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 Diego City Employees pension fund ailing
A more disturbing bit of news is the decision to have secret information gathering meetings on the "corridor", a scale used to set future Pension ARC payments... What's happened to the Mayor's transparency promises???— April 30, 2009 8:27 a.m.
San Diego City Employees pension fund ailing
In what appeared to be an end-around by the Mayor's office to delay the election of a new SDCERS Board President, the SDCERS Board defeated a motion by Mayor Sander's appointee, Susan Gonick, in an 11-2 vote to support going forward with the election. Gonick opined the Mayor's incoming slate of new Board members were being denied the "right" to either run for, or vote on, the Board Presidency. After discussion, the current Board members overwhelmingly agreed the delay served no other purpose other than to obstruct the Board's ability to move forward with SDCERS business in an effective manner. Emphasis was made regarding the Board's inability to expedite the vetting, scheduling and approval processes of the City. With two candidates nominated, and a 7-6 vote, Mark Sullivan, SDCERS Boards Vice President was elected to a new two year term as Board President. Sullivan, the Police Department's representative on the Board, has served for the past four years. As new the new Board President, Sullivan nominated Ray Ellis, the other Presidential candidate, for Board Vice Presidency. The nomination succeeded on a unanimous vote. Of note, new SDCERS Board President, Mark Sullivan, also serves as a Director and Treasurer the San Diego Police Officer Association. This may present challenges where Mr. Sullivan may have to recuse himself where matters conflict between SDCERS and SDPOA.— April 30, 2009 8:23 a.m.
The San Diego Pot and Coke Connection at work
Wow Johnny, twice in just a couple of days... I'm feeling lucky gonna go out today and buy a lottery ticket... The odds of us agreeing seem astronomical or 41,416,353 to one. Wish me good luck!— April 28, 2009 12:47 p.m.
The San Diego Pot and Coke Connection at work
Where is Fumber when we need him??? Typical liberal argument... attack the messenger when logic doesn't work. The facts are tens of thousands of Americans are addicted to drugs, some by choice, most by ignorance of the consequences or denial of their condition. In cases where those persons do not have the financial resources to sustain their habit, they predictably turn to criminal acts to support and augment their growing habit. In other words you take a person who is/was self sufficient changes them negatively. Where is the personal responsibility? I’ll tell you where, it's nowhere to found in the individual. No all you want is a nanny government that will be forced to care for the addicts who add NOTHING to the whole of culture. Fred you have to kidding: “Now we look at Portugal, which in fact has much more liberal drug laws than the Nederlands. Guess what? Their drug abuse rates have dropped since legalization, while their rates of treatment have almost doubled.” What a load of nonsense, nothing has dropped they merely relabeled a social problem and re-categorized addicts as treatable. So instead of abusers of drugs they are merely users who we can help. What a load of feces. As I said before, go live there, don’t let the door hit you in the butt on you way out of the very best nation on the planet. You can live with all the folks getting “treated”. Paul says: “Legalizing marijuana (and possibly cocaine) and controlling the distribution, purity and dosage (not unlike alcohol) would lead to none of the doomsday scenarios that you describe, but would neuter the Mexican gangs smuggling operations. Aside from costing us unnecessary billions, the war on drugs has made the border lawless and destabilized the government of Mexico so that it is on the brink of collapse. Another ridiculous premise. The Mexican Government has been corrupt for decades. It’s too the point where the weight of its corruptive behaviors are unsustainable and subject to collapse. The cartels are filling a void. Your argument is we should follow by allowing our own people to use the product supplied by the cartels because you want to have an open supply route. If all you really want is to get high, join Fred in one of those free thinking European bastions, no one is restraining you from leaving. You wouldn't last a year before you realized they have little, if anything to make your life satisfying. But your just a coward, your answer is to bring down the standards here. There’s no need whatsoever to legalize the use of narcotics expect those prescribed by trained medical professionals.— April 28, 2009 9:47 a.m.
The San Diego Pot and Coke Connection at work
Thanks for the nod Johnny, no pun intended.— April 27, 2009 4:52 p.m.
