce and development.
 S: our youth. We don’t have a lot to clean up related to what other cities have to face.
 S: People are willing to get active. Community members are willing to participate in programs like
Neighborhoods First.

 S: People’s roots and connections to neighborhoods
 S: Petco Park has created a great urban core
 S: Prop A
 S: Real estate, we are not overbuilt and we can recover quickly from being overbuilt in some places.
Great case studies to drive from like good TOD projects and density projects. Great charitable
 S: Resilient community and diverse population with the energy to work on these issues
 S: San Diego Foundation collaborations
 S: SD commission leaders are professional and response time is better.
 S: SD High is implementing a career mentality into schools
 S: SD organizing project has done good job
 S: Strength of military being here longterm
 S: Strong affordable housing developers. Also developers do more than housing, they build and rehab.
 S: Strong affordable housing industry and supportive housing (services in housing developments)
 S: Strong developer group in town, builders
 S: Strong, young leaders that are aggressive and full of energy. New young leaders coming into the
 S: Success at city council level because of housing federation visibility and education
 S: Technological leader/hub
 S: The military is the driver of what happens in our region.
 S: There are existing partnerships between community, business, and government to be built upon to
carry out collective community development.
 S: Three large universities allowing skilled labor coming in
 S: Tourism from downtown development
 S: tourist industry
 S: Transportation access
 S: Unity looking beyond language barriers
 S: Universities and strong workforce and young population
 S: University research capabilities have brought a lot of money into the City
 S: Unlike other cities we don’t have many CDCs and housing providers that will go out of business.
We are less threatened than other places. CDCs are comprehensive and have done some housing
projects and other projects. They are not major housing producers. Less threatened than other cities.
 S: We have 7 community plan updates underway but no leadership.

 S: Wisdom within communities, skills, data etc. packaging of what needs to be done and nothing gets
 S: Workforce is diverse
 S: Working together to be a regional area and grow/improve that way
 S: Youth based population
 S: Two districts in one (Little Italy)
 W/S: 19 BIDs but they are underutilized
 W/S: Olympic training center is here but not used or know about or advertised
 W: 17 redevelopment areas and only two or three are utilized well.
 W: Accessing information for small business and low income communities. People do not know how to

access their resources through grassroots orgs.
 W: Allowed dissonant voice to have more power in the guise of democracy and this impedes progress
 W: Anglo leaders working in illiterate, disenfranchised, working class people of color community
 W: Barriers between race, individual communities that neighbor each other within the same race,
barriers of the have and have not’s
 W: Black community is going backwards in SD
 W: Bureaucracy is not neighborhood focused
 W: Businesses in low resource communities are not prepared
 W: C street needs to be cleaned up
 W: City government receptors are weak
 W: City has no incentives for developers to come in
 W: Civicly engaged citizens are lost when community groups are powerless
 W: Commercial real estate market is taking a dive.
 W: Communities do not organize
 W: Community groups need more power
 W: Community planning groupS: we do not invest in our community planners. They are not trained
or educated and they do not have to run for office. Community planners need to be educated and trained
on smart growth and density and sustainability. The City needs to provide the skills and tools.
 W: Community planning process addressed from bottom up instead of top down. We spend a lot of
time trying to meet what communities want instead of saying what needs to be done. Need to act more
as leaders. Institutional cohesiveness. All the districts do not collaborate so there is no effective regional
planning except in transportation.
 W: Competent interpreters to help people access resources although there is a state law that mandates
 W: Connectivity is bad
 W: Parochialism
 W: Create a lively community in other neighborhoods
 W: Data on businesses is outdated and unorganized
 W: Defense, military and hospitality pay the least. Wages are in an hourglass. Middle class is
shrinking. Not tying education in.
 W: Development model of the past does not work everywhere in SD anymore
 W: Differences are used as a wedge by the decision makers and neighbors
 W: Disconnect b/w values of professionals and planners and the public. City officials understand
compact dev. and smart growth and PODs but the public does not understand the benefits of these and
will not support them. Lack of private and public development efforts. Many cities in CA have huge
effort to assemble land do zoning and do RFP. It is very proactive in other cities but not here.
 W: Disjointed San Diego, so many communities
 W: Council districts make it so members do not look beyond their boundaries
 W: Distrust of the government
 W: Diverging views of the issues. No subsidy program will help us build housing to goal for 2030.
 W: Don’t know if we have a common set of values
 W: downtown only supportable by a region because downtown is not high density. Many times there is
very provincial gov’t looking at outlines areas and not looking at things holistically with i.e. transit
 W: Education attainment, graduation rates, lack of science math and technology training from high
school to college
 W: Eminent domain’s lack of support and no education on the value of this tool. Lack of political will to

exercise eminent domain
 W: Expectation of citizens for government to do things for them
 W: Fear of making real change
 W: Fees and taxations are seen as a negative throughout the City
 W: Few black organizations with power, few organization of color with power
 W: General health is based on where you live
 W: Globally, lack of ability to reach political consensus on anything. This is causing feeling of
disenfranchisement. Obama small business program is being panned by small business trade in SD.
Ineffective programs.
 W: High demand for resources and low tax base in many areas in SD
 W: Homelessness plan has not achieved anything
 W: housing in mid range
 W: Immigration policy that recognizes the contributions of those across the border
 W: in a global perspective in SD County there is disjointed community involvement. No housing czar
in SD spear heading. Communities not organized to lead community development. Communities that do
it well: City Heights had civic, political leadership, Poway has moved affordable housing forward, Chula
Vista rehabbing older communities.
 W: Inability to maintain the character of communities without making a tourist trap
 W: Incentivize ways to live downtown and work downtown.
 W: Inefficient method of creating community gardens and parks on City property.
 W: Inequities of attention and funding going to different areas
 W: Infrastructure is about 100 years old
 W: It takes too long to get the money to fulfill projects like streetlights and potholes
 W: Lack green space in working class neighborhoods
 W: Lack of access to transportation
 W: Lack of community among businesses
 W: Lack of comprehensive growth management strategy
 W: Lack of jobs in private sector
 W: Lack of leadership and commitment, low and moderate income communities are not a priority for
 W: Lack of leadership in city level and grassroots level. City of villages strategy took years and now
density is not going to work in SD. No linking of plans for action. People have talked about plans but
then there is no money and nothing happens so people feel disenfranchised. Territorial and not
 W: Lack of political leadership and lack of money. In ranking housing as a priority where do you put it
in a state facing so many problems like Education etc.? Even if we make housing a priority there is no
 W: Lack of political will. There is a lot of planning to address community issues and then council
works around the issue.
 W: Lack of preparation of the future
 W: Lack of resources
 W: Lack of respect and understanding of the critical importance of education and culture and the many
definitions of that (This includes the arts)
 W: Lack of trust in our community: over abundance of conspiracy theorists that believe that people are
looking out for themselves and not the community.
 W: lack of understanding of our partners (non-profits): what they do, what they have going on, their

