• Scam Diego alerts

City Council President Scott Peters has taken big bucks from organized labor in his attempt to get elected city attorney. He has wasted little time repaying the favor. In the letters section of today's (May 25) New York Times book section, Peters attacks Roger Lowenstein's book, "While America Aged: How Pension Debts Ruined General Motors, Stopped the NYC Subways, Bankrupted San Diego, and Loom as the Next Financial Crisis." Lowenstein's "dire description" of San Diego's sytem is "outdated and inaccurate," insists Peters. Thanks to the city council, the system "is now funded to the level of other healthy municipal pension systems," claims Peters."Lowenstein paints 'big labor' as the boogeyman in this story but the recovery of San Diego's pension system is due in large part to concessions made by employee groups." Such poppycock. He doesn't mention, of course, the phony accounting that permits some to claim the pension system is better off. "The current amortization rate for the pension ignores the mandate of the voters to use a 15-year rate of amortization, rather than a 20- or 27-year rate. The impact of this is it allows the debt to be paid over a much longer period of time," says Councilmember Donna Frye. The City says it can't use the 15-year amortization schedule. "This is just one example. The majority of trustees of the retirement board approved a proposal for employees to receive service credits that underfunded the system by over $140 milion." When there is an opportunity for the public to learn of the manipulation techniques -- say, the long amortization schedue -- Peters blocks discussion. "Whether he agrees with it or not, he owes it to the public to put it on the docket , and he hasn't."

  • Scam Diego alerts

Comments

JohnnyVegas May 25, 2008 @ 6:43 p.m.

Peters is getting his pink slip in less than 10 days.

He is not going to be elected CityAttorney-he is not going to make a run off either.

He is DONE.

So is Sanders and Maienschein.

I was just going thru the comments section on the UT who has another anti Aguirre article running. There are at least 25 posters who are onto the pension scam-and the same 3 or 4 City employees who make the same stupid arguments Peters made in the NY Times(a 6/7 to 1 ratio against the pension scam).

I am telling you right now-the vast majority of the citizens are onto the scam, they will not be "had" again.

Mark my words........

PS, it brings a tear to my eye when I am quoted by the welfare queens with such disdain;

" Also UT, will you please post the IP address when post occur here. It would be interesting to see how many times Mr Aguirre and his staff use tax payers time and resources to post here (BBH, La Playa and Johnny are you there?)."

0

Don Bauder May 25, 2008 @ 8:52 p.m.

Response to post #1: I certainly hope you are right about San Diego voters. The U-T's steady drumbeat of inaccurate smears should be getting old hat to the citizenry by now. But when there is such a barrage of negative publicity about any person, it takes some intestinal fortitude for a person to back the victim of the attacks. The U-T's false assaults on Aguirre, and their effect on the public, would be a good Master's thesis or PhD dissertation. As to Peters, San Diego would be humiliated in financial circles if a person who knowingly permitted the bond prospectuses to be falsified were elected city attorney. Best, Don Bauder

0

HellcatCopley May 26, 2008 @ 6:24 a.m.

Don, you mention the steady drumbeat of the UT. But with its declining circulation and credbility, is the paper's opinion even relevant? The UT may now be like the odd guy on the street corner babbling to himself. Few San Diegans pay attention to the noise, and may even take steps to avoid hearing it.

0

JohnnyVegas May 26, 2008 @ 7:59 a.m.

HellcatCopley is on the money.

I do not think the UT, and their constant attack pieces, are going to affect the outcome of the election in any manner whatsoever.

The truth will come June 3, if Mike wins then it is a day of truth, the cat will be out of the bag and it will be clear as day; the UT will have been proven that they don't have the juice they used to.

June 3, the moment of truth for San Diego.

0

Don Bauder May 26, 2008 @ 8:01 a.m.

Response to post #3: Good points. The U-T's share of trhe San Diego market is now below 10 percent on a per capita basis, and below 30 percent on a household basis. Some of the circulation plunge arises from San Diegans' disgust with the twisted journalism, but most comes from demographic and technological factors. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder May 26, 2008 @ 8:04 a.m.

Response to post #4: Of course, as you know, Johnny, the U-T's twisted journalism is just one of many variables that will be at work on June 3. So in all likelihood, no clean analysis will be possible. But you may be right. Best, Don Bauder

0

Anon92107 May 26, 2008 @ 12:04 p.m.

Too bad AG Moonbeam (formerly known as Gov. Moonbeam) made a decision that supported the corrupt U-T puppeticians. Hard to believe that Moonbeam used to be a democrat, he must be following in Nader’s footsteps now.

Anyway, let's hope the brain-dead republicans in the "below 10 percent on a per capita basis, and below 30 percent on a household basis" class don't make the difference with their zombie-like voting of the "U-T Ballot Recommendations" again like they have in the past when they elected Golding, then Murphy, then Sanders et al.

0

stevegrossca May 26, 2008 @ 1:18 p.m.

with the way the stock market has gone the last 12months what will this do to the pension system as of june 30th when their fiscal year ends? let's see how upfront they are on the results for the period. and how they recalucate the funding levels

0

Fred Williams May 26, 2008 @ 2:18 p.m.

Scott "Million Gallon Man" Peters has also publicly declared that Petco is a success that's boosted our economy.

Obviously, this pitiful excuse for a man either isn't bright enough to understand economics, or is an unabashed liar.

Since every reputable economic analysis shows they loose money for cities, and these studies have been brought to the city's attention again and again, Peters is a liar.

But how can he do otherwise, considering his leading role in approving the corrupt deals that got us into this mess? If he were honest, he would have to do the honorable thing and resign in disgrace.

