Confused? Join the Club!

Today's long waited court hearing on DROP took place this morning. The judge rendered his decision and from the looks of it, was not very clear in his ruling. Case in point is the dueling press releases from the City Attorney and the SDPOA. During the hearing today, I received text messages from someone who was in the court. Who the person is does not matter; but what concerns me is the belief this person took away from court is similar to what the City Attorney reported in his press release. As the judge spoke during the hearing I received messages reporting the discussion. We all know how short text messages are and what type of information can be relayed in them. I would venture I received one hundred such messages and as they were coming in, I was becoming more and more concerned.

The last text I received was as follows; "judge acknowledges sdpd personnel are the best and have had their pay and benefits chopped away at for the last several years but he is not here today to rule on that. poa ordered to back to table to meet and confer about drop…the two parties are first to resolve the process first… poa has an obligation to meet on this issue. the court rules poa did not violate the mmb act. is drop an employment benefit… yes… the issues to be discussed is drop a betts issue. court declines to stop the change in entry age for now. to deal with the july 1^st date sdcers and the city will respect the drop applications for july 1… for an unspecified time… to be determined later… as to interest rates… the court rules… rates… will stay place… 4 another 4 weeks." This is a person who sat through the hearing, listening to the sides argue and the judge presenting his ruling. To say there is confusion is an understatement. I shared the above text with several people at Headquarters after receiving it.

A few hours later I talked to Jeff Jordan, Vice President of the SDPOA. Jeff had a completely different opinion of what the judge had ruled. He explained; as the SDPOA press release stated; "Today, in Superior Court, the San Diego Police Officers Association prevailed in preserving the core benefit of the DROP program, which includes the ability to enter the program at age 50. San Diego Superior Court Judge David Oberholtzer ruled that while interest rate terms are negotiable, the DROP entry age is a vested benefit." Jeff said Mike Conger, the attorney who represented the SDPOA, believed the SDPOA prevailed on all issues critical to the DROP; with the exception of the interest paid to DROP accounts. Jeff said the judge ordered the SDPOA back to the table to discuss DROP, but also said any changes must be voted upon as prescribed by Charter Section 143.1.

Then I see the press release from the City Attorney that made me think I was in some dream world and confused. The press release said in part; "Superior Court Judge David Oberholtzer today refused to grant an injunction sought by the San Diego Police Officers Association (POA) against the City of San Diego to prevent changes in the DROP program. In addition, Judge Oberholtzer granted the City's petition for an order requiring the POA to "meet and confer" under state labor laws as to additional changes to DROP. The POA had resisted such negotiations, claiming the program was completely "vested". Judge Oberholtzer did not find that DROP benefits were "vested". Judge Oberholtzer found that DROP is a condition of employment. Judge Oberholtzer also held that there is no law requiring an actuarial study as a condition to meeting and conferring on changes and/or elimination of DROP. But rather, expected the City and POA to discuss this and other issues related to DROP when they meet and confer about DROP." So you can imagine the confusion? It is no wonder the general public cannot understand the issues related to DROP.

What do we know to be in agreement? The judge ordered the SDPOA to meet with the City to discuss DROP. That much in agreed upon by all parties. I think that is where the agreement ends. It will be several days and maybe weeks before we can get our hands on the actual ruling from the judge to understand the vast opinions of what the judge actually said. I think it is a sad state when intelligent people can sit in a court of law; educated in the rules and language; participate in the process and have such vast views of what occurred in a single hearing. It is one thing for a lay person sitting in the galley listening to the proceeding to misinterpret a ruling; but for professionals to have such issues is pathetic. Was the judge not speaking the king's language? Was he not clear in his decision and articulate enough to convey his message for all to understand?

If you are confused; you are not alone. The SDPOA will be working diligently to provide information to members in hopes of belaying the concerns the future holds. The mayor has made it clear his number one goal in life is eliminating DROP. He has worked tirelessly to reduce and eliminate the benefits of those who work for the City of San Diego. Rest assured he will seek a ballot initiative to ask the public to take DROP from workers. He is surly feeling his oats after today. He is popping the corks on his bubbly and toasting to a victory over the SDPOA. He cannot wait to get back to the table to wreak more pain and hardship on the SDPOA.

If ever there was a time for the membership of the SDPOA to come together to fight for a common cause; this is it. We cannot sit on the sidelines while our destiny is decided by others. We need to stand shoulder to shoulder and fight with our every breath for our rights and those benefits we have earned over the past 25 years.

DROP Showdown at Sunrise

Tomorrow morning the SDPOA will be in court (Department 67; Judge; Honorable David B. Oberholtzer) at 0900 hours to defend the DROP against the mayor's attempt at reducing the interest paid to DROP accounts; changing the entry age of those wishing to take advantage of this benefit; elimination of DROP from managers (Chiefs and Captains); and seeking a final determination that DROP is a "Vested Right." The City is attempting to have the court rule DROP is not a "Vested Right" and subject to negotiations.

The central issue of "Vesting" is clearly addressed by David Wesco, the San Diego Retirement System's Administrator/CEO, in a letter to the mayor on June 22, 2009. Mr. Wesco also sent a tersely worded letter to City Attorney Jan Goldsmith on June 3, 2009, detailing clearly the effects of Charter Section 143.1 and the fact DROP is a "Vested right" in the eyes of SDCERS.