 W: Lack of urban gardens
 W: LEAD and the lack of local people in boards like those
 W: Library system
 W: Little celebration of cultures and talents that could be nurtured within their own communities
 W: Little representation from each of the neighborhoods. Not clear what wants and needs are. Not
clear how to get this information. Nothing drawing people to downtown.
 W: Loss of educational resources and safety net for children
 W: Low guarantee programs are being cut.
 W: MADs are rarely recognized as helping the City not spend so much and this should be public
 W: Maintenance is sometimes forgotten. Sidewalks need to be maintained in the right of way like
 W: Lack of political support for neighborhoods
 W: Military has more political influence than the jurisdictions
 W: Multicultural community not celebrated because we are all too divided and no walkability
 W: Municipal government does not make public resources like libraries a priority
 W: Need more leadership development and leadership capacity at many levels
 W: Need understanding of what the housing issue is.
 W: NIMBY prevents city of villages
 W: NIMBY-ism
 W: No avenues for citizen participation
 W: No broader sense of community
 W: No business influence to compete with other major cities
 W: No clear visionary leaders (army, politicians, socialites)
 W: NO community vision
 W: No depth of skill sets to sustain ourselves
 W: No effective communication mechanisms for repairs/maintenance of infrastructure
 W: No engagement of community members
 W: No grocery stores
 W: NO Jobs with livable wages
 W: No loud voice in SD
 W: No one stops place for advocacy and services where people can go to get answers
 W: No opportunities for native San Diegans
 W: No organization in the community development world
 W: No plazas for people to gather in downtown
 W: No political leadership. Weakness in cutting back deficits and prioritizing where money should be
spent. No political coalition being formed. ERAF:
 W: No political will or community will to change. The inability to change keeps you in status quo
 W: No political will to create high paying jobs
 W: No specific venue
 W: No streamline policy for urban gardens
 W: no structure for engaging business to create meaningful jobs
 W: No sustainability among local leadership
 W: No synergy

 W: No trust between organizations
 W: No unified information on what the needs are of communities and where those needs la y
 W: No walkable neighborhoods
 W: No will to change. We under-reach
 W: North of the 8 versus south of the 8 divide
 W: Not enough community collaborations for neighborhood improvements
 W: Not enough leadership
 W: Not enough resources and people to inform the citizenry to organize and get involved and have
 W: Okay to ignore low income, minority neighborhoods. They are not given credibility
 W: Only time infrastructure is fixed is when developers come in
 W: People cannot afford to live where their jobs are
 W: People forget about the essence of communities, which is the people
 W: People live far out so you have commuter campuses. Need more connectivity and city center as a
  W: People do not have the expectation of regulations on their businesses and that can lead to them
being out of business very quickly
 W: Petco park does not create good paying jobs
 W: Planning groups are not being involved in initiatives
 W: Political leaders do not do enough
 W: Political process for getting public input (NIMBY)
 W: Politicians put ideas upon the people and do not listen
 W: Public education, good schools are few and far between
 W: Public service sector cannot support the populace
 W: Resort town and not getting fare share because we poster ourselves not as an RND, university
 W: Resources are not distributed equally
 W: Restructuring of CDBG money
 W: Robert’s rules of order have alienated people
 W: Segmentation, geographically, ethnically, by language which causes us to silo
 W: Service cuts (mental health, homelessness, afterschool)
 W: Slowness of the planning process outside of downtown.
 W: Small business in communities do not strive if one entity controls them all
 W: Society does not cope well with complex problems and those complex problems are given simple
solutions that do not work. Need better complex problem solving
 W: Southeast SD has no political power except for in external organizations
 W: Subsidizing low income housing and change philosophy i.e. call it workforce housing.
 W: Taxation or fees not paid in the City, parking at zoo is free
 W: The development of boards and businesses are weak and unsuccessful
 W: The way we communicate with the public. It is too bureaucratic and dry. Vancouver did campaign
on eco-density and eco villages that made people engaged.
 W: Time or resources to continue programs going
 W: Too many organizations that are not collaborating, unorganized community and neighborhood
 W: Too many people/departments to have to go through to get things done

