• Scam Diego alerts

On Wednesday, Councilmember Carl DeMaio released information on 86 retired City employees raking in $100,000 a year or more in pension benefits. DeMaio did not release any names. I have been provided a list from a source I believe to be reliable. Here they are, from the top down:

$165,870 to $131,319: Patricia Frazier, Richard Snapper, Harold Bromfield, George Loveland, Bruce Herring, Louis Scanlon, Susan Heath, Ernest Anderson, Stuart Swett, Trudy Sopp, Daniel Gonzalez, Raul Bejarano, Richard Wilken, August Ghio, Keith Enerson

$129,708 to $120,589: Charles Yackly, Jonathan Dunchack, Ralph Edwards, Richard Hays, David Lee, Nancy Goodrich, David Worden, Barbara Harrison, Theodore Medina, Robert Osby, Adolfo Gonzales, Charles Abdelnour, Ed Ryan, Eugene Gordon, Marcia Mclatchy.

$119,410 to $111,289: James Mcginley, Willam Bagnell, Johnny Delotch, John Lockwood, Bruce Pfefferkorn, Jean Little, Margaret Watson, Philip Phillips, John Welter, William Middleton, Linda Baldwin, Gary Learn, Samuel Oates, Chett Chew, Terrance Finch, John Witt, Robert Thorburn, Paulette Mormino, Lawrence Grissom, Margaret Schaufelberger, Margaret Hanley, Terri Williams, Anthony Shanley, Gregory Fay.

$110,559 to $100,036: Frederick Moeller, Helen Heim, Robert Mulcahy, Steven Creighton, Ernesto Salgado, Robert Cartelli, Eugene Ruzzini, Grant Telfer, George Saldamando, Linda Leonard, Charles Hogquist, Rulette Armstead, R. Clifford Resch, Paul Dyresen, Helga Moore, Penny Castleman, Richard Bennett, Charles Rice, Ann Hix, Jack Fishkin, James Miller, Harold Cox, Michael Behan, Frederick Conrad, Anthony Dicerchio, Charles Mueller, Virgil Hathaway, Paul Ybarrondo, Kenneth Fortier, Glenn Breitenstein, Barbara Ventura, Carlton Black.

  • Scam Diego alerts

Comments

JF Feb. 13, 2009 @ 7:51 a.m.

That's an interesting list. Why? Because several people on that list retired pre-MP1. One retired pre-MP1 as a Fire Captain and yet is listed at a rate much higher than a current Fire Captain makes.

Why? Exactly as I've said. He was able to go way above the current 90% cap and retired at around 120%.

Every other retired FD person on that list was upper management -- Deputy Chief and above. For those not in the know, a Deputy Chief is the third highest rank in the entire FD. There is currently the Fire Chief, two Assistant Chiefs and seven Deputy Chiefs to run a thousand person department.

0

Ponzi Feb. 13, 2009 @ 9:58 a.m.

Why do people that have blue collar, public service jobs like fire fighting get to retire young and like kings? Are there that many fires to fight? Like are they worn out from fighting them everyday?

I really should have passed on the masters degree.

0

JF Feb. 13, 2009 @ 10:09 a.m.

Ponzi, as I said, the folks you're seeing here from the FD are upper management. All have at least a Bachelor's, and several Masters.

0

JustWondering Feb. 13, 2009 @ 11:15 a.m.

Hmmm... I'm just wondering... These gross amounts before taxes are paid? So the net would be 30-40% less with these numbers? Do the reported amounts in the cost of their medical benefits?

Yes, all of this costs, but if these numbers came from deMaio's office as you claim, they need clarification.

0

JohnnyVegas Feb. 13, 2009 @ 11:20 a.m.

One retired pre-MP1 as a Fire Captain and yet is listed at a rate much higher than a current Fire Captain makes.

Why? Exactly as I've said. He was able to go way above the current 90% cap and retired at around 120%.

Don't leave out the fact that this pre MP1 fire captain also worked to age 60 or later (33% LONGER than the 3%@50 scam) to get that pay, not age 50.

Funny how JF always leaves out the material facts.

0

JohnnyVegas Feb. 13, 2009 @ 11:25 a.m.

Ponzi, as I said, the folks you're seeing here from the FD are upper management. All have at least a Bachelor's, and several Masters.

Entry level education is a GED.

To Ponzi-FF's and Cops NEVER made the money they have the last 10 years. Back in the 80's they reitred at age 55-60 with 1.5% defined benefit for every year they worked, and were making about the same wage as a union tradesman worker made-such as concrete, dry waller, painter, construction and the other trades, which was around $35K back in the late 70's through the early 90's.

Today FF's and cops are starting out at over $100K per year in full compensation, STARTING OUT. The entry level requirements are nothing more than a GED (and maybe EMT certification for SDFD).