The attorney for the City (NOT the City Attorney) attempts to make the City's case in their petition using the June 10, 2009, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal ruling on "DROP Salary." The use of this ruling is almost laughable if this were not such a serious case before the court with extreme ramifications. Remember that "Institutional Knowledge" I talked about? This is a classic example of the problems associated with a person who is involved in an issue of this magnitude who has a total and complete lack of knowledge of the core issues. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal made no such determination of DROP. But it appears in a legal brief the City filed as their "Opening Brief on Petition for Writ of Mandate Compelling SDPOA to Meet and Confer on City's Proposal to Eliminate DROP."

The hearing tomorrow will likely take all day. The City was successful in keeping MEA and the other Unions out of the court. The Fourth District Court of Appeal refused today to overturn this ruling which sets up a faceoff with the SDPOA and the City. Mike Conger has prepared his legal briefs that have been posted on his web site for all to read. Take the time to read the facts and educate yourself. You will find a disturbing thread in each of the papers filed by the City. They have included information that is factually incorrect and in several instances the wording is almost word for word taken from article found in the Union Tribune; all of which is a fantasy and factually incorrect.

No court case can be called a "Slam Dunk" when issues of this magnitude are being considered. The human variable and potential for "If you say it long enough and loud enough; someone is bound to believe it" coming into play. The City's briefs are filled with the spin, half truths, miss-statements and flat out lies the Union Tribune has employed for the past several years. My hope is the Judge is made acutely aware of these factual errors and sanction the attorneys for the City for their careless and in my opinion; knowing and calculated miss-representation of the facts.

Tomorrow is an important day for the SDPOA and all City Employees who have had the City attempt to eliminate promised, "Vested" benefits and further damage the lives of so many. This is a political fight being waged by the mayor against the city's employees. This has more to do with ego than it has to do with money. The mayor has steadfastly refused to conduct an analysis of DROP to determine its actual cost because he knows the numbers would not support his assertion DROP is costing the City millions of dollars. The mayor has had ample opportunity to provide for the analysis of this program and yet on the eve of trial; in briefs the mayor and city assert in page after page their reasons for eliminating DROP; the "Double Dipping" costing the City millions of dollars each year.

The truth will soon be out and we can hope and pray for a positive outcome in Department 67. Do not look for the judge to rule tomorrow; in all likelihood he will take arguments from both sides and make a calculated decision in the coming days and weeks. The City is sure to appeal if the decision goes against them; keeping people in turmoil for many years to come. I say take one day at a time and focus on your safety and family. Control those things within your sphere of control and let the rest go. We cannot control the actions of the mayor; courts or politicians. We can control how we respond to their words and actions. Stay positive and be safe. They only win if we let them.

Does ANYONE on the 11th Floor of the CAB Tell the TRUTH?

Have you all been following the lies out of the mayor's office regarding the Water Department? Alex Ruiz, Assistant Director of the Water Department was caught in several lies when questioned about the City's plan for water conservation and mandatory rationing. Taking the next step in reporting on these lies; the Voice of San Diego asked for e-mails related to the issue through a Public Records Request. Two and a half months after making the request, the City provided a partial list and refused to say how many were withheld and why.

Then the lies begin in earnest. When questioned as to how many were redacted or withheld, Ray Palmucci of the City Attorney's office said he would provide a letter of explanation in 10 days. Darin Pudgil ignored e-mails asking for this information and Palmucci sidestepped the issue feigning ignorance. The City provided 736 e-mails related to the Water issue, but withheld 692 e-mails (48%). So the question raised from this is what is the City trying to cover up? Why is Darin Pudgil refusing to respond to a legal mandate for a Public Records Request that by law is required to be completed within 10 days unless there is some exigent reason for being unable to do so. But again; what is the mayor trying to keep from the public now?

Christina DiLeva, "Press Assistant" for the mayor, wrote a letter citing Government Code sections allowing for the City to withhold e-mails and provide no explanation. So the mayor throws another underling under the bus while Darin Pudgil and Gerry Braun hide in a side office, refusing to accept responsibility for this mess.

The mayor's office provides an excuse for refusing to release all of the e-mails with the following comment; "the public interest served by not making the record public clearly outweighs the public interest served by disclosure of the record." Who wants to take a stab at what in the hell would be contained in e-mails discussing water conservation; the Irvine Ranch Water District approach to water conservation; and the City plan for conservation that the public interest is better served keeping 48% of the e-mails secret?

Lani Lutar, President and CEO of the San Diego County Taxpayers Association, made a keen observation about the mayor's office refusing to release these e-mails. Lutar said, "The speculation of what's in the emails is going to be so much worse than what's probably in them. It doesn't seem to make sense. I'm concerned from a good governance perspective why information would not be made available to the public." Maybe more lies?

In the span of a couple of months, people are starting to demand proof when the mayor or any of his minions speak about issues. In short order the taxpayers will begin to see firsthand the lack of honesty, integrity and ethics in the mayor's office on the 11^th floor of the City Administration Building (CAB). I said a couple of weeks ago the lies would soon catch up with the mayor as they did when he was chief.

