• Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

"I am keenly aware that I have been accused by some people in the community of sensationalizing this, as has Chief [William] Lansdowne," said San Diego Fire Chief Javier Mainar during a presentation before the Public Safety and Neighborhood Services Committee on Wednesday, October 13. "I would argue that I am not in any way attempting to do that. I've been asked by the mayor to cut $7.2 million out of the budget. It wasn't a suggestion. It was a direction. I'm certainly not sensationalizing it or talking about any elective matters on the upcoming ballot."

Last week, Mainar came under fire from opponents of the sales-tax reform measure after he announced the cuts to the fire department and lifeguard services budget, which include eliminating staffing for one of the fire department's two helicopters, extinguishing five engines, potentially axing 60 fire fighters from the payroll, removing lifeguards at Mission Bay and North Pacific Beach, and reducing staff at city beaches.

The political firestorm was reignited hours before Mainar appeared before the public safety committee when councilmember Carl DeMaio released a press release asserting that his office discovered $5.4 million in bonuses paid to firefighters with EMT certification.

During the committee meeting, Mainar doused the heat from DeMaio, stating that the district five representative was referring to the "Emergency Medical Technician pay," which according to the fire chief is a separate line item in the department's budget. The pay, said Mainar, is extra pay for firefighters that hold EMT certification, which all are required to hold.

"I took it as a personal affront today," said Mainar, explaining that the additional pay has been part of the budget since the ’80s and is part of the firefighters overall salary.

From her spot on the dais, Councilmember Marti Emerald, chair of the committee, also took offense to her colleague's comments.

"It appears that Mr. DeMaio is playing some political game with public safety," said Emerald, who then directed her comments to staff members from councilmember DeMaio's office. "None of us appreciates that, from your boss or from any of you. Spreading rumors, spreading lies to try and influence your political outcome.... I hope you take that message back to your boss. We will do whatever we can to silence this misinformation, this irresponsible behavior."

  • Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

More from SDReader

More from the web

Comments

nostalgic Oct. 14, 2010 @ 7:57 p.m.

Wait a minute. There's $5.4 MILLION separate fund for firefighters with EMT training. The fire department says that is extra pay for firefighters with EMT Training. How does that differ from a bonus for firefighters with EMT Training? I guess Extra Pay is OK, but a bonus isn't. I'll take either one. How many people are getting this extra pay? Just curious.

0

Dorian Hargrove Oct. 15, 2010 @ 12:56 p.m.

Nostalgic, the money is listed as a separate line item, though, Mainar says the EMT pay is part of the basic salary for firefighters. All firefighters are required to obtain EMT certification.

0

nostalgic Oct. 15, 2010 @ 8:18 p.m.

Yes, but are we required to pay them an EXTRA $5.4 Million?

"The pay, said Mainar, is extra pay for firefighters that hold EMT certification, which all are required to hold."

So everybody gets extra pay? I still don't get it.

0

JustWondering Oct. 18, 2010 @ 7:35 a.m.

It's very simple and just another classic example of the City's mismanagement, or in this case, laziness.

EMT specialty pay for Firefighter was not required some twenty years ago. The City negotiated with firefighter years ago and encouraged them to get trained as EMT's. As part of that negotiation firefighters asked the City to provide pay for this qualification since not everyone was required to hold it. At the time 8.5% was granted if a firefighter took the necessary classes and practical experience to earn an EMT certification.

As time went by the City changed their hiring standards and required all FD to be EMT certified. But the City NEVER incorporated EMT specialty pay line item into the firefighter's base pay even though they altered the hiring requirements. So on a going forward basis, firefighter who were hired after the new standard was implemented are all EMT's. But those hired before the new standard are not required to hold such as certificate.

So if Mr. DeMaio wants to condemn the practice as it stands today, he should aim his ire and comtempt at the Mayor, COO and Comptroller for sloppy financial accounting.

