Evidence

Follow the record.

What the documents establish, what they do not establish and what still requires an answer.

Documented fact Directly supportedHistorical context Relevant, not determinativeOpen question Requires more informationRestore Barnes position Clearly identified advocacy
01

City of San Diego

1992 Lease + Council Action

What it proves

The public-tennis purpose, original term, $600 annual cash rent, public-access framework and City approval rights.

What it does not prove

It does not confirm the expiration date or cash rent currently recognized by the City.

02

California Coastal Commission / City record

Coastal Conditions

What it proves

The facility was treated as public tennis with an emphasis on youth programs, on land involving historic tidelands and continuing Coastal jurisdiction.

What it does not prove

It does not establish that current pickleball, padel or commercial activity violates Coastal law.

03

City of San Diego + Youth Tennis San Diego

2009 Memorandum of Understanding

What it proves

Defined improvements were formally approved, including the youth education building, mini-tennis courts, play area and parking modifications.

What it does not prove

It does not establish a lease extension or broadly replace the original lease framework.

04

City Real Estate correspondence

Historical Approval Record

What it proves

Food service, extended hours and a small telecom proposal received specific landlord review involving permitted use, sublease consent and City economics.

What it does not prove

Historical scrutiny does not, by itself, determine whether a current activity is authorized.

05

City Development Services

2024 Parcel A Letter

What it proves

Parking expansion exceeded the existing CUP, further CUP and Coastal approval was required, unauthorized parking had to stop and DSD described approximately one acre as illegally graded.

What it does not prove

The Parcel A finding does not establish that the entire Barnes operation or lease is unlawful.

06

IRS filing via ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer

2024 YTSD Form 990

What it proves

The nonprofit’s financial scale, aggregated tournament economics, compensation, related-entity reporting and a YTSD-controlled racquet-sports entity at the Barnes address.

What it does not prove

Aggregated tournament reporting does not show that any individual professional or junior event lost money.

07

YTSD filing, AEG and executive public profile

AGIA / Taktika Public Record

What it proves

A reported $139,817 YTSD payment to AGIA Padel LLC, Taktika’s operating role at Barnes and overlapping public executive roles.

What it does not prove

The record does not establish complete beneficial ownership, personal financial flows or improper conduct.

08

City of San Diego, Request 26-8084

2026 City Records Closure

What it proves

The City stated that all responsive, non-exempt records had been released. No comprehensive modern approval and economic framework was identified in that production.

What it does not prove

The absence of a document from the completed production is not proof that no authorization exists.

09

Restore Barnes request to City Real Estate

City Administrative Clarification — Closed

Following completion of the records process, Restore Barnes asked City Real Estate to confirm the recognized lease term, current economics, authorization of current uses, third-party arrangements and the anticipated future operator process. The City subsequently closed the inquiry without providing substantive administrative answers to those questions.

What it proves

Restore Barnes sought direct clarification after the records process was completed.

What it does not prove

The City’s closure does not itself determine the lease term, legality of current uses or future operator process.

Who we are

Restore Barnes was initiated by J. Semrau, a San Diego tennis professional and sports-marketing executive. The initiative is developing an independent tennis-first public-asset and operator-feasibility proposal. J. Semrau may participate in a future operating coalition if the City creates an appropriate process. That prospective interest is disclosed openly.

Next

See the alternative.

Review the plan