Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
San Diegans for City Hall Reform pushes more authority for mayor
Don, we're the only union that has not received any pay raise for three years. We've also voluntarily decreased retirement pick-up, thus creating a pay cut as well. We've done more than any of the other unions You point out that there was an independent review of DROP. Not really. The wording of the contract states an auditor "mutually agreed upon by both parties" or something to that effect. That has not been done. If the auditor can show that DROP is not cost neutral I'll be the first one to stand up for whatever changes need to be made. Note this quote from Joseph Esuchanko's web site, "When designed properly, a Deferred Retirement Option Plan can be a plus for both the employer and employees." So we know it can be beneficial -- if structured correctly. Why won't the city stand up and structure it correctly if it's so bad? What changes need to be made to make DROP beneficial to the city? Why would Sanders throw away something that has the potential to save the city millions?— February 22, 2008 10:08 a.m.
San Diegans for City Hall Reform pushes more authority for mayor
Don, shouldn't the sunshine tax work in reverse for taxpayers? If you want to live here, you'll have to pay more. Yet as several studies have shown, San Diegans pay LESS in taxes than folks in the ten largest cities in CA. I believe that includes Fresno as well. Not every city is in financial straits like SD or Vallejo. Not every city will switch to SS. SD will end up with the rejects from other cities. We already have a smaller hiring queue than we used to. We already extended deadlines. We already lowered the passing score on the written test. Do we want to be the first city to hire the losers who can't get hired elsewhere? It should be fairly obvious that we have a more complicated fire problem here than in cities such as Fresno or San Jose. Don, I believe you said that you're 72. Can you still carry 100 lbs of gear up 42 stories? Few 67 year olds can. So what is the disability retirement factor going to be? I don't think folks who are advocating a 67 year old retirement age have any idea how strenuous our job is. There's a reason ESPN calls the Firefighter Challenge the "Toughest Two Minutes in Sports". Here's the thing -- I've already shown that SS only saves 7% over the current city retirement. (Ignoring SPSP, which I think should go away) So we switch to SS. The city would likely also have a DC plan which they'd match. Say they matched the same as SPSP -- 3.05%. Now we're down to less than 4% savings. Four percent of the city personnel budget is $27 million dollars. That's just not going to save the city. That's not even enough to fully fund the FD. I know it and you know it. There simply has to be an increase in funding as well as a tightening of the belt.— February 21, 2008 10 p.m.
San Diegans for City Hall Reform pushes more authority for mayor
First of all, there aren't a thousand applicants for every open job. We hired around 40 last year. There were 2000 applications -- after extending the application deadline. Many of those were disqualified just from their application. I think I heard that only about 150 passed the written test and a few more didn't pass the interview, background or medical. When all's said and done, we have about a 2:1 ratio. Not too good. You might get folks who join for the money. As soon as they find out that they'll get more money and more retirement in City X they'll be gone. Is that what you want? Or do you want a stable life-long work force? I find it ironic that the citizens are furious about "stupid bureaucrats" causing loss of homes during the recent fires, yet don't want to pay for better folks. Retirement funding is mandated now. Especially in light of the Corbett decision. It's vested and mandatory. The savings over SS just isn't enough to ask workers to stay longer. Don's about 67 (or a little older) ask him if he can carry a hundred pounds to the top story of a high rise. You simply cannot find many folks who can do that. It's a little odd that you ask if I saw your link to the Vallejo story, given that I discussed it and provided another link above showing that part of the problem is increased OT due to employees leaving. Forget to take your ritalin? Or are your reading comprehension skill that low?— February 21, 2008 5:43 p.m.
San Diegans for City Hall Reform pushes more authority for mayor
Putting SD employees into Social Security won't cure the city's problems. It will make them worse, as OT will go waaaay up since the city won't be able to find employees. Or service will suffer. The 2006 SDCERS CAFR shows that the weighted total for city employees is 13.65% of payroll. Page 57. http://sdcers.org/images/pdf/2006_CAFR_financial_… Social Security is 6.2% of salary. So we're talking about a 7% of salary savings to switch. That just isn't going to save the city. A lot of the problem is that the city is now having to make up for missing payments in the past. That's accounting for more that the regular payment these days. It's hard to make up for capital you never put into your investments.— February 21, 2008 2:22 p.m.
San Diegans for City Hall Reform pushes more authority for mayor
Vallejo does have serious problems. But Vallejo is not San Diego. Vallejo has no reserves of cash, nor apparently property. San Diego does. There are a lot of things San Diego could do to raise money without raising taxes. Just off the top of my head, eliminate the subsidy for farmers in the San Pasqual Valley. Charge market rates for farms, golf courses, etc. As Don has pointed out, SD has already given away the farm (pun intended) in Point Loma. Back to Vallejo. It seems that a lot of their financial problems are being caused by overtime. Employees have lost confidence in the city and are leaving in droves. The city has to pay OT to cover shifts. Sound familiar? http://www.insidebayarea.com/ci_8294421?source=rss I really kind of hope that Sanders does eliminate the DROP on our next contract. It'll be fun to see the line at the retirement office on June 30. I'm guessing that 150 firefighters alone will be in that line. Twenty percent of the dept. It's going to get interesting. The question still remains. Why is it that Los Angeles and San Francisco can pay their employees more (much more) than SD AND maintain the DROP? They're doing just fine... plain and simple San Diego is underfunded.— February 21, 2008 1:58 p.m.
San Diegans for City Hall Reform pushes more authority for mayor
I'm guessing that fumber has a taste for oxycontin... Anyway, here's a good question -- it's been in the Local 145 contract for a few years now that the city must complete a outside evaluation of DROP to ensure that it is cost neutral. The city has yet to comply. Why wouldn't the mayor want to hire an outside auditor to firm up his position of removing DROP? Article 23H2 of the FY07 MOU for reference.— February 21, 2008 1:44 p.m.
Jack in the Box Beats Street Forecast; Stock up 3 Percent
Nope... didn't short it. I don't have time to be shorting stocks. If it dropped enough, I might have bought some and waited for it to go back up.— February 21, 2008 1:23 p.m.
Jack in the Box Beats Street Forecast; Stock up 3 Percent
Damn, and I was just thinking that they might get drug down some by this beef recall.— February 20, 2008 2:49 p.m.
San Diegans for City Hall Reform pushes more authority for mayor
Excellent story, Don! Now we have names for some of the players. How is current and past governmental practice making these folks rich, while causing the city's financial problems? For instance, can we see a comparison of business taxes in SD as compared to other large cities? What have been the give-aways to these folks?— February 20, 2008 2:48 p.m.
San Diego's Police State: Blogger Flannery Booted Out of Dumanis Press Conference
Maybe if the people donated to pols more, the power of big business wouldn't be so big. Only 65% of registered voters participated in the primaries, and that's considered a huge percentage. How many of those do you think donated? Put your money where your mouth is, as they say.— February 17, 2008 6:37 a.m.