I also see on Mr. DeMaio's website he has asked for information from the Comptroller on all of the city's "general fund" departments. One can only wonder what NEW misleading statements Mr. DeMaio will spew over the next couple of weeks before the vote on Prop D.

As a politician who has repeatedly been exposed for false and misleading statements, Mr. DeMaio spins this story to benefit his political cause, and further his aspiration of becoming the Mayor of San Diego. Of course in doing so, he jeopardizes the safety of its citizens, the very ones he is suppose to serve.

Mr. DeMaio made a conscious choice to OMIT the back story, the history of this pay for his own selfish reasons. Is this type of honest leadership San Diego wants? Haven't we had our fill of politicians and bureaucrats who spread self serving lies to further their careers?

0

Founder Oct. 18, 2010 @ 11:29 a.m.

Reply #2, #3 & #4 Line items are just additional methods to add money to budgets.

More line items usually referred to by number not by name allow additional funds to be "added" yet not identified...

I say Good for Carl DeMaio for pointing out this 5.4 Million that should never be "IN" the budget and is also something else the Mayor should be "directed" to cut $5.2 million out of the budget.

This is just more smoke and mirrors from our Leaders who are now taking sides to protect themselves and not the Citizens of San Diego!

===

RE: Marti Emerald, chair of the committee, also took offense to her colleague's comments.

As far as Emerald saying: "It appears that Mr. DeMaio is playing some political game with public safety," - & - " I hope you take that message back to your boss. We will do whatever we can to silence this misinformation, this irresponsible behavior." Wake up, you ALL are playing the Political Game with our MONEY.

BTW: Marti Emerald what part have you "PLAYED" in the Guacamole Bowl Debacle while promoting Prop D for Dumb? What could San Diego's the Public Safety and Neighborhood Services Committee do with $500,000 to $!,000,000?

Carl DeMaio for Mayor Stop the Budget Debacle!

Replying to "just" #4 RE: "I also see on Mr. DeMaio's website he has asked for information from the Comptroller on all of the city's "general fund" departments. One can only wonder what NEW misleading statements Mr. DeMaio will spew over the next couple of weeks before the vote on Prop D."

Get a grip, Council Member DeMaio should have access to any and all info he feels might be helpful; THAT IS PART OF HIS JOB, I WISH ALL THE OTHERS WOULD ALSO DO THEIRS, INSTEAD OF PLAY HIDE AND SEEK WITH OUR MONEY!

0

JustWondering Oct. 18, 2010 @ 1:31 p.m.

I have no problem with Mr. DeMaio having access to information and I never said nor implied that was wrong. I even agree with you, all of our Councilmembers should be well informed with the facts regarding city operations.

What bothers me is what he does with the information he gets. In this specific instance it not only offends me, but should offend all fair minded people. Mr. DeMaio has purposely chosen not to tell the WHOLE truth. By omitting historical facts regarding the pay he has carefully spun the information into something it's really not. And, in doing so, DeMaio is purposely dishonest to the taxpayers of San Diego and the citizens he is suppose to serve in his district.

In my previous post, I believe I made the history of the pay clear, as well as the City's mismanagement of it.

Further, if you recall, Mayor Sanders clearly pointed out that the City's data processing, payroll, real estate services, accounts payable and a slew of other financial services were in disarray where legacy computer systems could not communicate effectively. The City has already spent in excess of $50 million dollars to bring those systems into the 21st century, although it's not going smoothly at all. This is not an excuse, it's a fact.

Nevertheless, if you choose to believe DeMaio's interpretation of the data he presented as fact, that's your right and you're entitled to blindly follow him all you want. But the record is clear, Mr. DeMaio has been caught fabricating facts in past. His answer when confronted and challenged about the veracity of his statements; blame subordinates or others for giving him the "wrong" info.

Is that really the type of leadership you want running our city? You may want a documented liar as your future Mayor, but I, and other fair minded San Diegans, DO NOT.

0

Founder Oct. 18, 2010 @ 3:36 p.m.