The 64 thousand dollar question; will he bail from the mayor's office like he bailed from the police department? We can all hope!!!

Institutional Knowledge

What is it worth? Can it be quantified in dollars and cents? When does it matter most? Within any profession or job it is that person or group of people who have been around long enough to know why something was or was not done; how something came to be; what the thinking was behind a certain change or implementation of a policy, procedure, rule, law or benefit. When it's gone and no longer available those in decision making positions are forced to guess at the intentions of those before them, lacking the willingness or desire to seek out this "Institutional Knowledge."

When Mike Aguirre was elected City Attorney, the purging of experience, knowledge, expertise and "Institutional Knowledge" took priority over what was best for the City. When the ex-chief was elected mayor, the purging of experience, knowledge, expertise and "Institutional Knowledge" took priority over what was best for the City. Mike Aguirre and the mayor each found it suited their collective agendas to hire outside council and consultants with no knowledge of the inner workings of the City of San Diego to do their bidding. "Institutional Knowledge" was viewed as a hindrance to the goals each had for reaching their agendas of eliminating DROP; reducing or eliminating Retiree Medical; eliminating "Terminal Leave"; reducing the interest paid on DROP accounts and the reduction of the City's workforce.

Thankfully those who possess the "Institutional Knowledge" from decades of experience involving policy making; law and labor negotiations are sharing this knowledge. They are providing insight into the thinking and discussion that took place at the time, when changes were made to collective bargaining agreements; enhancements to retirement benefits; withdrawal from Social Security and Medicare; communications with Social Security, SDCERS, the IRS; and City Council Resolutions. They are sharing their knowledge of where these items can be found; how they came to be; what the thought processes were; and the intent of these changes.

Joe Flynn served on the SDCERS Board from 2005 to 2007. Joe has decades of "Institutional Knowledge" related to SDCERS and the operations of the City of San Diego. Joe sent a "Letter to the Editor" to the Union Tribune in response to a June 12, 2009, editorial. Here is the letter he sent;

In your June 12 editorial you continue to convey the impression that San Diego retirees get free health care and the taxpayers get nothing. Not so. In 1981 the City initiated the withdrawal from Social Security to save the City money. To meet requirements for withdrawal, however, the City had to establish the supplemental savings plan (with mandatory contributions by the employee and the city) to take the place of Social Security payments at age 65.

To take the place of Medicare, the City promised that "The City will pay for the retired employee's health insurance." * These costs were paid by the City on a year-to-year basis without full accounting. The City then moved these costs into the pension system which contributed to the under funding. This move was later disallowed by the Internal Revenue Service. Accounting changes now require the city to show the future costs of health care.

The City's withdrawal (from Social Security) did not come from the employees or the Unions but was initiated by the City to save money. It is unfair to report and repeat only the costs without ever mentioning the savings to the taxpayer which have accrued since 1981.

Joe Flynn, Retired City Employee

Member of the San Diego City Employees' Retirement System, 2005-07

*City Manager Memo dated November 20, 1981 entitled, "Withdrawal from Social Security" plus attachment, "Outline of Essential Provisions of Supplemental Pension Plan."

John Kaheny is asking questions from his position of knowledge about the vesting of Retiree Medical. John's knowledge surrounding this issue directs the focus of the City's withdrawal from Social Security and the communications between the City and Social Security Administration. He points to 1981 and the file detailing the election of members of SDCERS when asked by the City to leave Social Security for a promise of a similar benefit to be paid for by the City. Mr. Kaheny believes; based on his "Institutional Knowledge" this information is important when determining the "Vested Rights" argument.

Mr. Kaheny's knowledge goes deeper when discussing the elimination of "Terminal Leave." Mr. Kaheny points out the Rules of the Civil Service Commission and the provisions related to leave. The Civil Service Rules which are part of the Municipal Code in Article 3: Civil Service; Division 11: Leaves of Absence; discuss "Terminal Leave" and its use. The "Institutional Knowledge" of Mr. Kaheny and Joe Flynn are providing the; who, why, how and when decisions were made; and where and how to verify these important details. These pathways are opening up other avenues of information and bringing to light related documents the mayor and city attorney do not want to see the light of day.

One of these documents is, "Opinion Number 2007-04" written by Mike Aguirre on September 27, 2007. The mayor and his minions tout and spout Retiree Medical is not a "vested right" and thus they can eliminate or reduce this benefit as they see fit. Even Mike Aguirre, who wanted to eliminate EVERY BENEFIT possible, opined this benefit to be a vested right. It is clear; AGAIN the mayor is hiding FACTS from the public and the employees he is systematically and repeatedly screwing. The mayor will deflect any knowledge of this information and point to some other opinion from another of his many "outside" lawyers and consultants. All of whom lack the "Institutional Knowledge" to provide competent and accurate advise.

More is to come as documents find their way to the surface as the "Institutional Knowledge" is tickled, caressed and prodded into action. The "Institutional Knowledge" may have left City Service; much of it did not leave voluntarily; and much of it was laying in wait; wanting and waiting for someone to ask. To think the mayor has the gall to boast replacing "Experience" with "Enthusiasm" when that experience is what carries the "Institutional Knowledge" that runs and protects this City.

