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 retiree healthcare 3% funded
I thought this thread was about retiree medical insurance benefits or OPEBs, not DB pensions. Regarding the LA funding ratio, how did they get their 55% funded level? Was a factor of time or a combination of something else? It seems we need to know more if, in fact, it is a reasonable model to follow.— February 10, 2013 8:37 a.m.
San Diego retiree healthcare 3% funded
It was the City leaders who wanted out of Medicare and Social Security in 1981 under the leadership of Pete Wilson and then City Manager Ray Blair. Their choice was to use the pay-as-you-go plan rather than prefunding the costs of retiree healthcare. Managers and Mayors who followed made the situation worse by stealing what they labelled as pension system excess earnings, i.e. "the waterfall" to fund the costs. (We all know now there are no such things as excess earnings for pension systems.) Fast forward to 2011, 30 years after the 1981 agreement and after the IRS told the city the taking of earnings from SDCERS was illegal. The city negotiated changes to OPEBs with its labor groups and finally addressed this issue with some sort of fiscal sanity. 3% funded is a good start for a plan that is 30 years late.— February 9, 2013 1:48 p.m.
One way to negotiate: threaten to blow up the plant
Hard ball, hardly. Sounds more explosive to me.— February 7, 2013 4 p.m.
San Diego's great red light camera rebellion
So I am just wondering when will the city remove all the paraphernalia associated with this program at all of the intersections? The poles, signs, cameras, and lighting strobes are an unnecessary eyesore now the program has officially been terminated. Or is this just another "I'll be back" circumstance?— February 1, 2013 10:04 p.m.
George Shultz, wealthy lumbermen backed ex-GOP mayor candidate after loss
It just depends on which way the wind is blowing for Fletcher. His loyalties are tied to one overriding principle; doing what's best for Nathan first and foremost.— February 1, 2013 5:57 a.m.
Mayor Filner backtracks on enforcement of medical marijuana dispensaries
Name one U.S. Attorney who wasn't a figure head? IMO all of these political appointments are just that. They all know they won't keep their cushy jobs if they don't do their master's biddings. Just Wondering what would happen if we had an autonomous U.S. Attorney.— January 30, 2013 6:38 a.m.
Mayor Filner backtracks on enforcement of medical marijuana dispensaries
If that's true, the next four years will be long as he takes one step forward and two steps backwards.— January 30, 2013 6:32 a.m.
Mayor Filner backtracks on enforcement of medical marijuana dispensaries
As I stated in my previous comment in the story published last week...the Mayor is not above the law, nor a monarch who can order those who are sworn to uphold the laws of the State of California and U.S. Constitution not to enforce them. His decision the work through the political, legislative processes is the correct one.— January 29, 2013 8:23 p.m.
Filner ends pot dispensary crackdown; U.S. Attorney Duffy yet to respond
Filner, or for that matter, any politician holding an excutive position is not above the law. He needs start the process to repeal ordinance(s) not just order a stop to enforcing code(s) lawfully enacted. If he can lawfully order this, then what else is in his purview? If Mr. Filmer is so inclined to challenge the legality of ordinances, then do so through the Courts or Council, having the judicial branch of government being the arbiter of what's legal and what's not. Our democracy functions under the rule of law, arbitrary or changes made on political whims will only lead to chaos with selective acts being enforced while others are not. Our laws are not static and there are processes to change them. An order from a single elected official just doesn't seem to be what the founding fathers intended. In fact wasn't it exactly what they fled from in England?— January 11, 2013 8:42 a.m.
UCAN board meeting gets testy
Shocking? Only for those who have a morale compass! The rest are blinded, or should I say seduced, by greed. Yet I suppose this may be the level of arrogance necessary to be successful as an attorney. But it sure sounds, or reads, like some new form of legal extortion.— January 10, 2013 12:06 a.m.