Reply #6 RE: "is that really the type of leadership you want running our city? You may want a documented liar as your future Mayor, but I, and other fair minded San Diegans, DO NOT."

How can you say that when our Mayor and most other of our Leaders are saying out of one side of their mouth that we are in big debt and need Prop D while at the same time they are saying out of the others side of their mouth we should be promoting for the new Guacamole Bowl which will cost between $500,000 and $1,000,000,000 dollars of the City's Redevelopment Money WHICH THEY CONTROL!

Even using your twisted logic that like comparing a child's trivial fib to a lie about State secrets, like Bush's "Iraq has WMD"...

Prop D for Dumb will not solve our problems, SD needs to declare Bankruptcy A$AP, in order to get back on firm fiscal footing before our Leaders blow a BILLION Dollars on yet another $TADIUM, while they ask us to pay them higher taxes to protect their future Pensions! What's wrong with that picture?

0

JustWondering Oct. 18, 2010 @ 11:38 p.m.

I never said Sanders was or is my choice. IMO he's been a tremendous disappointment since his reelected. Instead of moving the fixes along, he been more concerned about his legacy.

The City's finances have been mismanaged since the 80's when then Mayor Pete Wilson withdrew employees from SS and Medicare. Wilson promised employees retiree health care but never put a dime away for the obvious expenses to come 25 years later. The city even stole investment returns at SDCERS to fund it illegally which also compounded that system's underfunding.

It's going to take years to get out the hole the City leader dug for themselves and the taxpayers. The $22 million dollar KROLL report spells it all out.

The bottom line is this, when comparing the revenue sources and amounts versus the operational expenses, the city does not come close to other municipality. That's in both areas; revenues are substantially less then other cities in California and expenses are higher.

This story has nothing whatsoever to do with former President Bush. This story is about DeMaio's twisting of facts. Distortions he chose to tell, to mislead citizens who only take the time to listen to sound bites or gather facts from his twisted twitter tweets.

But you're are right, Prop D, by itself is not going to fix the city's structural deficit. That's why the City's business leaders, along with the Mayor and a MAJORITY of Councilmembers have gotten behind amendments strengthening the original plan. It's going to take Prop D as well as other reforms from labor groups to fix this mess. Nevertheless, approving Prop D is an appropriate and necessary step toward the solution.

0

JustWondering Oct. 19, 2010 @ 10:13 a.m.

By the way, don't take my word for it on SS and Medicare. Read the Nov. 20, 1981 memorandum written by then City Manager Ray Blair, who worked for Pete Wilson, for yourself. In it you'll see the plan was ultimately all about cost/tax avoidance. You'll also read the city's undeniable promise of fully paid retiree health care.

Here is the link: http://www.lawconger.com/images/images/Ellis/BlairMemorandumdated11-20-1981.pdf

0

Founder Oct. 19, 2010 @ 10:29 a.m.

Reply #8 JW, I DON'T Agree that "Nevertheless, approving Prop D is an appropriate and necessary step toward the solution."

How about commenting on my "Prop D for Dumb will not solve our problems, SD needs to declare Bankruptcy A$AP, in order to get back on firm fiscal footing before our Leaders blow a BILLION Dollars on yet another Downtown $TADIUM, while they ask us to pay them a BUNCH of higher taxes to protect their OWN future Pensions!" + When Prop D (as in Doesn't) pass what do you and your "Business Leaders" suggest the City do to get out of the Fiscal Hole they have created? I went to the Budget Meeting with the "Revenue Options Prepared for the CRRECC" and it contained NOTHING that would allow the City to reduce it's MAJORITY of Debt which comes from PENSIONS but it did contain a bunch of ADDITIONAL TAXES and fees that Residents will be paying for forever*...

Your comments are slanted about "fixing" our City Fiscal problems and if you feel that I'm misrepresenting the truth, then I challenge you to post a City document listing of how the above or anything short of Bankruptcy will solve our Problems with huge new taxes to support Super High Pay and HUGE Pensions for City Employees and that includes those for the City Council and Mayor!