 W: Too much work needs to be done at the ground level
 W: Transit issues. Build community around where people live but also have connectivity around the
neighborhoods in SD
 W: Transportation system is weak and people live far from their jobs
 W: Trouble with not defining what community is
 W: Uninformed public and narrow self interest. Affordable housing success but many obstacles.
Community planning groups in SD opposing density and affordable housing in plans because of a lack
of education. Loss of faith in gov’t and need to find ways of putting more confidence in gov’t.
 W: Very uneven political participation throughout the City. The use of political power is concentrated
in few hands.
 W: water problems
 W: weak civic leadership in City and in business community. The chamber should try to move agenda
forward. Business community used to have a big say.
 W: Weak political leadership and lack of communication and collaboration with non-profit
 W: Weak political lobbying
 W: You cannot empower people but they need to be enabled to make wise decisions. Vest the people in
the community
 W:No political commitment
W/O: Low quality economic development in communities, quality of grocery stores
W: Capacity issues with affordable housing developers
W: Jacobs model is too expensive
W: Limited open/green space in low-income/under-served communities
W: Local government has not taken advantage of federal monies because of disorder and la ck of unity
W: Schools are crippled
W: Technology Divide- the widening gap in access for all communities/homes
W: Allocation of services and funds are not allocated well
W: Broad definition of community development that does not include and integrates education, housing
and all areas of community
W: Can't replicate Jacobs or Price model/need another model like LISC or hybrid
W: Capacity of orgs to do what they say they will do. Capacity of orgs to deliver.
W: CDBG funding is cumbersome and unfair
W: CDBG grants are too small and weak and the process for such small grants is too long
W: CDBGs intent was for blighted areas but now that has been diluted in a district wide basis. It is not
being used where it is needed
W: City of SD is that they did not work out the governance structure. Council is at war with mayor and
that prevents anything from happening.
W: City of Villages
W: Current financial conditions, no money for infrastructure that would help progress an agenda.
CCDC develops income streams but its limited to that area. No redevelopment agencies in all
neighborhoods and that may not be practical. This leads to inequality throughout neighborhoods
W: Debt accumulating at state and local level
W: Difficult for new organizations to go in
W: Disconnect of many groups to local and national initiatives. Issues are by neighborhood and issues
are not seen as something on a larger scale
W: dominance of labor
W: Economic development staff at City level is small

W: eminent domain is not looked at in the broader sense and in the sense of how it affects the
W: Eminent domain power abused in San Diego
W: Entrepreneurs are leaving SD because of the cost of living
W: Environmental issues and blighted areas have collocation issues and zoning issues
W: ethnic groups becoming larger but becoming more underrepresented in community decision making
W: For profit universities are not as engaged
W: Foundations do work but they do not keep people involved
W: Funders to not gather the resources to have comm. Dev move forward
W: Gentrification
W: Healthcare and medical needs are high because of environmental issues in some communities
W: Healthcare system is exacerbated because of the immigrant population
W: Homelessness, we need to find a better way to take care of them as opposed to putting up temporary
tents in the winter
W: Housing
W: Immigration issues legal vs. non legal
W: In efficiency and wasted money on administrative functions
W: Infrastructure issues because of the condition of the city
W: Jacobs model is not replicable
W: K-12 system, lack of investing in education and prison industry expanding
W: Lack of creativity to solve problems, people are stuck in the idea of gov’t and banks
W: Lack of funding and lack of leaders. No bench string.
W: Lack of funding to get leaders
W: Lack of government or will to address issues in small business and housing in a focused way. The
leadership is fractured
W: lack of leadership in ethnic communities, no sense of collaboration and barriers
W: Lack of meeting spaces/ community building spaces. These are very neighborhood centered and the
geography of our county does not pool people to a collective center.
W: Lack of planning and too much reactionary planning instead of proactive city planning and county
W: Lack of private investment and redevelopment does not pull that in and private investors do not
know where exactly to go. Foundations work as the middle man
W: Lack of private investment in these communities
W: Lack significant players/philanthropic dollars going to SD
W: lacking big base of charitable organizations to make up for cut in services
W: Large immigrant population imposing on little resources we already have
W: Leading industries are affected by the economy so no jobs
W: Location as CA and SD and where funds are taken from
W: Low socio-cultural communities are taken advantage of
W: Macro economic issues of the state caused by Prop 13
W: Major structural issues
W: Military employment base is large and manufacturing industry is dominated by the military also
W: Money is not going to the best places
W: New communities that are perceived as high income also need community development work

because they are now becoming older cities. They need small business assistance
W: NIMBYism stopping projects
W: No Access to information (computers, internet)
W: No appropriate means for civic engagement. Need ways to engage the public
W: No coherent strategy that is logical especially with the border and immigration
W: No coherent vision of what government should do for families and welfare
W: No collaboration between organizations because of the limited resources
W: No employment base to build a blue collar work force and there is no emphasis to rebuild that like in
W: No holistic approach to comm. Dev like in Boston (Dudley St)
W: No level of collaboration and cooperation between orgs
W: no long term quality of life work
W: No long-term money
W: No multigenerational organizations
W: No Resources in centre city for Remodeling City hall, building library, convention center expansion
and no resources for the rest of the neighborhoods
W: No strong voice in Sacramento or Washington
W: No sustainability included when development happens
W: Non profits depend on banks for their funding and they should look at other industries for this
W: Non-profit organizations do not have the capacity to apply for grant funds
W: Not a business friendly community. Hard for business to expand and incubate
W: Not enough resources for entry
W: Not for profits compete with each other to much for limited resources
W: Not learning from the past from what was achieved when there was a coalition between state and
W: Not many local organizations that have the capacity to do mixed use development or rehabilitation
W: Our largest industries are so affected by the recession and there is no job generating mechanisms
W: over statement and use of the term America’s Finest city causes less federal monies
W: People flee areas in need and do not stay to invest
W: Permitting problems and length of time
W: Philanthropic sector’s ability to leverage corporate dollars towards comm. Dev.
W: Planning for Populations in need is bad. Not building in transportation corridors
W: Political will and prioritization
W: Politics in the different departments that control the approval processes of development
W: Public transportation is inadequate
W: Same charitable orgs keep getting the funds and not producing
W: SD is focused highly on the creation of white collar jobs
W: SD non profits not applying to neighborhood stabilization funds. They do not have the capacity
W: Small philanthropy community and little funding for homeless and housing issues
W: Specific people targeting projects in different areas are not specialized in those areas
W: Status quo is that people do not work together
W: Succession planning of community development professionals
W: Takes too much investment to see a change and there is not that much investment to go round.