FRANK WHITE IS ACQUITTED

Today, a jury in Vista found Frank White "NOT GUILTY" of all charges stemming from his off-duty shooting. Rick Pinckard represented Frank at trial and provided excellent representation. The SDPOA supported Frank and his wife through this difficult time. Mr. Pinckard is to be commended for his dedication and expertise in defending Frank.

Happy Father’s Day

I'm going to be brief today and keep it light. I had the pleasure of attending Sergeant Joe Woods' retirement party yesterday at the San Diego Police Officers Association. Many family, friends and co-workers paid tribute to a man who impacted so many. Joe was one of those who always had a positive attitude and brought that out whether he was mentoring new recruits as an Academy Training Officer; a member of the SWAT team; coaching or counseling members of his patrol squad; or interviewing people during an investigation while working Internal Affairs. Joe always had a smile on his face and a kind word. Sergeant Woods will be missed.

I signed my BLOG up on Twitter this morning. If you would like current updates and musings from my BLOG, please join and follow. If you have not used Twitter it is very easy to do. Find the Twitter web site; www.twitter.com and then click the "join" button if you have not yet registered. After you have joined, you can either; search for the link to "SparkySanDiego"; or "Steve McMillan"; (I also have a Twitter account under "stevemac1956") and click the "Follow" button. It is that simple. If you wish to have the updates show up on your telephone by way of a text message, don't forget to activate your account with your cellular telephone. I promise not to send more than 2 new notifications per day from Twitter; unlike the mayor who sends as many as 10 a day, most of which have nothing to say.

I want to wish all the fathers out there a "Happy Father's Day." Like many of you, I am blessed with two wonderful children who have made me very proud. My daughter is an English/Language Arts teacher at a local high school and my son is starting year one in Law School next month. As many of you have experienced it is not always easy being a father and working in law enforcement. The changing shifts, long hours and constant of having to work holidays, birthdays and those times when our children wanted us there the most; all made difficult by the career we chose. We suffered along with them. But, we persevered and never stopped finding those times when we could spend laughing with; loving and teaching our children.

Go enjoy the day and spend time with your children; your children's children and your significant other. I am off to the Padre game this afternoon and hope for a win to end the weekend. After the game my kids will be home waiting for me and a BBQ with the in-laws. I am working on two lengthy posts I hope to finish this coming week, dealing with Manager's Proposal 1 and 2 or MP1 and MP2. The mayor is looking to repeat the idiocy of these two incidents with his own proposal; I will call it MP3 (mayor's proposal 3) that will take use AGAIN down the wrong path. More on that later.

Happy Father's Day.

 

The After Life of Police Work

Life offers us many opportunities and challenges. I am sitting on the balcony enjoying the crisp morning air and my third cup of coffee after having read the paper, when I started thinking about all of those who are leaving the police department for retirement. I picture the faces of friends; old partners; co-workers; acquaintances and those I only knew by sight; as they venture off in a new direction. A life of retirement and moving forward in front of them. Many have a sense of apprehension and fear of the unknown. They have devoted over half of their life to a career they loved and are being pushed out the door to make room for "Enthusiasm."

I want to put a different slant on this exodus of our most talented and experienced members of the department. Life offers opportunities for us to change direction at the drop of a hat. What may seem initially a set-back, is actually a stepping stone for moving in a different direction. I hike whenever I get a chance. I have hiked Mt. Whitney; Half Dome in Yosemite; Mirror Lake; Dove Lake; Parker Lake; Ice Lake, the John Muir trail and many other locations up and down California, Arizona, Colorado and New Mexico. One of the hikes I do often is right here in our back yard; Iron Mountain. I do it as often as I can and with friends who enjoy the hike and our many conversations directed at solving the ills of society. But, when hiking Iron Mountain there is a clearly marked trail and signs telling you not to cut the trail or leave the trail.

Hiking Iron Mountain helps you learn how to keep your footing on uneven terrain when on a steep descent and to navigate rocky trails, switch backs and long steep climbs. It prepares you for climbing a steep trail in the Sierra's or White Mountain of Arizona or climbing into the Grand Canyon. There are several variation of the trail on Iron Mountain; some longer than others; some steeper than the others; some more technical and then the main trail; wide and varied. This is important because it allows you to take different paths for a change in scenery and to help gain a variety of experiences for future hikes in faraway places.

As we near the end of our careers and prepare for the next chapter in our lives we instinctively look back at where we have been. I am more aware of the stepping stone I have covered in my path to where I am today. My career and life are filled with miss-steps and a few slips along the way. I have taken a variety of paths to gain new experiences and see more of what my career and life had to offer. I guess you could say I have a wonder lust for new adventures. I seldom stayed in the same job for more than 2-3 years. I enjoyed the varying paths and adventures each new assignment offered. I have no regrets for any of the changes of direction these stepping stones led me to. Many times I may not have been as observant, respectful or cautious as I should have been when making some of my decisions to take one path or the other but I have always been watchful of my step, the angle of the descent, the difficulty of the ascent and how to proceed. Sometimes I threw caution to the wind and let whatever happened, happen.