The San Diego Pot and Coke Connection at work
Well I have dealt with it personally and professionally. In my younger days I found myself involved in a very serious automobile collision. After waking up in a trauma center, doctors administered semi-synthetic heroin to ease the pain associated with my extensive injuries. It was that moment, as the doctor pushed the drug into my vein that I realized the POWER of these potent centrally-acting analgesic drugs of the opioid class. It was that moment when I realized WHY people are so easily hooked and become DEPENDENT on the affects. It was that moment where I realized how, in the hands of non-professional, you could become a slave to need, to do whatever it took to get your next fix. I NEVER want to live in a culture where the leaders says it okay to become an addict because they're lying to you to maintain their control. We don't need to live our lives in a drug or alcohol induced haze. If you want to, fine, as has been pointed out there are countries on this planet where you can do just that. Just go, and enjoy yourself. Just don't come back when the haze lifts and no one is their to rescue you.— April 27, 2009 1:28 p.m.
The San Diego Pot and Coke Connection at work
If you really knew Norm Stamper you'd know he's a buffoon and a loon. I'd argue there's no indication that a larger portion of our population would NOT become drug addicts. Everyone of the people who use drugs, legal or not, drag down our culture in one form or another. Doesn't matter if you're some kid making a bad decision or a national conservative radio personality hooked on a legal drug, illegally obtained. Neither one is a positive influence. So my question is; if other countries are decriminalizing drugs why not go there and live you're lives as you see fit. The rest of us who choose not to "get high" will stay here and live our drug free lives.— April 27, 2009 8:53 a.m.
The San Diego Pot and Coke Connection at work
Hmmm I'm just wondering how a guy with a New York RoadRunner email address finds a blog in a tiny out of the way blog in San Diego. No offense to the Reader or Matt but this isn't the NYTimes. But what's more disturbing is the argument we should legalize drugs. Hasn't our culture declined enough with the drugs used illegally? If you want to accelerated America's demised, legalize drugs and you'll watch as our country destroys itself. If you like what they done in Portugal, no ones stopping you from moving yourself and your family where you can live in drug laden haze for the rest of your sorry life.— April 26, 2009 7:26 p.m.
George Munger and the Golden Girl: Memories of J. David Dominelli's Ponzi Scheme
Although I rarely agree with oldmanSurf, on this one I must. The whole J. David era in San Diego was ushered in by those consumed with greed. Nancy Hoover, J. David's lover may have donated lots of money to charitable causes, but she did with stolen money and personal vanity and community stature, nothing more. She and others are morally void. It's obvious greed was the overwhelming driving force for Mr. Munger and others during this time, just as its been over the last few years. The only imformation left out in from the blog by Mr. Potter, was whether Mr. Munger made full restitution, or as is true with many deadbeats, he ignored his moral obligation to repay the debt. If that's the case, then he can burn with the rest of the unrepentant, fame seeking losers.— April 25, 2009 8:01 a.m.
Pension Pros Warn That Hocus-Pocus Could Be Used to Lower Annual Payment to System
In what appeared to be an end-around by the Mayor's office to delay the election of a new SDCERS Board President, the SDCERS Board defeated a motion by Mayor Sander's appointee, Susan Gonick, in an 11-2 vote to support going forward with the election. Gonick opined the Mayor's incoming slate of new Board members were being denied the "right" to either run for, or vote on, the Board Presidency. After discussion, the current Board members overwhelmingly agreed the delay served no other purpose other than to obstruct the Board's ability to move forward with SDCERS business in an effective manner. Emphasis was made regarding the Board's inability to expedite the vetting, scheduling and approval processes of the City. With two candidates nominated, and a 7-6 vote, Mark Sullivan, SDCERS Boards Vice President was elected to a new two year term as Board President. Sullivan, the Police Department's representative on the Board, has served for the past four years. As new the new Board President, Sullivan nominated Ray Ellis, the other Presidential candidate, for Board Vice Presidency. The nomination succeeded on a unanimous vote. Of note, new SDCERS Board President, Mark Sullivan, also serves as a Director and Treasurer the San Diego Police Officer Association. This may present challenges where Mr. Sullivan may have to recuse himself where matters conflict between SDCERS and SDPOA.— April 24, 2009 2:12 p.m.