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
Mike Aguirre's Brother Will Be Unpaid Intern
Who cares if he is the brother of the elected City Attorney. Is he's licensed to practice law in California. If so, that's what counts. Is he a competent attorney who is working for the people? That's what matters most NOT some blood relation nonscense. And, I for one, think he should be paid for his work following the same salary schedule for newly hired attorneys working in the Criminal Division. If after a short probationary period his work is rated superior then he also deserves merit increases based on his years of experience prior to joining the City. But if his work doesn't meet the standards necessary to succeed in the Criminal Division he should fail a probationary period and be dismissed just like any other. There is no doubt the City needs experienced and compentent attorneys in many areas of specialized practice!— August 22, 2008 8:28 a.m.
Mike Aguirre Has Hired His Brother at City Attorney's Office; Flak Expected
Don, I'm just wondering why you have such a closed mind? It’s pretty clear Mr. Goldsmith will win, but that’s not a guaranteed! November is still a long way off. But, if that is the case, we certainly have Mr. Aguirre to THANK for bringing attention to ALL the problems that have been hidden for years in the city closets. AND, for pointing out inappropriate actions since he’s been in office. Whether you want to admit it or not, Mr. Aguirre, has been, well maybe not his worst, but his own enemy. Simply put he hasn't been very "professional" in his practice of law or demeanor. While his conduct shouldn’t weight as much as his practice, it has had a cumulative negative impact over the last four years. Certainly tenaciousness is a character trait every client wants to see in their attorney, but Mr. Aguirre needs handlers or coaches to polish his approach, to calm some of his more manic tendencies if he wants to return to public office. With that said, I pray, you’re wrong regarding your prediction of the future of our City Attorney’s Office. And, I believe we have Mr. Aguirre to THANK for this too. He has wakened a long slumbering electorate. For years politicians and bureaucrats said …all is well and good in San Diego, now, thanks in part to Michael Aguirre, we know they were lying to us. We also have learned, our watch dog, the UT, has grown old, lazy and ineffective when it comes to keeping an ever watchful eye on those choose to represent us. With new attention clearly focused on those who run our City, and a new generation of pups at VOSD, The Reader, and other non-mainstream media, I’m optimistic, albeit with great caution; our City Attorney’s Office can get back to the business of giving timely, thoughtful, professional legal advice to the Mayor, Council and City Departments WHILE protecting the electorate from wrongdoers.— August 22, 2008 7:59 a.m.
For In-coming SEDC president: Having your interview printed in the paper may not be a good thing...
As a baby boomer who could have joined AARP a few years ago I really don't think you've gone that far out on that limb. In fact, I believe your analysis is close to the mark. And, to tell you the truth, I never really considered the Consent Agenda argument before. But now, after some thought, you're correct. Any item may be placed on the consent agenda. What a wonderfully covert way of bypassing effectitve public discourse. And, if thing don't necessarily work out, a viable and built in excuse is already in place. I also agreed with the statements regarding two worker families. Being one ourselves we really don't have time. So we happily hired our representatives to look after this for us. Never expecting those folks to be so incompetent. I'd also argue district only elections have fractured this city into nine mini-cities where we are only concerned about our "voters" and what's good for the entire city in a long term context. Keeping a Stong Mayor form of government is something I believe in as long as we hold the mayor accountable. But I think we should go back to citywide elections for council members too. Their decisions as a political body effect my life too yet I only have a say in one out of the nine votes. Proving there is little, if any, real accountability.— August 13, 2008 2:04 p.m.
For In-coming SEDC president: Having your interview printed in the paper may not be a good thing...