I have three years ahead of me before I head off into retirement. I have made the decision to stay and gut out the future and hopefully in some way help set the course for the next generation of police officer. Those that are leaving have many stepping stones before them. Each stone has its advantage and will take you forward in a different direction. With each step on a new stone you will move forward, but differently. Each of you will move at different rates to new places in your lives and maybe even change direction several times before you find the path that best suits you and the life you wish to lead after police work.

As your foot hovers over the stepping stone in front of you; be thoughtful of the experiences you have had in life and step with confidence; in the face of a small flicker of fear of what is to come. I know that ultimately each of you has given a life time of dedication to making this world a safer place and it is time now for you to encounter a new and exciting adventure. As you step forward onto that stepping stone, that stone will lead you in a different direction; follow your heart; there is no turning back. There is a life after police work.

The Exodus is in Full Swing

• Antoine "Tony" El-Assis         Traffic Motor        25 Years Service
  
• Carlos Chacon            Detective / Sergeant    33 Years Service
  
• Jeffrey Fellows            Detective / Sergeant    34 Years Service
  
• Michael McCollough        Traffic Inv Sergeant    29 Years Service
  
• Max Verduzzco            Traffic Inv Sergeant    30 Years Service
  
• Robert Rohde            Traffic Inv Agent    34 Years Service
  
• Bryan Manning            Traffic Inv Detective    22 Years Service
  
• Kenneth Hofer            Police Officer II        29 Years Service
  
• Curtis Perkins            Traffic Motor        29 Years Service
  
• Stephen Webb            Traffic Motor        29 Years Service
  
• William "Bill" Day        Traffic Motor        27 Years Service
  
• Darryl Emerson            Traffic Motor        22 Years Service
  
• Dave Hoffman            Police Officer II        29 Years Service
  

The above members of the department bid farewell on Wednesday, June 17, 2009. Friends, colleagues and family joined in a celebration to wish them all well in retirement at the Recital Hall in the Palisades Building at Balboa Park. Many laughs, tears and stories were shared during the recognition of 402 years of dedicated service to the citizens of San Diego.

• Steve Robinson            Detective / Sergeant    30 Years Service
  
• Sharon McNair            Detective / Sergeant    24 Years Service
  
• Ted Kasinak            Detective         35 Years Service
  
• Dave Walker            Detective        29 Years Service
  
• Ed Martinez            Agent            29 Years Service
  
• Mike Kroesch            Police Officer II        25 Years Service
  
• David Lyall            Police Officer II        28 Years Service
  
• Scott Lawford            Police Officer II        24 Years Service
  

The above members of the department bid farewell this evening, Friday, June 19, 2009. Friends, colleagues and family joined in a celebration to wish them all well in retirement in the Hall at the SDPOA. Many laughs, tears and stories were shared during the recognition of 224 years of dedicated service to the citizens of San Diego.

• John Teft            Sergeant        30+ Years Service
  
• Steve Sloan            Detective        30+ Years Service
  
• Joseph Wood            Detective / Sergeant    31 Years Service
  

Steve celebrated his retirement with a gathering at the Rock House at the San Diego Police Pistol Range on Thursday, June 18, 2009. Steve served as a Director for many years on the SDPOA Board of Directors, serving the members and representing us during negotiations. John celebrated his retirement with a gathering at the same location, Friday, June 19, 2009. Many OMBAC friends, family and co-workers joined in wishing John well in retirement. Joe will be celebrating his retirement at the SDPOA Hall on Saturday, June 20, 2009, at 1500 hours. Joe ended his long career working as a Detective Sergeant in Internal Affairs. He will be joined by many family, friends and co-workers to send him off to retirement and wish him well.

The twenty-four (24) dedicated Police Officers above have provided a combined 717+ years of service to the Citizens of San Diego. These men and women have given the best part of their lives ensuring the safety of people they do not know. Each will tell you they did the job because they loved it and could think of nothing more satisfying than fulfilling their responsibilities as a police officer. None of them joined the department for the money or the benefits. They were called to the job for many reasons; most saying because they wanted to make a difference. They will all tell you they are leaving because the promises made by those they served have been broken and they cannot continue to serve and risk the loss of retiree medical insurance for themselves and their family. Few were ready or wanting to retire.

They each can stand tall and be proud of their service, dedication and commitment to the Citizens of San Diego. I wish to say "THANK-YOU" from the citizens and co-workers who had the pleasure and honor of working with you all. Enjoy another 30 years of happiness and joy and remember you were one of the good guys who made a difference. You will be missed greatly!!!!

The Oath of Law Enforcement

The assault of employees continues by San Diego's mayor. There is no let up in sight and the writings are on the wall. Can someone stop by the 3^rd Floor of Headquarters and see if one of the Graffiti Task Force Detectives can look into these writings? I can't help but think, based on past behaviors, the mayor and his minions won't use spray paint to boast of the next assault, like the graffiti from Logan or Shell Town gangsters when boasting of their many crimes. Seems the mayor and his staff are boasting of things to come for MEA and Firefighters Local 145. If you missed today's revelation in the Union Tribune; "Benefits for ex-city employees examined" you should take a few minutes and read it.