W: Term limits expansion not happening because we lack experience
W: There are agencies and institutions that have a long history of community dev and services and
there are newer orgs. Older orgs should be given priority
W: This region does not have many corporations that do philanthropic work and for people to
W: Unable to mobilize our congressional or delegate powers to serve the area. They serve their masters
and not better San Diego and the money change
W: Union management splits and partisanship is divided
W: We don't have a local office
W: Where you build housing and businesses, density issues
O/S: Clergy
O/S: Military reps
O/S: Support and work with groups developing urban gardening/famers' markets
O/S: To create a collective, inclusive, comprehensive plan
O/S: University reps
O: Could potentially get federal funding because of biotech industries
O: Develop a plan for growing existing small business
O: LISC should have first approached non-profits and then figured out what their individual agendas
O: ability to do more
O: Acquiring federal funding
O: ACTION and Agenda Forum
O: all ingredients for a world class city but have not optimized are strengths and partnerships
O: Alliance between industry and community to stop intoxication
O: Allowing people there to recognize that they do have support for innovative ideas and that civic
engagement can happen
O: apply resources more strategically
O: are we greater than, less than or equal to the sum of our parts
O: Authenticity
O: Baja California connectivity
O: Before conference, trust and relationships need to be made
O: Better coordinate/organize opportunities
O: Bi-National nature of the region like cultural bi-national business
O: Biotechnology can create more jobs for people in SD
O: Bring in those that accomplished something in for example Southside Chicago to explain what the
arena they live in is like to compare and contrast with the environment here in SD
O: Budget problem is a call to action
O: Budget problems are creating opportunities for more volunteer work and more opportunities for
community engagement (example just fix things)
O: Build out of the county means that redevelopment of older communities are the future. Private
capital and private building will be returning to older neighborhoods.
O: Build upon cultural diversity
O: Build upon initiatives in the works Neighborhoods First Initiative and comprehensive community
O: California Endowment

O: California endowment
O: Can create new communities and deal with NIMBY issue in a good way because of our great
O: can we capitalize on that demographic shift
O: Capacity to have actionable prioritized game plan for stronger neighborhoods, city, region
O: Capturing community of newcomers and entrepreneurial thinking to create change
O: Collaboration forum
O: Commitment to education of children forum
O: Community hot spots with internet for wireless computers
O: Community owned economic development and financial institutions
O: Concrete ideas to maximize the work with constituents
O: Conversations to create comfort levels among leaders
O: Creating and electing the next great leaders forum
O: Cross-border forum
O: Density building
O: Develop a consensus among, chamber, business community, residents
O: Develop common agenda that is from the ground up as opposed to top down approach
O: Diverse population and young population can be invested in towards their education
O: Eco-town can be known nationally
O: Educational centers fostering opportunity in development initiatives
O: Energy efficiency programs
O: Entrepreneurial spirit makes an ability to create jobs and spur employment
O: Environmental change house by house
O: Federal administration is strong believer in place based initiatives/ neighborhood focus
O: Focus groups! Figuring out a system of support with all mediums like (CDFIs and NGOs, etc.)
O: Football stadium which could create more community pride
O: Ford foundation has taken interest in SD
O: Great developers creating mixed use, mixed income housing
O: * great leaders emerge in tough times not easy ones and this is the time
O: Health and technology industries
O: Hiring locally
O: Housing platform for community development
O: Identify common priorities
O: In the shadow of LA OC, SD needs to speak up
O: increased philanthropic support
O: Industrial environmental association along the bay-front supporting Environmental Health
Coalition, buffer plan and supporting issues of collocation. Pro jobs and business but not toxic waste
O: Information in different languages and educational
O: Intelligent people in SD
O: Invest in economic development
O: Job creation: Clean technology, healthcare, military, life sciences
O: Large demographic shift to capitalize on in next 10 to 15 years

O: Less focus groups and more action
O: LISC initiative talking about education, jobs, conservancy
O: Look at other industries to drive community development
O: Low cost land investors and lenders coming back. Conditions are ripe except for gap financing.
O: Make sure folks are aware of what others do
O: Many funders, public and private sector getting their head around comprehensive initiatives for
O: Match financial institutions with entrepreneurs. Get small businesses started and incubated
O: Maximize international collaborations
O: Media involved with the work, engaged and participating
O: more can be done than what we are doing
O: more flexible funding
O: Need transportation corridors to be walkable, improved and maintained
O: New green house gas emission regulations will be met in new community plan updates which means
more transit oriented development
O: New HUD if can get resources from congress. They are streamlining opportunities for housing
O: Not precluded to anything and not locked in like older Eastern cities
O: * Organizations can collaborate to create more significant higher impact programs
O: Organizations should collaborate for tangible results through collaborations and funnel out the
weaker non profits that do not show results
O: plan and create common vision
O: Private investors forum
O: * Reach out to get more dollars, federal stimulus money
O: Redevelopment agency has good expertise and infrastructure in comparison to other cities our size
O: San Diego + Tijuana
O: social venture fund
O: Something that will actual happen and not just a conversation or something on paper
O: Stadiums, redeveloping and developing which would bring in parks, housing, stores, river
conservancy, mixed use communities, entertainment industry
O: Structuring something that will work to improve communities
O: The hopes are that this conversation will produce action
O: The schools are putting out great people
O: Tourist industry
O: Translation and interpretation
O: Transportation, improvement of the airports, and rail system
O: Universities
O: University folk wanting to volunteer
O: Use of public resources
O: Vision campaign for mayor
O: Vision forum
O: Volunteerism can shore up the needs that the fiscal situation has created. Example: clean ups,
volunteer work to make up for reduced maintenance, faith based organizations have done this
O: We can do more than what we are doing now
O: What is an innovative neighborhood look like?