What is going on is a socialistc scam, a monopoly where the laws of supply and demand of a free market do not apply.

0

JF Feb. 13, 2009 @ 2:36 p.m.

Back in the 80's they reitred at age 55-60 with 1.5% defined benefit for every year they worked,

Um, no.. the benefit was a range from 2.2% at 50 to 2.77% at 55. It increased a little with each additional year.

But then you know that. So why post false information?

0

JF Feb. 13, 2009 @ 2:43 p.m.

Johnny is always harping on this GED bit. So here's an interesting fact I learned the other day. 70% of high school graduates (no less GED holders) cannot pass the Navy entrance exam. Now I have no idea if our exam is tougher, but since they have fewer applications per job than we do, it stands to reason.

So if 70% of HS grads aren't even qualified to join the Navy and scrape paint (not to mention the much more technical jobs the Navy has) then what percentage can make it through the FD test?

Remember... the only education requirement to be an attorney is... um, none!

0

JohnnyVegas Feb. 13, 2009 @ 3:37 p.m.

JF-I got the 1.5% DB number from a FF off of the OC Register. So why would he lie? So read it for yourself-it is at odds with your past pension claims (2.99%@50), which have been proven to be bogus.

Here, see for yourself, it is under the handle "cossack" in the comments section (and I think it was you JF that said there is no nepotism or cronyism in gov employment...bwhahahhaha, yeah right!);

cossack wrote:

"My dad was a retired firefighter. My older brother is a retired firefighter. I am an active firefighter. My dad retired under a 1.5% at 60 plan. My brother under a 2% at 60 plan and I am now grandfathered into the 3% at 50 plan. My dad had to work into his 60s to have enough to retire on, my brother until 58 and I will be able to retire at 90% of salary at 51 next year."

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/county-benefit-lawsuit-2306224-granted-supervisors

0

Don Bauder Feb. 13, 2009 @ 3:39 p.m.

Response to post #1: But many would ask if retired FD managers are worth a retirement that high. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Feb. 13, 2009 @ 3:41 p.m.

Response to post #2: They have political clout, partly because of their unions. On another post, we are debating whether government workers protected by civil service should be permitted to have unions. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Feb. 13, 2009 @ 3:46 p.m.

Response to post #3: I would say that most people with bachelor's don't retire on $100,000 a year. That's probably true of those with a master's, too. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Feb. 13, 2009 @ 3:49 p.m.

Response to post #4: I don't have that information. I went through the DeMaio information and had questions, too. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Feb. 13, 2009 @ 3:53 p.m.

Response to post #5: Yes, those early retirements wangled by employees are one of the major villains of this tale that is bankrupting the city. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Feb. 13, 2009 @ 3:56 p.m.

Response to post #6: It's a scam on the taxpayers but the politicians gave it to them. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Feb. 13, 2009 @ 3:58 p.m.

Response to post #7: You stand accused, Johnny. Time to defend yourself. Best, Don Bauder

0

JF Feb. 13, 2009 @ 3:58 p.m.

Johnny, First, I never claimed that SDFD retirees got 2.99 @ 50. It was 2.9999 @ 55. The scale started at 2.5% at 50 and rose .1% each year until it reached 2.9999% at 55. That was post MP1. Prior to MP1 it was 2.2 @ 50 up to 2.77% @ 55, again a sliding scale.

Second, the pension that a firefighter in OC got in the mid-80's has no bearing on what a firefighter down here got in the mid-80's.

Third, I never once said that there weren't family members who work together. That's pretty common in business as well. Guess you've never heard of a business named, say, Sanford and Sons.

You sure have a funny way of interpreting what I've said. But feel free to post a direct quote and link to anything I've said contrary to the above. Or feel free to retract your statements if you can't post a link. I'll be waiting. Or are you just being a troll again?

0

Don Bauder Feb. 13, 2009 @ 4 p.m.

Response to post #8: Some would say that one requirement for being a lawyer is to have sticky fingers. But I wouldn't say that about Johnny. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Feb. 13, 2009 @ 4:02 p.m.

Response to post #9: You're up, JF and JW. Best, Don Bauder

0

JF Feb. 13, 2009 @ 4:25 p.m.

Johnny, please cut and paste the exact line from cossack post where he stated that his dad retired in the 1980's.

Of course, you're welcome to retract your statement if you don't.

0

JohnnyVegas Feb. 13, 2009 @ 4:46 p.m.

Johnny, please cut and paste the exact line from cossack post where he stated that his dad retired in the 1980's.

I never said his Dad retired in the 80's, read my post again.

I have no idea when his Dad or brother retired, but they had a 1.5% at 60, and a 2% at 60 retirements. That is light years apart from a 3% at 50 retirement.

One thing you don't understand about nepotism JF is the fact that a private company was BUILT by the owner-and they can hire whom ever they want- the SDFD (or any other gov agency) was NOT built by you or any other FF, and your claim that gov employees are entitled to nepotism (or cronyism) hires is pure nonsense.