We now have a Political Problem not a FI$CAL problem in Sn Diego...

Good Luck, I can't wait to see what you come up with because the IBA "Team" has been working on this for a long time and they at least have the Professional Credentials and the "inside scoop" to see the Big Fiscal Picture!

How about a few hundred words on that, or stop $PINNING the slanted truth?

0

Visduh Oct. 19, 2010 @ 12:19 p.m.

Whether or not that $5.4 million is truly a separate item, the way it is shown on the budget and on the PAY SCALES is obscuring reality. The reality is that firefighters are paid that much more than the line item for pay would indicate. Moreover, if that EMT override is budgeted separately, it is surely shown on the pay scales separately. That means if a firefighter tells you, "My pay is X per hour that I work", the truth it that he/she actually earns 8.5% more than that (or whatever that percentage is now.)

Once all the firefighters were EMT qualified, that separation should have ended. But you know what? That amount of special-category pay is just about equal to the cut that KFC Sanders is asking the fire chief to make. Why not just tell the firefighters that they will have that override left off their checks next fiscal year? That would be their "temporary" help in balancing the budget. Wouldn't that be better than laying off dozens of their fellow workers? Wouldn't it?? Wouldn't it??? Aah, I guess not. It might become permanent, and we couldn't have that, could we?

0

Founder Oct. 19, 2010 @ 12:57 p.m.

Reply #11 Visduh, Great observation and a great suggestion; I bet we and others could find many more if we had access to all the budget info and someone knowledgeable to answer our questions!

Examples like this are what I was hoping the Independent Budget Analyst and her team would be able to expose and then suggest how to "fix" them but I'm beginning to think that they have been told to keep away from certain "Pet" items and or Budgets...

0

SurfPuppy619 Oct. 19, 2010 @ 3:23 p.m.

I never said Sanders was or is my choice. IMO he's been a tremendous disappointment since his reelected.

Yes, major let down........identical to Arnold IMO.

Both major flops.

0

SurfPuppy619 Oct. 19, 2010 @ 3:31 p.m.

When Prop D (as in Doesn't) pass what do you and your "Business Leaders" suggest the City do to get out of the Fiscal Hole they have created?

Can I take JW's question since he will not answer it??

I have laid out this plan before here, but will again in case anyone missed it;

I would CUT all FF and PD pay by 25%, I would CAP the pay at that rate for a minimum of 5 years, maybe 7-10, that would freeze all pensions costs in place so they did not rise, I would then take the 25% that was cut and put it directly into the pension system until the pension system were funded at 120%.

I would do this "cut and cap" to not just the FD, but all employees making 6 figures or more-I would make the cut to those between $50K-$100K also, but at a lower %, on a progressive scale.

This is a plan that would work, it would get the city out of debt and make us whole again. The ones who are reaping the BIGGEST benefits-those making $100K or more, and those with the "3%@50" pensions would take the biggest hit in this plan, and that is how it should be.

But if anyone else has a better plan, besides BK, please post i tup.

0

JustWondering Oct. 19, 2010 @ 4:03 p.m.

Let's not loose sight of story here folks. This isn't one of Bauder's columns.

Mr. Hargrove's story was about Mr. DeMaio's twisted facts and inflammatory language calling what the city acknowledged as base pay, bonuses. Interpretations like DeMaio so call bonus story typically appear in nationwide publications like the National Inquirer. Usually buried a few pages down, right next to the story about three-toed Alien going door to door selling Amway products in rural Whatchamacallit, Arkansas.

0

JustWondering Oct. 19, 2010 @ 4:21 p.m.

Founder did you miss the underlying message of the CRRECC presentation? The message is, San Diego, compared to other metropolitan areas all over the State, has substantially lower fees and thus less revenue for the services the citizens want. Read it San Diego is the only city that collects trash at NO cost to those who produce the waste. I'd be fine with paying the California average fee for residential trash collection IF the city pledges to use the funds to keep libraries and rec centers open for residents.