O: Working through the tension to find commonalities
O: Would consider investment opportunities in SD if LISC were to assist
O: youth entreprenuership
O: How to make a game plan for achieving
O:Connections with like-minded people to get things done
O:Have communities invest in projects and be a part of it
O:Something Replicable and scalable for all neighborhoods and that all the will and resources are
behind it∙∙
 O/S: Ability to collaborate and cooperate among organizations
 O/S: Professional population getting involved
 O: More collaboration is needed, for example like for clean-ups.
 O: 20% budget cut downsizing the City to deal with efficiency
 O: Ability to get things done if there is leadership
 O: Access to technology
 O: Aggressive process of urbanism, wonderful new funding, affordable housing (tax increment for low
income housing). Redevelopment agencies have been aggressive developers.
 O: Annual income spent on transportation and mortgage is 60 to 70 percent! This is unsustainable and
can be changed
 O: Awareness campaigns
 O: Balboa park, use as a social resource
 O: Border expansion
 O: Building a new City Hall to create good paying jobs for SD
 O: Building prices have dropped. Land prices are also opportunities.
 O: Building projects will create sense of hope and jobs and supporting small businesses
 O: Building up density although there is a lot of resistance
 O: City council members can have more direct communication with the community (San Diego speaks
(budget cuts)
 O: City has better accounting system so money can be allocated to the correct areas.
 O: City of Villages
 O: Civic leadership
 O: Clean technology. Create biotech cluster and collaborate with other areas
 O: Collaborations
 O: Collaborations would get more done.
 O: Community gardens
 O: Community groups like chambers and are used to going to these forums
 O: Continue to give voice to people in decision making processes (BIDs)
 O: Current administration creating opportunities for no profits to create an economic impact. Getting
the media to support projects and successes to get the word out to the community. Ability to capitalize
on the positive impacts non-profits are creating. Since some non profits are falling out more
opportunities for collaboration.
 O: Cut personnel
 O: Cut red tapes when it comes to experimenting with new ideas to improve communities
 O: Diversity
 O: Education on high school level
 O: Educational institutions should be in partnerships with orgs to get locals involved in improving

 O: Educational system can integrate more digital technology
 O: Empowering people at the local level to reinforce the natural character
 O: Engage communities in funding opportunities and how to use that money
 O: Establishing relationships to allow projects to happen. Staying persistent to develop relationships
 O: Exceptional medical field, many conventions
 O: Farmers markets
 O: Federal monies for transportation rapid rail
 O: Financial crisis allows us to act boldly so gov’t should use this time to experiment. Perfect time to
take political risk. City council has not been bold and should be.
 O: Focus groups are great but action is also needed
 O: Forums like this will help. Prop 63 Prop 1c. Opportunities around changing leadership in
Downtown and Southeast CDC.
 O: Gardens
 O: Growth and improvement of the transportation system but need political will to do what is best for
the region
 O: Growth for example with the convention center, port
 O: Healthy movement, walking anti-obesity campaigns
 O: If we look at these weaknesses can be made into opportunity through public transportation and
connectivity from border to downtown.
 O: Infill projects to fulfill missions of organizations and to fulfill community plan updates
 O: Integrated economies
 O: Intellectual capacity can bring good reasoning to problems that are not reactive. Educational
community is hear.
 O: Interactions and collaborations
 O: Kyoto Prize spreading throughout the City
 O: Leadership supporting creative ideas to better the community
 O: Learn about how racism and subtle racism plays a role in development.
 O: Learn how to listen to low income minorities
 O: Lessons learned before applying a model or idea
 O: Let neighborhoods do their own infrastructure services
 O: LISC is integral when developing
 O: Metro transit center at the border
 O: Military human resource
 O: Mobilization around resources
 O: More kids walking to school makes people more engaged
 O: More resident services
 O: More ships coming into SD would create more good paying jobs at the port
 O: More worker owned/small businesses can be used to create more of a community in downtown.
 O: Multi-cultural and multi-lingual region and global community using resources on both sides of the
 O: National mood for community service and volunteerism
 O: Need for development agencies.
 O: Need to find a way of making businesses more successful
 O: Next two to three years will be great times for opportunities

 O: Non profits neighborhood orgs and city orgs can work together for common goals like through
clean up days and community improvements especially in downtown.
 O: One stop locations for income tax credit and food stamps
 O: One stop locations, i.e. housing resources center. Also necessary for others
 O: Opportunity to avoid becoming a barbell city. Elderly are left behind and there are the haves and the
 O: Opportunity to gather people in their interests and implement educational opportunity in it also
 O: Organize and help people grow around their issues and their needs and not what they city thinks
their needs are i.e. getting involved in political avenues of participation
 O: Our medical services are exceptionally good
 O: People need to organize and respect the integrity of those next door to yr agency
 O: Place we have to create model projects (and we already have). Public housing combating NIMBY -
ism through education. Educating based on successes.
 O: Preserving beauty
 O: Price charities, California Endowment, LISC, political attention, but it is precarious. There needs to
be leadership and education so people understand what is happening and they can make their own
 O: Professionals have more time to get involved because of decling economy
 O: Regional transportation plan which is a sustainable communities plan to reduce green house gas
emissions i.e. smart growth and urban infill. This also means more opportunities for civic engagement
 O: Relinquish work to the community to deal with their own issues
 O: reorganize redevelopment for greater benefits to tax increment generation.
 O: SD businesses owners need forum for communication with higher powers
 O: SD has unique opportunity right now because positioned to move in to meet our future as a great
city of the new century. High speed rail, biotech, protected natural resources, we have that here but we
need to take opportunities and move forward.
 O: SD is a young city and not expected to do things a certain way. No established paradigm so we can
use entrepreneurship to create success. Universities can use locals to become leaders stay in their
 O: Showing that democracy still works and that the multicultural community
 O: Sitting down and discussing who is doing things right and who is doing things wrong.
 O: Small town SD where people know each other so people know how to get things done
 O: Surplus of supply or demand
 O: Take each neighborhood and look at assets and strengths on neighborhood level and build on that
 O: Tap into the military
 O: Technical trades
 O: Technologies, clean energy
 O: these focus groups and structuring the information for all of us to process. Focus groups should
happen more often.
 O: To influence elevated officials
 O: Turn the paradigms around
 O: Universities can pull in talent into region and research money
 O: Use creative solutions and invite these creative people. We have to respect their input and try it.
 O: Utilize the brains of the region (highest per capita of PHDs)
 O: Veteran housing projects
 O: Volunteers
 O: Working with small businesses and entrepreneurs to prosper and/or expand and improve