Everyone is entitled to have a fair shot at a gov job based on their qualifications-not their blood line or who they know. You need to figure that out. That is why SDFD and every other major FD in CA has been sued, admitted liability for such misconduct and entered into consent decrees to stop that misconduct, yet here you are giving it the thumbs up with another bogus argument- that because Dad, or brother, or uncle or (insert family relationship/connection here) works in the FD then their family gets priority.

Sorry JF, gov employment does not work like that (or it is not supoosed to), but that is one reason it is so screwed up.

0

JF Feb. 13, 2009 @ 5:16 p.m.

Everyone is entitled to have a fair shot at a gov job based on their qualifications-not their blood line or who they know.

Yep. That's why we've fired the kids of several chiefs from the academy. They got their fair shake and couldn't cut it. That's also why the kids of several past members have never been able to get hired. They competed against the general public and couldn't get hired. Very few children of firefighters are hired in San Diego.

Please post a link to the consent decree where the San Diego Fire Dept. was forced to address nepotism. You can't because there never was one.

Oh, and you used cossack's post describing his father's retirement as proof of your 1.5% @ 60 during the 80's claim. I don't know where they worked, but the rate here was 2% at 55 with a reduction of .5% for each month before age 55 in the 1981 retirement system. (24.1106b SDMC) That was gone by the mid-80's and replaced by the 2.2 to 2.77 system. That was changed to 2.5 to 2.9999 effective 1/1/97 (MP1) and finally to 3.0% at 50 as a result of Corbett in 7/2000. (Table 1 24.0403 SDMC)

0

JustWondering Feb. 13, 2009 @ 6:15 p.m.

As Don said, in another thread, "An Internet troll is one who posts inflammatory or inaccurate information just go get others excited. Johnny, defend yourself. Best, Don Bauder"

That defines 90% of Mr. Vegas'posts. He's an angry man. Johnny Vegas: SD Reader's resident Internet Troll.

0

JohnnyVegas Feb. 13, 2009 @ 7:29 p.m.

That defines 90% of Mr. Vegas'posts. He's an angry man. Johnny Vegas: SD Reader's resident Internet Troll.

JW-I'll wear that comment from you like a Badge of Honor.

Thank you.

0

JF Feb. 13, 2009 @ 9:06 p.m.

Oh Johnny...Please post a link to the consent decree where the San Diego Fire Dept. was forced to address nepotism.

0

Burwell Feb. 13, 2009 @ 10:34 p.m.

When I was in High School in the early 1970s I had a friend whose father was either a captain or assistant chief in the San Diego Fire Department. I know the father made at least assistant chief because I saw his name in the paper from time to time. There were six children in the family. My friend and three of his brothers were hired as firefighters by the San Diego Fire Department. His two sisters wound up with positons at fire departments outside of San Diego.

0

Burwell Feb. 13, 2009 @ 10:49 p.m.

I am sure many nepotism cases have been filed against the San Diego Fire Department with regard to hiring and promotions. I suspect that most of these cases are settled quietly, without media publicity. I doubt any public record of these complaints exists.

0

Don Bauder Feb. 13, 2009 @ 11:23 p.m.

Response to posts #20-27: Nepotism is a subject worth debating, particularly in a time of public outrage. Just how serious is this problem? We know salaries and retirements are high at FD: if they are going to a selected few, then this is worth more public airing. Best, Don Bauder

0

JF Feb. 14, 2009 @ 8:58 a.m.

I'm still waiting for Johnny to post a link to the consent degree. Again, if it's such an issue, Johnny is welcome to sue.

The written test is administered by city personnel. If the progeny of a current worker can't score 90% on the test, they're done. End of story. The FD cannot intervene in that.

The interview is conducted by FD personnel. My experience has been that they hold the children of employees to a higher standard because they should know better. Those kids need to have done everything that others have done and more to get hired.

City personnel then totals the combined score and offers jobs to the highest scoring folks. In other words, if the interview is scored 100%, but if a candidate barely passes the written they won't be hired. This helps to maintain objectivity.

And Burwell -- off the top of my head, there have never been four brothers working for the FD. Three, yes, four no. You're welcome to post the last name to prove me wrong. I'll be glad to eat my words if I am.

The simple fact is that there isn't that high a number of kids following the footsteps of their parents into the department. Those who do are held to a higher standard. This is more about Johnny's bitterness over his police academy experience than the truth.

0

Don Bauder Feb. 14, 2009 @ 11:08 a.m.

Response to post #29: The nepotism subject should be put in the spotlight. We can discover whether you or Johnny is nearer to verisimilitude. Best, Don Bauder

0

JF Feb. 14, 2009 @ 11:36 a.m.