Additionally, if you compare wages as the Mayor did in 2007/08 with his Buck Consultants Report, we find San Diego wages are lower than many of the major municipalities in California.

The problem is, as you pointed out, we have a political problem. And with so called leaders like carpetbagger Carl DeMaio, nothing will get fixed. His divisiveness is intentional! Why, you may be wondering? Because it keeps him in front of the cameras and microphones where he thrives.

0

Founder Oct. 19, 2010 @ 6:17 p.m.

Reply #16 No I did not "miss" anything! 1. Just because you choose to pay MORE for City services doesn't mean that others want or can afford to do the same thing!

2, "San Diego wages are lower than many of the major municipalities in California" who cares, what others are doing; our City's Pension $ystem is out of control and must be "FIXED" and not by adding more increases/money to it!

  1. Calling Carl DeMaio a "carpetbagger" is not helpful! Because at least he is one of the few that puts numbers to his "estimates".

I think it is you (and everyone else concerned about our Debt) that needs to read the report, so I'll list it again from #10 above: http://www.sandiego.gov/crrecc/pdf/100713revenueoptions.pdf

  1. I think you should contact via email Carl DeMaio, as I have done and give him suggestions on how to make things better; at least that might be "Helpful"....

Oh and you might re-read Reply #14 again and use that as a model for your suggestions!

0

Visduh Oct. 19, 2010 @ 8:29 p.m.

If San Diego collects and spends something below the state average for its various municipal services matters not. It obviously cannot afford to perform the services that its charter demands. If other areas of the state spend even more, well God help us! The real issues are whether it can continue on its current course, spending $5.4 million a year (and rising) to pay firefighters for having a required certification. Look at the city budget, and you will have to conclude that the budget gap will not close soon or ever. Rather it will widen, and something will have to give. So, how about putting that EMT pay near the top of the list of things that will have to be cut?

This is not a "political problem" any more. It is a real problem of too many commitments and promises and not enough to fund them.

It is not going away soon, and it may be around for decades to come.

0

JustWondering Oct. 19, 2010 @ 9:56 p.m.

On one hand San Diegans are tax adverse, it's been that way for years. In simpler words, they're cheap.

But on the other hand, San Diegans want services. They just don't want to pay for them, or, they really believe the services should be provided at 50 cents on the dollar. But why would they think they can get them cheaply? Well, over the last 30 years our political leaders repeatedly obfuscated the true cost of operating the City until they were caught red handed. So citizens like yourself have been conditioned to believe that way and it's not the real world.

The point of the report which focused on five potential revenue streams to reduce the structural deficit, was San Diego residents and especially visitors are not paying their fair share for the services. Here's another great example: "T.O.T." San Diego is a few percentage point lower than other California destination towns. But when visitors come here they use services at a reduced rate, so residents who pay for these services too are subsidizing visitors.

As I said before, Prop D is not going to solve this problem on its own. But it is the first step on the revenue side equation. Prop D along with the reforms, both required and voluntary ones, is a step in the right direction if you really want to fix the structural deficit.

0

JustWondering Oct. 19, 2010 @ 9:59 p.m.

Visduh,

That's the point the City collects LESS than other cities in California but spends just as much or more than it take in. That's called a structural deficit.

0

SurfPuppy619 Oct. 20, 2010 @ 5:46 p.m.

On one hand San Diegans are tax adverse, it's been that way for years. In simpler words, they're cheap.

======================\

I disagree with you JW. Hey, what a surprise.

We are not "cheap". We simply do not want to pay Cadillac prices for a Yugo. And that is what is happenng with gov employees and their compensation.

It is a well documented fact that gov employees are grossly over compensated.

There is no reason for public employees (or anyone else for that matter) to have DB pensions that start at age 50 with 90% of their salary. None whatsoever. It is an insult to the work class taxpayer/s making much less and working much longer, 50% longer.