 O:Encourage foster and develop leadership at the local level
T: Affordable housing developers do not have the funds to build up their organizations
T: Bad economy is affecting retail of small businesses
T: Budget cuts, investors are not there, promised money is not being distributed because of budget
T: Budget for non-profits
T: Budgets at state and local level
T: CA is a donor state and sends money to DC
T: CDFIs are losing strength because banks are not investing in them as much
T: City’s financial problems
T: Depletion of natural resources
T: Development does not benefit long term residents, development is not balanced
T: Development encroaching upon low income neighborhoods
T: Disconnect between theoretical green CA and economic reality of the state. Too much shooting
down of business
T: Displacement and changing of communities structures
T: Displacing of downtown residents near tenth avenue terminal.
T: Diverse communities and cultural differences keep the communities segregated in dealing with
community issues
T: Dysfunctional school board
T: Economic situation and how it is impacting the city, county and neighborhoods gov’ts
T: Economy is cutting small business programs like CalCAP
T: Economy which impacts corporate philanthropy and support from city, county, state, federal
agencies, also individual philanthropy is cut. Programs are cut
T: Fair share on federal and state programs
T: Fair share on hi-tech credits
T: Federal funding has not been flowing down to SD and the administration has not distributed that
T: Finances
T: * Foreclosure crisis and collateral damage of the crisis
T: Funders are growing afraid to invest in certain neighborhoods or non-profit orgs that are not
performing well and do not have the capacity to receive funding. Even collaborations do not result in
more funding opportunities
T: Funding and the fiscal situation on the private sector side locally and in the state situation
T: Gangs and gang-related violence
T: Gentrification displacing people and not addressing needs of people not being displaced
T: Geography is a challenge to organizing
T: Governor Election coming up combined with the state budget crisis
T: * Healthcare and people losing their benefits because they lost their jobs
T: High level leadership problems
T: Homeless population
T: Ignoring issues in communities
T: In the shadow of LA or Orange County
T: Inability to manage the process of solving issues as well as the faulty leadership

T: Income gap between different communities and people and that dictates redevelopment and
T: Increased applicants of borrowers to non-profit lenders but not meeting the requirements
T: Indirect effects on financial industries comfort
T: Job creation problems for the non college educated
T: Lack of coordinated effort in the City and their response to the stimulus package
T: Lack of employment, housing market
T: Lack of future secure source for a water supply. Imperial County is having problems. Clean
technology needs water supply to prosper and create jobs.
T: Lack of inclusion in the process, not just feeding an agenda. Participation from those affected and
representatives of those affected
T: Lack of readiness and cohesion among different sectors as to what direction the City should be
headed in. Stimulus money was lost because SD was not ready to compete for.
T: Local leadership in the City and county trying to secure funds
T: Mom and pop, housing, transportation issues
T: No affordable housing
T: No consistent community plan updates
T: No mature third, fourth generation non profits
T: No one building affordable housing, no money for community centers
T: No organizing principal/ common table to build relationships
T: Non profits did not diversify their donor base so they are struggling to find donors
T: Non-profit borrowers are not strong
T: Not enough funding, not enough resources to do comm. Dev
T: Organizational and institutional sustainability
T: Other state gov’ts are friendlier to economic development
T: People do not want to borrow money because of the financial state though banks can lend
T: People who want to borrow want to borrow to cover pay rolls and banks do not want to lend for
purposes like that
T: Political will to move on something but also to work across jurisdictions.
T: Pollution
T: Reduction in school budgets/loss of teachers
T: Severe dearth of knowledge in terms of being a bi-national community. No bi-national
communication. Lack of information
T: Small business supports like Cal-Southern program so no micro lending
T: Some districts do not have the resources to change the perceptions and images of the communities
T: State budget
T: State gov’t regulations are causing businesses/jobs to leave the state.
T: State politics are also not coordinated
T: The border crimes can spill out to border towns and this can erode healthcare quality
T: The city and county does not get along and they need to cooperate
T: Transformation and beautification does not preserve culture and community
T: Water supply problem
 T: Access to capital issue and banks not lending for small businesses. Small companies not getting
financing and not creating jobs. Non profit are bearing the brunt of work to address people’s needs but
they have little funding from the city. For CDFIs, gov’t funding is low on the west coast. Majority of
money went to CDFIs on east coast and the little money went to SF and LA.

 T: Affordability in SD causes people to move away
 T: Anticipated population growth and no infrastructure (housing) to support that or resources
 T: Assessments not made correctly and credibility is hurt.
 T: Bad educational system
 T: Border issues (tourism) stump local economies
 T: Border state means less resources to serve all of the people in the federal area in particular
 T: Budget cuts
 T: Bureaucracy asks for too much and almost destroys projects
 T: Bureaucracy makes it difficult to get necessary things done
 T: Bureucracy does not trust other methods of doing things
 T: Bureucracy does not trust the community
 T: CA charter school financing is huge and higher education on the state side is increasingly
 T: Challenge: banks and foundations funding issues. State redistributes money wrong. No clear
indication of what the basic principles of community development is! Not enough attention on infill.
 T: Citizens are angry and are not going to take it anymore
 T: Citizens do not feel connected to government
 T: City is so short staffed and no one analyzes other methods of doing things or being creative
 T: City regulations for business are also bad
 T: Climate change
 T: Consumers are impacted by budget issues
 T: Continuing over consumption as if we have infinite resources
 T: Control of communities instead of engagement and listening. This trumps the foundation of our civil
 T: Corrupt gov’t perceptions
 T: Cost of living, gentrification in certain neighborhoods
 T: County wide organizations trying to help but do nothing
 T: Crime perceptions affect where business is set up
 T: Cultural differences cause lack of civic participation and engagement and causes more isolation
because of fear to talk to authority because of their cultural backgrounds
 T: Desire to replicate models without taking communities/neighborhood uniqueness into
consideration. Not looking at differences in cultural diversity, unique operations between
 T: Deteriorating infrastructure
 T: Development has stopped in East Village
 T: Development moving in and displacing people
 T: Difficult financial problems
 T: Distrust of government in SD between power players and communities
 T: Downsizing has made it difficult to continue services
 T: Drugs at the border
 T: Dwindling local resources. Bigger and bigger gap that needs to be filled by local resources. Local
jurisdictions able to do less projects. Fewer external resources coming in
 T: * Economic impact and unemployment rates are impacting communities
 T: * Education system is bankrupt and not graduating
 T: Employment, lack of jobs.

