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
Andersen's Split Pea Soup Restaurant, Santa Nella
Don't forget Buellton, just north (actually west) of Santa Barbara on the 101. It is the original Pea Soup Andersons. It is on the offramp to Solvang, which is probably why it is themed the way it is. It has been there for 85 years.— July 13, 2009 10:11 a.m.
El Monte Averts Bankruptcy. Can Oakland Do the Same?
"Response to post #15: I think a $150 fine for talking on a cell phone while driving is too low. It should be raised. Best, Don Bauder" I think that fine is appropriate, as long as they also do one other thing. If you are stopped for using your phone in a car, you also give up your phone for a month. Get caught again, and you lose your phone and have your account terminated. You've got to hit these idiots were it hurts, and apparently their phones are the only things that matter to them.— July 13, 2009 8:38 a.m.
Watchdog Institute Puzzles Union-Tribune Staffers
Reply to #20: "Response to post #14: Who gets to see these W-2s? Best, Don Bauder" Strictly between me, my spouse and the IRS!— July 1, 2009 10:46 a.m.
Watchdog Institute Puzzles Union-Tribune Staffers
"Response to post #16: What's the difference between working for the government and working for a defense contractor? Best, Don Bauder" Quite a lot, actually, but still not enough, which is why I don't anymore. The easy answer is pretty obvious: If there was no difference, then you wouldn't be advocating outsourcing for the city. Defense contracts are competitive bid, so there is built in competition. If you fail to perform for your customer, you won't get future or follow-on contracts, or you can even have your contract yanked early for non-performance. Your management responds not only to the customer, but to the board of directors and the shareholders. It is competitive and profit driven. Are there games and abuses? Of course, but do you know of any major industry where there are not? I was never high enough up the food chain to be exposed to the truly evil stuff (I think of that as the level congress gets involved. Think Cunningham), but I would get a whiff every once in awhile.— July 1, 2009 10:44 a.m.
Watchdog Institute Puzzles Union-Tribune Staffers
Response to post #21: "You can't blame the U-T for not wanting to pay $1,900. Best, Don Bauder". I think it is cheezy not to pay $1900 to get the necessary numbers for a report of this magnitude that the UT invested four reporters and an unstated number of "analysts" for weeks, but I understand the UT was cheap before and is probably cheaper now. I find it beyond merely irresponsible to publish numbers that they knew full well were high (and doing it very publicly), in a sensational manner, while very intentionally not pursuing the correct numbers at least in large part (in my opinion) because they knew the accurate figures would greatly reduce the impact of their four month investigation.— July 1, 2009 9:43 a.m.
Watchdog Institute Puzzles Union-Tribune Staffers
"Was this you?" Happily, no. I've never worked for any government agency. I have worked for defense contractors in the past, but I haven't for some time now and I don't miss it a bit. Of course if our business goes south, I would go back to defense if needed. My kids mouths come before my pride.— June 30, 2009 11:55 p.m.
Watchdog Institute Puzzles Union-Tribune Staffers
"As for the other issues you brought up-such as counting an educational class that was reimbursed as pay-how did you find that out?" I know for two reasons: 1) The UT said so: "The database the city provided also lumped tuition and mileage reimbursement with income, making it impossible to extract." 2) I'm married to one, and I have the W-2. I must confess that I was going by memory before, and the actual difference between the amount stated by the UT and the W-2 in this case is 8%, not 12%. A straw pull indicated that the 8% overstatement was on the high end, but that a majority had at least some overstatement, and nobody had an understatement. The UT also said: "Because the city did not provide breakdowns of types of pay, the data shown has limitations in disclosing some of these variables. The annual figure for compensation includes salary, overtime, bonuses, pension settlement payouts, uniform allowances, cashed-out vacation time, and hundreds of other types of cash compensation that are not broken out." The problem with that is the city offered to break it down for them exactly how they wanted it, but said that it would take a substantial amount of city employee time and they would have to charge $1900.00 for it. The UT wasn't interested.— June 30, 2009 11:49 p.m.
Watchdog Institute Puzzles Union-Tribune Staffers
There are lots of interesting tidbits to be learned from the UT database. For instance, I learned that our former mayoral spokesman was named Federico Sainz de la Maza (who knew?), and that the city could save a nice chunk of change by getting rid of the COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE II B (A catchall category which includes folks like Gerry Braun and Julie Dubick). One in that group that we need to keep in place is Shalonda S. Vinegar (one can only guess what the "S" stands for, and whether she has a sweet disposition). Another interesting item (if true) is the listing for Judith M. Italiano as a CLERICAL ASSISTANT II in 2005 and 2006. Why in the world would she be on the payroll at a classification she had not worked in decades? Did the city really pay her $23,000? For what? Why? I think Saathoff is even worse. He was president of the union for 28 years (a full twenty years too long), and was pulling down a full salary from the city while he was spending all his time working as the head of the union. Why is he a fire captain? When was the last time he actually worked as a firefighter? Why was he being paid by the city while also being paid by the city?— June 30, 2009 4:19 p.m.
Watchdog Institute Puzzles Union-Tribune Staffers
SurfPuppy, There are problems with the numbers in the UT article. I can vouch for at least one employee that the number cited by the UT is at least 12% higher than what it says on their W-2. One example is that when an employee takes a required training class, they often have to pay for it themselves up front and then get reimbursed. The UT decided to call that pay. When an employee is required to contribute an additional 5% into the insurance and pension, however, that is not considered a cut in pay by the UT. The UT had the chance to get the numbers right, and intentionally chose not to, for their own motivations.— June 30, 2009 3:30 p.m.
Appellate Court Says DROP Not Vested Benefit
surfpuppy, There is no way that JW is Ann Smith. Have you ever read anything she has written? She never fails to use 100 words where 10 are required. JW's answers are much too short and concise to have come from Smith.— June 12, 2009 11:15 a.m.