That is why we are in the deficit hole we are-we have two gov workforces today, the one working and a second one (probably bigger than the first one that is actually working at this point as well as making more money via 90%+ pensions) that is retired.

I laid out my plan to get out of the hole before, but in case you missed it;

1) raise the retirement age to 62 for safety, age 67 for everyone esle

2) change the multiplier to 1% per year DB, and add in a small DC to supplement the DB, or better yet have ALL the public employees go into a DC with a generous match, 12%-15%, so THEY TOO share the risk of loss, not just taxpeyers, who already are stuck with their own risk of loss with DC's.

3) Cut and CAP ALL public employee pay, progessively, with those at $100K and more taking a 25% cut, then as the salary drops you drop the % of the cut, take THAT MONEY you just cut, put it into the pension system and get it fully funded, 120% or more.

That would work, where those making out the best would take the biggest hit-and they can afford to.

You have a better plan JW???...(not the one where you raise every tax a public employee can dream up either), then post it up. But tax increases are not happening, not today and not for at least 3-5 years, b/c it will take that long to get out of this mess.

In fact, I am sending this plan over to Carl DeMaio via Facebook, he needs to see my plan, it is the only one that will work short of a BK filing.

0

JustWondering Oct. 20, 2010 @ 9:53 p.m.

Guess you haven't been paying attention. Your buddy Goldsmith has filed litigation against SDCERS that claims employees must share 50% of the investment losses, but none of the gains.

Yeah those ages will work for safety employees. The only problem will be 90% or more will be retired with industrial disability pensions. I want to see those 62 year old firefighter hauls up 100LB hoses with the other 100 lbs of safety gear.

Go ahead and send YOUR plan to DeMaio. One of two thing will happen, he'll claim he came up with it or some slight variation or he'll just ignore you like so many others. DeMaio is out for DeMaio nothing else matters. So DeMaio will only grandstand for political capital every chance he gets.

0

SurfPuppy619 Oct. 20, 2010 @ 11:40 p.m.

. I want to see those 62 year old firefighter hauls up 100LB hoses with the other 100 lbs of safety gear.

Plenty of other jobs besides actively pulling hoses, which account for what-2% of a FF's job?? 98% of their calls are paramedic calls, not fighting fires.

Same with PD, there are plenty of jobs that need to be done that does not require patrol or even shift work.

Do you know that every single school in the Sweetwater Union High School District had a FULLTIME CV/National City cop assigned to it, with their highest in the county compensation?? Can you tell me why every school in the SUHSDistrict needs what essentially amounts to a fulltime baby sitter assigned to it, when they are comping the babysitter $200K per year???? That would be a perfect job for a 50-62 y/o CV cop.

But if they do need to retire before age 62-for disability or any other reason-then you simply have to bring down their pensions. Retiring at age 50 with a 25%, or even 50% pension would not break the budget.

0

SurfPuppy619 Oct. 20, 2010 @ 11:50 p.m.

Go ahead and send YOUR plan to DeMaio. One of two thing will happen, he'll claim he came up with it or some slight variation or he'll just ignore you like so many others.

It is MY plan, but to be honest I would not care one bit if Carl DeMaio or anyone else used it and took all the credit for it. If it gets the city out of debt, under a progressive debt reduction plan, then they can take the credit all day long.

The fact is if we do not implement a plan like MINE, or one similar to it where salary is lowered and capped for high income earners, like Safety, then the only option left is bankruptcy.

San Diego is technically bankrupt right now on a cash flow basis, income does not meet expenses (so is the state), by a fairly large %. Pension costs are taking up 1 dollar out of every 5 in revenue. And it is getting worse, not better.

By capping salary, we are also capping pension costs b/c the pensions are based on the highest years salary. This muni will not survive unless salary, and by default pensions, are capped.

0

Founder Oct. 21, 2010 @ 8:48 a.m.

Reply #19

Carl DeMaio is at least Promoting a solution to our fiscal problems!