Some more interesting facts are coming out about San Diego's redevelopment "corporations", CCDC and SEDC. One of the telling facts; this model ONLY exists in San Diego. The big question is why? Given San Diego's lack of EFFECTIVE oversight on almost EVERYTHING having to do with government it appears this is just one more sad example. Being a bit cynical I see this more same duck and cover from our elected leaders. No one is ever held accountable. Given the history of San Diego's city council members it's not surprising. We are also in the process of discovering Ms. Smith "termination" agreement MAY hold some clauses which will prevent the City from recovering her ill gotten gains. These so-called bonuses the taxpayers NEVER intended may NEVER be recovered. Where was the leadership from our CEO, Mayor Jerry Sanders? Who approved this? While I believe Ms. Smith began working at SEDC with best of intentions years ago, why, or more importantly HOW did this happen? As you mentioned “... The purpose of an audit is to lend credibility to a company's financial statements. In making the audit, the auditor carefully examines the company's statements and the accounting records from which they were prepared. ..." Even today, after all this City has been through financially, our “new careful audits” are not discovering these highly questionable, if not illegal, (IRS tax code) practices. What is the value of an audit that reports an entity as “clean” yet later we discover tremendous problems? Sadly it wasn’t even subsequent audits that found these problems in 2004, or 05, 06? It was the investigative journalist at the Voice of San Diego who broke the story on rampant corruption at SEDC and now, new problems unfolding at CCDC. History is suppose to be a teacher, the history of these hybrid corporations run by the City of San Diego, is not what anyone would call shining. Let’s not forget the infamous yet still functioning San Diego Data Processing Corporation. Maybe it’s time for another look at their books too. If San Diegans ever return ANY of these people to public office, or allow our representatives to appoint them jobs where public dollars are used, we, the people of San Diego, only have ourselves to blame.— August 13, 2008 7:13 a.m.
San Diego Is Chargers' Problem
Don, For the record I've seen the apologies over the misstatement and I'm glad to see the reader removed the offending comment. Nevertheless, I'll also add; Stadium Manager Mike McSweeney, who I known for several years is a hard working honest man whose ethics are beyond reproach.— August 7, 2008 3:27 p.m.
Bond Law Firm Settles City Attorney's Suit for $2.875 Million
You're right I would not be surprised if it's more of same corruption. But why haven't our audits found these problems? These auditors are saying the City is "CLEAN" until someone else turns over another stone. What about Kroll's exhaustive $20 Million dollar audit. Why didn't it uncover this lastest boondoggle?— July 30, 2008 3:19 p.m.
Bond Law Firm Settles City Attorney's Suit for $2.875 Million
Looks like Mr. Aguirre's timing couldn't be better. The City is going to need this settlement money to repay CDBG money it cannot account for. This could be millions drained away, all due to incompetency and mismanagement.— July 30, 2008 12:59 p.m.
Bond Law Firm Settles City Attorney's Suit for $2.875 Million
Don what's your take on the latest City Hall bomb on the mismanagement of CDBG monies? How does the City get so-called "clean" audits but only to discover missing or mismanaged millions?— July 30, 2008 12:56 p.m.
Union-Tribune is up for sale, company tells employees
A potential light at the end of this long and dismally dark tunnel, or a train wreck... only time will tell. My Mom always said, be careful what you wish for, it may not be as good as what you already have.— July 24, 2008 3:36 p.m.
SDPD dog handlers want pay for after hours
Seems the court disagrees with you. It's analysis was it wasn't overtime, and worse, it gave little, if any weight to the integrity of the testimony or the theory presented by the defense. Simply, it couldn’t be an error if “five different people over eight different years — so that is 40 different times — all made the same mistake [by signing the Earnings Codes Document]. That just doesn’t seem logical.” Now come on Johnny, a bit on the high side! That's the understatement of the year. Heck, you claim this appeal was worth $5K, yet the City paid $300K!! I thought there was $250K limit in place? Did the City Council approve these costs? We all know those "big name" firms have a lot of rent to pay keeping those posh offices and inflated salaries. So I'm JustWondering where all those billable hours came from to justify these invoices? If there's something that needs a thorough looking at it's our City Attorney's practice of hiring outside firms, and then their billing practices.— July 23, 2008 8:31 a.m.