The disingenuous comments and pathetic argument put forth by the mayor and his minion Goldstone related to "Terminal Leave" is but another benefit under attack. To say "I told you so" is little consolation to the destruction one individual has been able to reek upon a once proud group of civil servants. The mayor; once a police officer, sued to get promoted to sergeant; sued again to get promoted to lieutenant; then promoted to captain; followed by his promotion to deputy chief then assistant chief and then the chief; it is absolutely pathetic and offensive to hear references to him and his time wearing a badge. Over the years we have had police officers go bad and commit crimes; giving a black eye to every man and woman wearing a blue uniform and the badge of a police officer. We did our level best to put on a professional face and work a little harder to re-build and re-gain the trust of the public we serve when these few failed in their oath and promise to never betray the badge, their integrity or public trust. Never has a police officer ever gone as bad as the ex-chief, now mayor. We have had those convicted of murder and rape; so for me to make such a comment is a strong statement of where we are today.

Many of you remember the International Association of Chiefs of Police or IACP. The mayor knows the group and their ideology. The IACP is very high on ethics and honor and promotes agencies re-affirming their oath on a regular basis to keep it fresh in every police officers mind. IACP'S oath, used by agencies world-wide is as follows;

On my honor,
I will never betray my badge,
my integrity, my character,
or the public trust.
I will always have
the courage to hold myself
and others accountable for our actions.
I will always uphold the constitution
my community and the agency I serve.

They follow the oath with definitions of the words in the oath;

Honor means that one's word is given as a guarantee.
Betray is defined as breaking faith with the public trust.
Badge is the symbol of your office.
Integrity is being the same person in both private and public life.
Character means the qualities that distinguish an individual.
Public trust is a charge of duty imposed in faith toward those you serve.
Courage is having the strength to withstand unethical pressure, fear or danger.
Accountability means that you are answerable and responsible to your oath of office.
Community is the jurisdiction and citizens served

I started this post wanting to point out the threats to the rest of the city work force by the mayor. Local 127 SEIU and the SDPOA had "Terminal Leave" stripped from us for our refusal to play along with the mayor's antics during the last round of negotiations. As has been his history, the mayor went all out in his assault on police officers and now blue collar workers for our refusal to kneel and kiss the ring of the master. They have seen the wrath of the egotist and his vindictive and destructive manner when not getting his way. SEIU and the SDPOA had far more TAKEN from them than the other unions who, for whatever reason, bowed and kissed the master's ring and signed contracts. The more I write about this, the more I come back to my thoughts of the "Battle of the Badges." OK I digress again, sorry.

The thing I have learned in my 30 years in law enforcement and just shy of 53 years on this earth, is a person either possesses honor; integrity; character; and courage or they don't. I have learned that a person who lacks honor; integrity; character or courage, NEVER had it and NEVER WILL. In my opinion, a person is born with these characteristics and they are re-enforced by their upbringing. A person who is honorable and acts with integrity, character and courage acts as such when alone or in a group and in all their words and actions. A person who lacks honor is not capable of acting with integrity, character or courage.

The mayor has proven over and over again his lack of integrity and character. His first statements when seeking election to fill Mayor Murphy's seat, told the entire story of the individual who is now the mayor. To refresh; when questioned about his statements and stand on the DROP and SDCERS Benefits and why he jumped on the band wagon rather than tell the truth about these benefits; he replied, "I won't get elected telling the truth. It's politics." He showed his lack of courage and character from the very beginning. He showed his cowardice and lack of character when he admitted his need and desire to perpetuate further lies and miss-truths about employee benefits and the DROP. His true lack of integrity, shown clear for all to see, and yet in San Diego seemed normal and acceptable to voters, who were blinded by a past title and the lore of stripping the civil servants of the perceived, "Cadillac Benefits." Little did people know what they were in for?

The mayor has fostered a culture lacking honor; integrity; character and courage. His actions and words have become a daily attack of workers and their benefits. His true character emits a total lack of integrity; bearing no sign of courage to do what's right; and his ego prevents him from doing the honorable thing and resigning his office to allow the City to try as it will to find a person of honor who acts with integrity; character and courage. There is no hope for this mayor to rekindle or repair his ability to lead this city. He has lost completely the trust and faith of EVERY worker in the City of San Diego. It is a sad time for San Diego; falling further and further into the abyss of hopeless despair. Go back and read the oath of law enforcement and the definitions. This is who we are; who is he?

Have You Seen My Chameleon?

The only possible explanation I can generate from my 52 ½ year old, Sponge Bob brain, of why the mayor is now championing the expansion of the Convention Center and espousing the increase to fees and taxes, is he physically changes colors when laying down with any of the following; the downtown power brokers, chamber of commerce, Lincoln club, republican money men, or special interests. What other explanation could be plausible? Why can't we see him for what he is? He is constantly changing color as he slithers from his downtown office to any of his many cronies to get his new walking orders. Who is he? What is he?