JW, You say, " Prop D is not going to solve this problem on its own. But it is the first step on the revenue side equation"

but in reality all you are promoting is Prop D (for Dumb) which will only signal a bunch of new Taxes/User Fees which will change the Quality of Life for everyone in San Diego that is not RICH and NOT SOLVE OUR FISCAL PROBLEMS...

As many have asked you before, forget about Blogging for D for Dumb and let US know what SD needs to do to get back on firm fiscal footing!

BTW: If our FF & PD had "guts" their members would collectively take the $72 Million Dollar "hit" and offer to do it for the good of THEIR City, instead of waiting for the City to do it for them... They enjoy the title of "Heros" now it's time for them (and their Unions) and EVEN our City Council to offer to take a reduction in Pay & Pension and not continue to hold the City of SD hostage any longer!

0

JustWondering Oct. 21, 2010 @ 10:38 a.m.

Guess you did not listen to the Mayor at one of the first town hall meeting. Cops have already done what you ask. FF will be doing it this years, and employees hired after 7/1/05 don't get the pension or benefit you complain of.

I love it when people like you say the employees should take the "hit" but citizens like you want services for free or half the real cost of providing the service. What would you do, if as puppy suggests, your income, no matter what it source, was cut by 25 percent. Maybe you're independently wealthy, and it wouldn't matter, maybe you have a trust fund, but if 25% of your income disappeared, never to return, you'd be worried too.

Puppy says salaries should be capped. Well not only have they been capped for a couple of years now, they've also been reduced in many instances by 6 percent. But then again, your hero, Carl DeMaio, gave his crew raises. Next, you and the pupster will suggest we reclassify government employees as indentured servants, not public servants.

But there's little point to this thread because we won't agree on anything.

0

SurfPuppy619 Oct. 21, 2010 @ 11:56 a.m.

Guess you did not listen to the Mayor at one of the first town hall meeting. Cops have already done what you ask. FF will be doing it this years, and employees hired after 7/1/05 don't get the pension or benefit you complain of.

I love it when people like you say the employees should take the "hit" but citizens like you want services for free or half the real cost of providing the service. What would you do, if as puppy suggests, your income, no matter what it source, was cut by 25 percent.

1) The PD and FD have not taken a 25% pay cut nor have they had their pensions altered in the manner I suggest, the only way that the system can remain viable.

2) Services are not given for "free", nor have the citizens asked for "free" services. They have asked not to get ripped off with pay and pension scams similar to Bell and Vernon CA have. 3%@50 is essentially a scam. I laid out my plan, PD/FD retire at age 62, if you cannot pull hoses on those 2% of actual fire calls that requires you to pull a hose, then there are other duties just as important that you can do.

3), Last, I never suggested 25% of income be cut from everyone, just those making $100K or more in salary, the top 7% in the nation.

This is not too much to ask.

"Next, you and the pupster will suggest we reclassify government employees as indentured servants, not public servants."..please, you're starting to sound like the FF mouth piece who claims we are putting $200K per year employees into the poor house, and it is a ridiculous comment.

0

Founder Oct. 21, 2010 @ 12:16 p.m.

Reply #26

RE: "But there's little point to this thread because we won't agree on anything."

Speak for yourself, nobody is begging for your Prop D (for Dumb) $PIN...

0

Founder Oct. 21, 2010 @ 12:18 p.m.

Reply #27 Great Factual Post, hope "Just" is learning something "new"...

0

JustWondering Oct. 21, 2010 @ 1:28 p.m.

Citizens of San Diego have not and do not pay the TRUE cost of services.

The best example of this is the City's trash collection service. Since 1919 San Diegans have had the trash collected at LITTLE or NO cost to them. Certainly not the TRUE cost of collecting it. Hell the City even gave each resident a FREE trashcan when it started the automated system.

Here's another one. The City only bills the Chargers for 50 percent of the cost of law enforcement, fire and traffic control services during home games. Spanos is a billionaire who doesn't even live in San Diego. If he had his way, he's want the services for free, so don't tell me people don't want services for free.

