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
Ed's gone, but this Sweetwater shenanigan isn't
You may be right about there having been a beef between Cheryl Cox and Steve Padilla--but several months ago when Mayor Cox attended a Sweetwater Board meeting, McCann as chairperson demonstrated a singular demeanor when introducing her prior to her presentation. As in, inappropriate and just plain weird. My memory tells me it went something like this, "My old colleague is here, ohhh boss!" Mayor Cox just looked at him as one would have patience with someone clearly out of their league. Someone called out, "Former, former!" And McCann just kept grinning like this was some sort of exceptionally funny joke. No sense of what is appropriate, no sense of respect, no sense of how an adult goes about handling things. Short version: I highly doubt the Coxes have a terrific opinion of John McCann.— November 23, 2014 11:30 a.m.
Ed's gone, but this Sweetwater shenanigan isn't
Thanks for the info on the timeline. I somehow missed the exact date of the latest McCann parking lot debacle! About how the USNR copes with McCann's outbursts--I'd have to think McCann manages to control himself in that environment, because I do not think he'd get a decent fit rep if he pulled this stuff while in uniform.— November 22, 2014 3:36 p.m.
Ed's gone, but this Sweetwater shenanigan isn't
The last word as reported on SD Rostra is that all votes have been counted and McCann and Padilla are tied. So, if that was the call from the Registrar of Voters, it is a very good question, oskidoll, if Padilla also got that phone call. Also, if that indeed was the gist of the call--that all votes were counted and he was in a tie with Padilla--McCann's state of mind (never all that even-keeled) might have taken a turn for the further unbalanced. At which point, Kevin O'Neill becomes an attractive target for McCann's frustration. Yes, there is definitely some pathology here. McCann is a bit more tightly wound than your ordinary cuckoo clock. But back to the bigger issue, has anyone asked Steve Padilla if he was called at around that time?— November 22, 2014 12:34 p.m.
Ed's gone, but this Sweetwater shenanigan isn't
This needs to change.— November 21, 2014 1:30 p.m.
Ed's gone, but this Sweetwater shenanigan isn't
A quick google of Sweetwater and Shinoff leads me to believe that the new board needs to find new legal representation immediately. Shinoff seems to be best at bleeding school districts dry--the merit of the lawsuit may or not exist, but he always makes money. So that is why we continue to argue in the courts over the long improved girls softball field--this is simply insane. I am hoping we get some intelligent people on the board, who cannot be bought, threatened, cajoled or otherwise "influenced" to go along with how things have been in Sweetwater for the past 30 some years. I won't say forever, because I do know that at one time Sweetwater was a well-run, respected school district, with responsible, honest leadership. I hope that day is returning.— November 21, 2014 10:38 a.m.
Ed's gone, but this Sweetwater shenanigan isn't
I was not able to be at last night's board meeting. anniej and Mr. Brickley, I share your deep disappointment in the rubberstamping and the lack of concern for Sweetwater's future. Dr. Glover is a wonderful human being, a great educator--but I believe the input he was receiving was not of the highest order. Ensenadamaria, perhaps you are right, and there are people pulling strings who really control things. That must change. The pullers of strings need to be named and shamed and run out of town. Then have not done us any good, they have nearly destroyed a school district. Would some of those pullers of strings have been members of a 7-11 committee from last December? The meeting that didn't really meet all the legal requirements? The meeting that was held to shove some things through--just like last night's board meeting shoved some things through? Here's another little tidbit I read in the UT this morning: that poor beleaguered San Ysidro school district was offered a settlement by the solar company they are now deeply in hock to--but none other that Dan Shinoff who represents them in this matter, declined. And is still billing, billing, billing. Who do you think he is really representing? Isn't that grounds for disbarment? Hasn't Mr. Shinoff represented Sweetwater on a number of items? Should we possibly look at everything he has done, because it looks like it all could be more than crooked?! And isn't he a great friend of Ed Brand? If I am wrong, please tell me where and when, because I would rather know the truth than live in darkness.— November 21, 2014 10:14 a.m.
Ed's gone, but this Sweetwater shenanigan isn't
Exactly!— November 20, 2014 11:30 a.m.
Ed's gone, but this Sweetwater shenanigan isn't
They are trying to act to protect someone or something. Maybe themselves and their reputations, maybe Ed Brand has the goods on them, maybe there is something/someone else involved. Whatever it is, it stinks to high heaven. Like the old dead skunk of note. What could it be? Would any Sweetwater contractors/suppliers have contributed to the campaign war chests of any of the County Board of Education members? Does anyone owe anyone else a favor or two? Just what is the corporate memory of the County B or E with regard to Sweetwater? Years of hands off, letting Sweetwater run their own financial system. No one from the county apparently bothering to take a look at what Ed Brand was up to--which might partly account for the fact Brand could make the 2005 deal with Litchman. The people who were supposed to be watching Brand had allowed him to arrange his own financial empire, which then evolved into his own real estate empire...courtesy of all of us taxpayers in Sweetwater. Or is it something more than this?— November 20, 2014 9:22 a.m.
Ed's gone, but this Sweetwater shenanigan isn't
anniej, you are absolutely right--with the new board soon taking over, why is there any big rush to push things through--unless certain people are afraid the new board would not be in favor of these items. And, if these certain people fear the new board would not be in favor, doesn't it stand to reason that there is something questionable about these items? So--why push for a vote on several items--I think we will need to really examine what is on the agenda tonight. This could be a last grasp for fiscal shenanigans from those who should know better, but are trying their best to slide a few deals through. Sickening, yes. We need a wholesale examining of everything Sweetwater is embroiled in. All the lawsuits, all the charters, all the consultants--all the WASTE! Unwieldy as Sweetwater is, a many-headed Hydra, perhaps--we need our new representatives to take command of matters and remove the obfuscators, the deadwood, the Brand loyalists, the schemers and the cheats.— November 20, 2014 7:01 a.m.
Ed's gone, but this Sweetwater shenanigan isn't
The Ed Brand Era of Real Estate Speculation will not go gently into that good night. Specters of deals gone bad will be haunting us taxpayers for decades to come--so why isn't Ed Brand called to account for any of this? He was never in the game for the students, it was always for himself--how can any of this be remotely considered legal? So, when the district tries to disentangle from his schemes, the district is on the hook for more legal fees? Litchman, so it seems to me, is basically trying to hold the district hostage until he gets what he wants. Since when is this type of extortion legal?— November 19, 2014 10:05 p.m.