 T: Fear of losing our valued resources (environmental and cultural)
 T: federal gov’t deficit and unwillingness of anyone to address non-discretionary spending. Obama
considering putting a cap on housing.
 T: Few people that have generational connection to SD. Many people are transplants
 T: Financing in short supply and financing sources are not keen on financing mixed use non-traditional
projects. Establishing effective communication.
 T: Financing: State of economy has weakened private banks and housing programs that normally fill
gaps. Infrastructure and public safety decline. Jobs and economic opportunity which go hand in hand
with family incomes. Infrastructure threatened: potholes, drainage, mudslides, roads, water sewer.
 T: Foreclosure possibilities
 T: Foreclosures
 T: Funding. SD gets lost when people look at hosing issues. Federal and foundation funding is always
low in SD. HUD is awarding stabilization funding and none is coming to SD
 T: Gentrification. People come in and try to fix issues but they are displacing the people who needed
the help.
 T: Geography will have impact on growth, jobs, etc.
 T: Governance
 T: Governor is taking redevelopment funds
 T: Having the perception of the City being unable to do anything.
 T: healthcare system is weak
 T: Housing commission is now in competition with affordable housing. Housing commission is now a
real estate development commission
 T: Housing crisis and no rebuilding of housing torn down for development. Also no affordable housing
 T: Housing market is bad because of foreclosures and will be bad in next five years when it turns
around completely
 T: If had decent project SD Commission used to work with people to try and make the project work.
SD commission has no leadership but could work as financing partner.
 T: Integration of border issues
 T: Investment is not made a priority in SD
 T: Lack of civic participation
 T: Lack of leadership.
 T: Lack of water
 T: Location of neighborhoods and gentrification and displacement
 T: Location, bottom of state
 T: Low mod funds are being taken from every jurisdiction which has an impact of killing or delaying
deals. No state leveraging (low mod funds, TODs, infill etc.). We need permanent source for housing.
Economy taking low mod and state is to. Low mod indirectly hit.
  Anti-community policies
 T: Mentality, anything given out for free is doubted and non profits have to offer the same quality
services as for profit orgs in order for that to change
 T: Moving disparity around instead of addressing the underlying issues (Gentrification/displacement)
 T: No affordable housing
 T: No definition of community
 T: No jobs
 T: No loans for homebuyers
 T: No money to get projects done
 T: No Necessary elements for Affordable housing developments

 T: No old money because not many old families here still to take ownership of the neighborhood
 T: No streamlining has happened
 T: non affordability of transportation, education, housing
 T: Not enough affordable housing
 T: Not graduating people who can enter a high wage workforce that can afford the quality of life in SD
 T: Older neighborhoods are pushing back (for example city heights) on growth/density. Long waiting
time in the City for projects to go through.
 T: Our economy is not large enough to be competitive
 T: Panhandling
 T: People are moving into pockets of comfort
 T: Perceptions of development and expertise
 T: Perceptions of state of CA being incapable
 T: Perceptions of unequal distributing of resources
 T: Permanent source
 T: redevelopment in inner cities. Infrastructure is in a crisis stage. Community and developers have
limited resources to improve infrastructure. Adds to costs of developments
 T: Regulations in CA for example to build a new home
 T: Reimbursement time for non profits is too slow
 T: Reorganization of the City can also impede upon community work
 T: San Diego’s inability to grasp/ create a different model of politics
 T: SD has no unified voice politically (in Sacramento too) so other cities are able to garner more than
their fare share. Bay area cities and LA have a more regional approach in leadership. There is no
compelling regional vision.
 T: SD Housing commission has provided local resources to produce affordable housing but
organizational shifts in recent times has caused weakness and funding has too.
 T: SD is a young city and we are in a phase in which we are trying to define who we are and where we
are going but there is no integration or direction of all the different sectors. The community then wants
things to stay the same because there is no public vision that people can cling to so that then commerce
and development can support that. The City in CPUs is not communicating what is needed for every
community to take on what is needed for density.
 T: SD needs to be more capital friendly
 T: shrunken environment of tax credits and increased conservatism of tax creditors ability is almost
gone. Example strong market vs. weak market. Capital wants to go to easy places.
 T: State budget affects private investment and small business
 T: State freezing loans
 T: State gov’t structural funding gap
 T: State is dysfunctional and local term limits with not strong mayor and council not happy about what
the mayor is doing
 T: Structure of CA and its taxation policies are causing businesses to move out
 T: Talent is lost because of un-affordability of SD
 T: The City is not prepared to deal with the changes that increasing diversity brings
 T: The idea that government is not meant to be trusted and neither are corporations
 T: The money coming in. How will it be used? How is improvement measured? Starbucks?
 T: The State permeates everything, education K-12 and Universities
 T: Too far south of Sacramento
 T: Unemployment rate is making people frustrated

T:* Unions are a threat to keeping things the way they are.
T: Water supply
T: We have no competition for state and fed dollars
T: What is the vision for downtown? This is not clear and the economy makes that uncertain

Addendum B: List of Focus Group Participants

Monday February 8, 2010:

9am−10am, Affordable Housing Developers
         Community HousingWorks Sue Reynolds Aff Hsg Developer
         National Core John Seymour Aff Hsg Developer
         San Diego Housing Federation Tom Scott Aff Hsg Developer
         San Diego Interfaith Housing Foundation Matthew Jumper Aff Hsg Developer
         Wakeland Housing and Development Corp Ken Sauder Aff Hsg Developer

10am−11am, Mixed Group
         Accion Elizabeth Makee Intermediary
         UCSD Mirle Bussell Education
         Corporation for Supportive Housing Simmone Ruff Intermediary
         Low Income Investment Fund (LIIF) Matthew Hass Intermediary
         RED Capital Group/PNC Evan Becker Intermediary