If you missed it; the latest revelation from the mayor's office is his "championing" of the expansion of the San Diego Convention Center with a price tag of ONE BILLION DOLLARS and an annual cost of $53 million. How many times can someone change colors before they start to look like a clown?

Who among us made the following statements; I'm opposed to taxes; we need to raise fees; I don't think the taxpayers are ready for new taxes; we need to raise taxes (TOT increase from 10.5% to 15.5%); In today's difficult economy I do not think it fair to raise fees; we need to raise fees for entry into Sea Word, The Zoo, The Wild Animal Park ($1 to $2 surcharge per ticket); we need a 1 % to 3 % tax on food and drink; we need a $5 surcharge for rental cars; I support Proposition 8; and oops, I am opposed to Proposition 8? Can someone catch this slippery clown and put him in a cage before he changes color yet again and we can't see him?

I had to laugh as I read the comments of Port Commission Chairman Michael Bixler who was unexpectedly surprised by the plan to expand the Convention Center and said he had a lot of questions. In a Union Tribune article, September 28, 2008, Bixler said; "There's a process that you have to follow; it's like when a tenant is moving out of an apartment and somebody new is moving in and you, as landlord, don't know who they are." But more than that, Bixler said, he does not know how the convention center plans to pay for an expansion and hotel, which together could cost $1 billion. The port also wants to receive market-rate rent from the hotel of several million dollars a year."

I got another laugh as I watched the mayor's video (1^st link above) explaining his reasons for supporting the expansion of the Convention Center during this horrible economic time. His colors changing with every word and phrase; he even keeps a straight face as he details the importance of this "Vital Economic Engine." The list of committee members appointed by the mayor is long and distinguished and stacked with the usual players to ensure his desired outcome is guaranteed.

The spin machine is in full swing as the chameleon champions his cause, changing color with each word and action. Rather than rant on about this latest changing of color by the mayor, I would point to an article written by Don Bauder; who, honestly, I seldom agree with; in the Reader on June 10, 2009, titled: "Convention Liars." Bauder nails everything that is wrong with the chameleon and his latest proposed fleecing of the taxpayer.

I am fully aware of the need for a convention center large enough to attract businesses and conventions that will fill the halls and hotels and bring in needed tax dollars to the City. I understand the desire to be one of the top five convention cities in America. I am not so naive that I do not understand the desire. But for heaven's sake; when is someone going to lead this City and start setting priorities that make sense? The streets and parks in this city are in such disrepair from lack of deferred maintenance and repair; parks, libraries and pools will have to be closed in short order due to budget constraints; many of the city buildings and offices are in need of major repairs or replacement; public safety is as stressed and stretched as any in the nation and the chameleon wants to spend ONE BILLION dollars on the expansion to the Convention Center. The thought process of adding $53 million in expenses to the City's budget to pay for this expansion is nothing short of idiotic and pathetic, when viewed against the budget shortfall of this City and projected revenues for the next several years. Not to mention the Pension Debt and lack of planning for future Retiree Medical expenses.

How is it we have come to accept these types of actions from our elected mayor and city council? Why have we become so complacent we allow a mayor to tell us what we want? What will it take to get people to speak up and demand THEIR NEEDS be met before the desires of the politicians? If you could vote on the priorities of the mayor and city council, what would be your top three priorities? Would the expansion of the Convention Center be on your list, even if I were to allow you to set your top 10 priorities?

It's time to stand up and shout in a loud and firm voice; "ENOUGH IS ENOUGH; GET OUT!!!!" We were looking for a mayor when we got this chameleon.

Pension Savings or Screw Job?

Did you all catch the latest out of city hall today? To forewarn you, the "Little Rube" is at it again. At 12:38 PM the Union Tribune/Sign on San Diego posted a story titled; "Report studies pension savings" which sounds innocuous. Naturally I read the article and instinctively began gnashing my teeth. The story begins by explaining how the City could save millions of dollars a year if it were to suspend the 2% Cost of Living increase (COLA) for retirees.

So as the story goes; the "Little Rube" aka Carl DeMaio, and one of the mayor's minions, Jay Goldstone asked Cheiron (A Consulting Firm) to study this part of the SDCERS benefit for retirees. Cheiron said a one year suspension of the COLA would reduce the City's unfunded pension liability by $58 million. Cheiron said if this reduction was taken the City's annual required pension contribution would be reduced by $4.5 million. Cheiron said if the City were to eliminate the 2% COLA permanently the City would cut their unfunded pension liability by $920 million. This would then lead to a reduction, according to Cheiron, of $74 million in pension contribution by the City in 2010.

So I ask myself as I read the last paragraph of the article; "When will the mayor and the "Little Rube", stop the attacks of employees and their VESTED benefits?" I am glad today my doctor saw fit to put me on blood pressure medication over my objections last year. The "Little Rube" wants an opinion from the City Attorney (I actually laughed at this part of the article) to see if the City could "legally suspend the annual increase." I am like you; waiting with bated breath for this next "Memorandum of Law" from our NEW City Attorney. So while we all wait for this new revelation I thought I would break out the calculator and do some math.