You guys should be asking your hero Carl DeMaio why the City doesn't get FULL cost recovery on ALL special events?

Sadly, Puppy hasn't posted anything NEW or completely factual in the Reader's blog columns in years. Most of the time it's the same retreaded comments or outrageous exaggerations.

0

SurfPuppy619 Oct. 21, 2010 @ 2:27 p.m.

Here's another one. The City only bills the Chargers for 50 percent of the cost of law enforcement, fire and traffic control services during home games. Spanos is a billionaire who doesn't even live in San Diego

Lets make Spanos pay for what he uses then. I am all for it.

I HATE Spanos b/c if the way he rips our city off.

I will be the first in line to fight that fight.

0

Founder Oct. 22, 2010 @ 9:05 a.m.

Reply #30 More "dodging" the discussion AND name calling from you JW.

Please tell us you are not "JU$T" a "Phobogger"*.

*A Phony Blogger, someone that is getting paid and or promoting Spin to disrupt a blog discussion.

0

JustWondering Oct. 22, 2010 @ 9:56 a.m.

Flounder better check the mirror buddy.

This thread was about DeMaio's false and exaggerated claims of BONUSES to firefighters. The reality is DeMaio's so-called bonuses are part of their base pay and the City never changed the salary codes table once it, the City, changed EMT from an optional skill with additional compensation, to a mandatory job requirement.

The last paragraph of the story tells it all:

"From her spot on the dais, Councilmember Marti Emerald, chair of the committee, also took offense to her colleague's comments. It appears that Mr. DeMaio is playing some political game with public safety," said Emerald, who then directed her comments to staff members from councilmember DeMaio's office. "None of us appreciates that, from your boss or from any of you. Spreading rumors, spreading lies to try and influence your political outcome.... I hope you take that message back to your boss. We will do whatever we can to silence this misinformation, this irresponsible behavior."

The bottom line is you support DeMaio and that's your right as a citizen.

I do not support him. Mr. DeMaio has been called out too many times for spreading or worse, as in this instance, creating misinformation. This time his actions warranted criticism in the strongest of terms by his colleagues. IMO the man is all ego, he has demonstrated unethical behavior, and sadly, he lies straight faced to San Diegans.

If this is the kind of leadership you want, if these tactics and lies are acceptable to you, then San Diego will suffer for years to come.

0

Founder Oct. 22, 2010 @ 10:36 a.m.

  • Fiscal Fiasco -*

Our elected Leaders say, "Services must be cut" Now they're asking all of us, to determine just what

They say, "Our City is in terrible Debt" All the while, they are making a back door bet

They're getting the OK, to spend a Billion on a new Bowl While suggesting, huge layoffs and putting workers on the dole

I know all this money double talk sounds crazy, but it is true If you don't believe me, just wait until someone, decides to sue

Our City is now being sold out and is something we will all miss As our Leaders protect their Pensions and push US into the abyss

If you are just wondering, if there's anything you can do, to stop this irk Tell all to VOTE NO ON PROP D & PUT OUR CITY LEADERS TO WORK

*from: http://www.sandiegoreader.com/weblogs...

0

SurfPuppy619 Oct. 22, 2010 @ 11:51 a.m.

. http://www.sandiego.gov/citycouncil/cd3/pdf/101020.pdf .

But can give away nearly a billion in corporate welfare to Spanos.

I will be amazed and shocked if D passes in light of the Spanos deal.

0

Founder Oct. 22, 2010 @ 12:11 p.m.

Reply #35 Great Post

Let's all hope that you are NOT $HOCKED or Amazed!

Spend San Diego Money on San Diego, not $panos

BTW: My copy of the above flyer only had 4 groups, where as your link has more!

Again not providing the complete list is just such "Poor Politics"...

Here is the latest on our Debacle: http://www.sandiego.gov/citycouncil/cd3/pdf/101020.pdf

I'm just wondering how many will soon be writing in:

Vote for Recall, Not Prop D...

0

Sign in to comment