11am−Noon, Mixed Group
        Ito Girard Assoc. Robert Ito Private Developer
        Urban Land Institute SD Mary Lydon Comm Dev Consultant
        Urban Housing Partners, Inc. Sherman D. Harmer, Jr. Private Developer
        London Group Realty Advisors Gary H. London Private Developer
        Union Bank Brian Roberts Financial

1pm−2pm, Business Improvement Districts
        Downtown San Diego Partnership John Hanley BID
        Gaslamp Quarter Association Jimmy Parker BID
        San Ysidro Business Association Judy Elliot BID

2pm−3pm, Business Improvement Districts
        San Ysidro Business Association Klara Vidrio BID
        Business Improvement District Council Tiffany Sherer BID
        CDC Small Business Finance Robert Villareal BID

3pm−4pm, City/Government
        Redevelopment Agency Janice Weinrick
        Southeastern Economic Devel Corp (SEDC) Brian Trottier
        San Diego Gang Commission Pastor Cooper
        San Diego Housing Commission Rick Gentry
        San Diego Police Department William Lansdowne
        San Diego WorkForce Partnership Mark Cafferty
        San Diego WorkForce Partnership Todd Philips

Tuesday February 9, 2010

9am−10am, Financial Industry
         Bank of America Richard Bregman Financial Industry
         Comerica Bill Becker Financial Industry
         Citi Chi Tran Financial Industry
         CDC Small Business Finance Robert Villarreal Financial Industry

10am−11am, Financial Industry
         San Diego National Bank Gordon Boerner Financial Industry
         U.S. Bank Erica Opstad Financial Industry
         Wells Fargo Wendell French Financial Industry
         Northern Trust Jimar Wilson Financial Industry

11am−NOON, Mixed Group
         Benbough Legler Foundation Peter K. Ellsworth Funder
         Foundation for Change Andrea Rocha Funder
         Foundation for Change Blanca Romero Funder
         Turner Consulting Jarl Turner consultant
         Cloud 9 shuttle John Hawkins Business
         ONA Dennis Otsuji Business
12pm-1pm LUNCH
1pm−2pm, Mixed Group
         Price Charities Tad Parzen Funder
         San Diego Food Bank Scody Hage Non Profit
         State Farm Insurance Mike Rossman Funder
         The California Endowment Steve Eldred Funder
         United Way Douglas Sawyer Funder

3pm−4pm Non-Profits
        Neighborhood House Association Rudolph A. Johnson Non-Profit Leader
        Neighborhood House Association Michael Kemp Non-Profit Leader

4pm−5pm, Non-Profits
        Environmental Health Coalition Leticia Ayala Non-Profit Leader
        Neighborhood House Association Valerie Wright

Thursday February 11, 2010

9am−10am, Business Interests
         Asian Business Association Joni Low
         Mad Science Joe Farrage
         Sempra Francisco Urtasun
         Union Bank Kathy Patoff

10am−11am, Mixed Group
         Parker Foundation Judy McDonald
         San Diego Urban League Ray King
         Urban West Development Rich Juarez
         Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz, APC Barry Schultz
11am- Noon - No group
12pm−1pm, Mixed Group
         Fusion Marketing Solutions Art Rivera
         Chelsea Jim Schmid
         NEF Todd Fabian
         Point Loma Nazarene Bob Brower

2pm−3pm, Mixed Group
        Housing Opportunity Collaborative Vino Pajanor
        Move San Diego Elyse Lowe
        San Diego Grantmakers Nancy Jamison

3pm−4pm, CDC's
        BAME Renaissance CDC Monte Jones
        Bayview CDC Jerry Robinson
        Bronze Triangle CDC Maria Flores
        City Heights Community Development Corp Jay Powell
        Casa Familiar Andrea Skorepa
        Proyecto de Casas Saludables Virginia Angeles
        Proyecto de Casas Saludables Valentina Hernandez

4pm−5pm, CDC's
        SAY San Diego Kevin O'Neill
        Mid City CAN Diana Ross
        International Rescue Committee Bob Montgomery
        Sherman Heights Community Center Jerry Guzman-Vergara
        Sherman Heights Community Center Liliana Garcia-Rivera

Friday, February 12

3pm−4pm, Mixed Group
        Manpower Trevor Blair
        San Diego Foundation Cheryl Phelps

Addendum C: Sample Invitation Letter to Participate in Focus Groups

January 10, 2010

Subject: 2010 Neighborhood Innovation Forum

It is our pleasure to invite you to participate in an exciting opportunity that will bring together a
diverse spectrum of industries and national experts in an effort to strengthen quality of life in San
Diego’s neighborhoods. In May, the City of San Diego and the Local Initiatives Support Corporation
(LISC) plan to host a two-day Neighborhood Innovation Forum focused on comprehensive, “place
based” community development. This forum serves as the first opportunity of its kind for national
experts to share their experiences, best practices, and innovative approaches to strategic community
development and begin to strategize a coordinated local effort.

As a key leader in our city, we value your insight, experience, and time. Accordingly, we want the
forum to provide an opportunity for useful and productive dialogue that will result in a road map for
future neighborhood development. In order to frame an agenda that is specific to the needs and
interests of San Diego communities, we are requesting your participation in a one-hour focus group
to be held on February 8, 2010 at 3:00 p.m. at Civic Center Plaza, 1200 3rd Avenue, Suite 1400,
San Diego, CA 92101 (conference room). It is our expectation that the ideas generated through
focus groups will help us to achieve this goal.

Given the unprecedented challenges in these current economic times, strategic partnerships are
increasingly critical to maintaining and improving the quality of life for our businesses, families and
institutions. We hope that you will join us both at the focus group in February and the Neighborhood
Innovation Forum in May. Please RSVP to Amy Benjamin at abenjamin@sandiego.gov or 619-533-
3983 or Joe Horiye at jhoriye@lisc.org or 619-528-9058x11.

We thank you in advance for your consideration of this request and look forward to your involvement
and support of our efforts.


JERRY SANDERS                                      Joe Horiye
Mayor                                              Executive Director
City of San Diego                                  San Diego LISC


To top