As I've said, Johnny is welcome to stop spending his entire day blogging -- he posts here, on the Union Tribune, on the Voice of San Diego, on the Orange County Register and the Vallejo Independent Bulleting -- find a victim and sue the department over any of our hiring practices. Perhaps we'll find reason to improve our methods. More likely we won't. Either way, the department members will enjoy getting the OT to testify.

Or... put up or shut up.

0

Time_on_my_hands Feb. 14, 2009 @ 12:47 p.m.

Don, the San Diego Union-Tribune editorial on 2/13/09 provided details on the pension crisis and urged the pension board to "slash payments." My question is...Where were they when the city council and Mayor Golding put this monstrosity together in the first place? Did they sounds the alarms then?

0

Don Bauder Feb. 14, 2009 @ 1:47 p.m.

Response to post #31: We all hear that answer so often: "So. Sue me." Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Feb. 14, 2009 @ 1:55 p.m.

Response to post #32: The Union-Tribune didn't lift a finger at the time of MP1 or MP2, or when Golding and others were voting themselves enhanced benefits. Further, the U-T ridiculed Aguirre for his attempt to slash payments. And, of course, the U-T trumpeted corporate giveaways that bloated the spending side, such as the ballpark and concomitant real estate ripoffs, as well the Qualcomm conversion. No one on the U-T was pointing out that the money for the 1996 Republican convention came from tapping the pension fund, and that the books were cooked to conceal those expenditures. Best, Don Bauder

0

JF Feb. 15, 2009 @ 8:01 a.m.

Don, you left out cutting public safety budgets to spend on the Faberge eggs.

For that matter, you left out when Pete Wilson started SPSP.

0

JohnnyVegas Feb. 15, 2009 @ 8:40 a.m.

As I've said, Johnny is welcome to stop spending his entire day blogging --

I never blog during work time-only breaks and usually in the afternoon evening.

Ill hunt down one of those SDFD lawsuits which was last litigated in the late 70's as I recall.

Thanks JF.

0

Xray Feb. 15, 2009 @ 2:52 p.m.

Must break more than you work, watch out for those paper cuts and coffee stains.

0

Don Bauder Feb. 15, 2009 @ 5:42 p.m.

Response to post #35: Yes, the U-T missed those two, and also Wilson creating CCDC to benefit the developers. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Feb. 15, 2009 @ 5:45 p.m.

Response to post #36: Certainly, the Reader doesn't care when you blog. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Feb. 15, 2009 @ 5:47 p.m.

Response to post #37: I haven't noticed coffee stains on any of Johnny's blog items. Best, Don Bauder

0

JF Feb. 21, 2009 @ 9:31 a.m.

Ill hunt down one of those SDFD lawsuits which was last litigated in the late 70's as I recall.

Still waiting for that nepotism lawsuit, Johnny...

0

Don Bauder Feb. 21, 2009 @ 10:43 a.m.

Response to post #41: I can think of a lot of private sector nepotism lawsuits that should have been filed, but weren't. I'm thinking of companies that self-destructed because the owner's son or daughter was put in charge. Best, Don Bauder

0

JF Feb. 21, 2009 @ 11:18 a.m.

Good thing you took the cash payout, eh?

0

JohnnyVegas Feb. 21, 2009 @ 12:32 p.m.

Still waiting for that nepotism lawsuit, Johnny...

By JF

===========================================

And your wish is my command (BTW- I did not specifically say nepotism, but certainly meant it);

All-female fire crew a rarity in service

S.D. one of best agencies in hiring female firefighters

By Sarah Kershaw NEW YORK TIMES NEWS SERVICE

January 23, 2006

"Women have made greater gains in San Diego than in many other cities, officials said, partly because of a 1974 consent decree that required the Fire-Rescue Department to recruit women and minorities. The 10-year decree was the result of a lawsuit filed by five female firefighters who said they were wrongly fired in the last weeks of their academy training in the early 1970s."

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20060123/news_1m23crew.html

You want me to do SDPD too JF-or have you had enough???

Every major City in this state has been sued at one time or another in the last 40 years for PD and FD nepotism and cronyism-but the FD's especially so.

SFFD was the absolute worst.

LA FD had NO woman unitl 1983, when they were sued.

0

Don Bauder Feb. 21, 2009 @ 9:55 p.m.

Response to post #43: I assume you are talking about me. I've never regretted taking the lump sum. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Feb. 21, 2009 @ 9:56 p.m.

Response to post #44: If the charge wasn't nepotism, it was certainly cronyism. Best, Don Bauder

0

JF Feb. 21, 2009 @ 10:24 p.m.

or have you had enough???

No, I want the consent decree dealing with nepotism in the SDFD, not the consent decree having to do with hiring women.

0

Don Bauder Feb. 22, 2009 @ 8:28 a.m.

Response to post #47: Dig, Johnny, dig. 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