Emerald Hills project

The County Supervisor and former District 4 councilmember strongly supported the project, framing large minimum lot sizes as racist tools and the homes as a path to generational wealth.

The 88-year-old longtime community activist recounted fighting for large lots and open space in Encanto since the 1960s and opposed losing the designated open space.

The Air Force veteran and 50-year resident demanded the council reject the project, preserve the hilltop as a park, and accused officials of favoring developers.

Led a large organized presentation arguing the project concentrates density in an under-resourced community, raising notice defects, fire evacuation risk, and a land-swap park alternative.

Shared her family's redlining history and District 4's legacy of greatness, asking the council to honor the community and support the appeal.

Representing a Liverpool San Diego group, argued Footnote 7 was invalid from the start and the project conflicts with the community plan's large-lot character.

Treasurer of the Young Black Democrats urged denying the appeal, noting the park designation was aspirational and the city never bought the land.

Speaking for Partnership for the Advancement of New Americans, supported the housing project and its infrastructure and affordable homes.

A lifelong Southeast San Diego resident, supported the project because her adult children cannot afford homes in San Diego.

A nearby homeowner and real estate broker since 1978, supported the new homes as an upgrade for the community.

Supported the appeal, noting Southeastern San Diego has 64% less park space and that every community is watching how the council treats public green space.

Local president of the National Association of Real Estate Brokers, supported the project as advancing democracy in housing and generational wealth.

A sociologist from Emerald Hills, called the project environmental racism and asked the council to reject Footnote 7 and protect the community's legacy.

Criticized D.R. Horton's construction quality and lending practices in other states, opposing the project.

Executive director of Our Time to Act, supported denying the appeal, arguing smaller minimum lots reduce exclusion and the project should deepen affordability.

Founder of San Diego United Communities, opposed the density, questioned the developer's ties to the community, and warned of electoral consequences.

A first-time homebuyer hopeful, supported the 123 homes as relief from rising rents.

A 40-year District 4 homeowner, said the yellow-shirted opponents don't represent the district and urged the council to deny the appeal unanimously.

A District 1 resident urged the council to support the appeal and put the community above developers.