He supported Prop. C (the ballpark fraud) and now supports Prop. C (the mayor's captive auditor).

Watching him at the Council meetings is instructive. He cuts off any debate or discussion about our finances. Then he has a press conference (surrounded by wealthy insiders) declaring he has "solved" the problems.

I, for one, hope he comes in second on June 3rd. That way we'll have the whole summer and fall to educate San Diego about the "Million Gallon Man" and his record of disservice. His defeat in November to Aguirre will be so sweet.

Remember to vote!

No on insider corruption.

No on dishonest bookkeeping and liars-for-hire.

No on C.

0

Don Bauder May 26, 2008 @ 2:33 p.m.

Response to post #7: Yes, ex-Gov. Moonbeam is something else. I don't know if he has ever practiced law, but there he sits as attorney general. If he has practiced law, it has been on a limited basis. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder May 26, 2008 @ 2:36 p.m.

Response to post #8: U.S. stocks have been on the downside since August of last year, but not drastically. There is much more in the portfolio: U.S. bonds, foreign bonds and stocks, real estate, etc. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder May 26, 2008 @ 2:43 p.m.

Response to post #9: I've heard that most San Diegans think Petco is a success. They go into the ballpark district and see a lot of tall buildings, and reason the deal must have worked. They don't know the buildings are half-full, empty, or nearly empty condos, and a large number of the people who have purchased the suites are in San Diego only a few weeks out of the year. The promised hotels, retail structures and office buildings aren't there. The tax revenue is not servicing the ballpark bonds, as promised. It will be interesting to see if Peters gets away with these ruses. Best, Don Bauder

0

Fred Williams May 26, 2008 @ 3:17 p.m.

Good news!

The UT saves us all a lot of time and trouble by posting their recommendations online.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/op-ed/editorial2/20080526-9999-mz1ed26botto.html

All an informed voter has to do is vote the OPPOSITE.

But especially, let's all vote NO on Proposition C.

0

Anon92107 May 27, 2008 @ 12:48 a.m.

Response to post #16:

"So which is it?" is a most interesting question indeed.

Actually both republican and democratic leaders have failed us at all levels of government, which makes it even more of a dilemma.

At this point we appear to be left with choosing the candidates we believe in the most as a result of their efforts in our behalf, and vote for what they recommend.

In San Diego that pretty much means considering whatever Francis, Aguirre and Frye recommend.

And the San Diego League of Women Voters also provide some information to think about, such as their Easy Voter Guide: http://www.easyvoter.org/

0

JohnnyVegas May 26, 2008 @ 5:24 p.m.

I disagree with about 75% of the UTs picks....

Carl Demaio in D3-yes-agree there.

April Boling-I might regret this but I am going with Marti (Marti-no FF or PD raises!).

O-Side school bond-NO.

It kills me how we are already spending 60% of the general fund money on education thru prop 98, but every year there is over 1 billion in LOCAL bond measures. Every single year.

0

Don Bauder May 26, 2008 @ 9:04 p.m.

Response to post #13: Voting no on Prop C is crucial to San Diego's future. If the mayor gets to choose his or her own auditor, the fraud will burgeon. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder May 26, 2008 @ 9:09 p.m.

Response to post #14: So which is it? Reject 75 percent of the U-T's picks, as Johnny suggests, or reject 100 percent, as Fred recommends? Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder May 27, 2008 @ 6:55 a.m.

Response to post #17: The League of Women Voters, led by Norma Damashek, is a powerful force opposing entrenched corrupt power in San Diego. Best, Don Bauder

0

Anon92107 May 27, 2008 @ 1:39 p.m.

Response to post #18:

I sure hope the SDLWV "Easy Voter Guide," your columns and blogs and The Reader negate the "entrenched corrupt power" editorials and op-eds in the U-T or we are screwed regardless of the efforts of civic champions like Norma Damashek, you, Francis, Aguirre and Frye.

Your next issue tomorrow will be extremely important in getting the word out before the June 3 election next Tuesday to make the right things happen to restore honor and integrity to San Diego politics.

0

Don Bauder May 27, 2008 @ 2:35 p.m.

Response to post #18: Yes, be sure to check the Reader that shows up online tomorrow (Wednesday, May 28) and in print Thursday. Matt Potter and I have put together a story that tells a lot about Mayor Sanders's character and ability to scrutinize important material. Best, Don Bauder

0

Fred Williams May 28, 2008 @ 6:28 a.m.

Don, I hope you and Matt included this:

http://www.laprensa-sandiego.org/archieve/august19-05/sanders.htm

I continue to wonder how Sanders got where he is considering his record. After his abysmal failure as a police officer, he should have been fired.

Instead, Jack McGrory hand-picked this guy to be chief, and then he lied his way into being the mayor.

What a city.

0

Don Bauder May 28, 2008 @ 6:55 a.m.

Response to post #22: "Must" reading. Best, Don Bauder

0

JohnnyVegas May 28, 2008 @ 3:26 p.m.

That is a wild article on Sanders.

Since I have never heard such allegations before, and have no idea as to their accuracy, I am going to have to withhold judgment.

I'm no fan of Sanders, but that article may be stretching the truth a bit.

0

Don Bauder May 28, 2008 @ 5:50 p.m.

Response to post #23: There was another charge by a publication -- perhaps La Prensa -- that Sanders deliberately delayed any action by the sniper team until he could get there personally for the press photos. Best, Don Bauder

0

Sign in to comment

Join our
newsletter list

Enter to win $25 at Broken Yolk Cafe

Each newsletter subscription
means another chance to win!

Close