I began to look at the numbers Cheiron opined on related to the 2% COLA. I am not a math major but I think I understand the concepts of what is necessary to understand these numbers. How on earth can you make the leap from the first statement of reducing the unfunded liability by $58 million and a reduction of $4.5 million in pension contribution for a one year suspension of the COLA to a reduction of $920 million pension liability with a permanent elimination of this same 2% COLA? I'm sorry; I'm not buying these numbers or analysis. I tried every math equation I could remember from my days of school and math classes, statistics, economics and public finance. I pulled out the latest numbers from SDCERS and the pension liabilities they have reported to the City. The numbers in the article do not jibe in any way when compared to the analysis of Cheiron. Seems reminiscent of the information in the City's court filings they cannot seem to justify or explain.

What do we know about the mayor and "Little Rube"? We know BOTH of them are HELL BENT on eliminating DROP. We know BOTH of them are HELL BENT on eliminating the Defined Benefit Retirement from employees and replacing it with the less acceptable, more expensive and politically motivated Defined Contribution Retirement for new hires. We know BOTH of them are HELL BENT on reducing the work force of the City and outsourcing as many job functions as humanly possible and as quickly as possible. We know BOTH of them have NO ETHICS or understanding of HONESTY when putting information out to the taxpayer when seeking to meet their goals. We know BOTH of them are HELL BENT on doing whatever it takes to make ALL of this reality.

This is just another poke, jab, slap and kick of the dedicated city employee who had NOTHING to do with the City knowingly, willingly and unlawfully underfunding the City's Employee Retirement System. Think the lines are long for those seeking to join the workforce for this City? If you do; I have some land I am seeking to sell at a much reduced rate. I have some pictures if you would be interested in seeing them. Please; no checks or credit cards…. CASH ONLY!!!!

Demoting Chiefs, Captains, Lieutenants, Sergeants

The City of Fresno Police Department is demoting 25 supervisors from the rank of Chief to Sergeant. The City of Oakland is laying off 140 officers to close their budget deficit. The City of Sacramento Police Department is headed toward layoffs and the City of Stockton has sent layoff notices to 55 sworn officers; seven supervisors were demoted and 35 civilian employees of the department were also laid off. There are about 20 more examples of police agencies facing layoffs or demotions of supervisors and detectives to close budget deficits in cities across the state.

There were five (5) Oakland officers attending the Internal Affairs Class I attended in Campbell last week. I listened as they detailed the planned layoffs of officers and demotions of supervisors. This is all after the City spent over $70 million dollars hiring 170 officers to bring their department to full staffing. Those in attendance did not have much confidence things would change and they were preparing for the loss of 140 SWORN officers.

The above examples are all worse case scenarios and taken from headlines and web postings over the last couple of weeks. Many are knee jerk reactions to budget deficits from City Council's and Mayor's across the State. The threats of layoffs and demotions are scare tactics and attempts to paint unions and their members as greedy, selfish, uncaring employees who refuse to help save their respective Cities. The common theme presented by these elected members of city governments, is that the budgets of the public safety departments, is larger than all others and thus it makes more sense to cut them.

I am not saying there is not a financial crisis in cities and states across the nation. I am not saying there is not a need to share in the cuts and reshaping of budgets and expenditures. I am not implying we should not participate in reductions of wages or benefits to help keep the city afloat. But I take exception to a mayor who threatens the layoffs of 124 police officers and a similar number of firefighters from a city already decimated with the exodus of almost 250 sworn public safety officers (140+ Police and 88+ Fire) who have retired prematurely. I take exception at a city government that excludes its employees in the decision making processes of these cuts and reductions in benefits. I take exception to a mayor who is using the current financial and economical crisis to further his agenda of eliminating the DROP for purely POLITICAL reasons.

The mayor and city council has yet to share in the cuts the rest of us have been subjected to. The mayor continues to receive his retirement payments as well as his full salary. Yes, he will tell everyone who will listen he took a 6% cut to his regular pay. We are not that stupid mayor; that cut amounted to NOTHING comparatively speaking. Don't get me started on the city council and their refusal to take the same cuts as the rest of us. Their latest slap in the face, orchestrated Marti Emerald, to take reserve funds to make up the anticipated 6% cut, is a complete joke. They have yet to pare their staffs or office expenses. The mayor's office is larger than any mayor's office in City history.

When elected officials begin to act honestly and inclusive; unions and their members can join together in seeking solutions to the mounting problems facing us all. When true honesty and transparency is reflective of the mayor's every action and word; workable solutions will be openly discussed and implemented without fear. To even utter potential layoffs of safety personnel in the City of San Diego today, is indicative of how far from reality and honesty the mayor sits. We have a long way to go and with the current lack of leadership and truth in government (you do know I mean TOTAL LACK of truth) the turn-around may not occur in any of our lifetimes.

How Did This Happen?

People say we are whiners because we expect promises made, to be fulfilled. Half of Americans are expecting a retirement based on Social Security. A good many of these people have also contributed to personal retirement plans (401(k) or Deferred Comp type plans) in hopes of having enough money to live a comfortable life in retirement. When we joined the Civil Service Ranks as Police Officers, we were promised a Defined Benefit Retirement for which we contributed a percentage of salary and the City was, in theory suppose to contribute a like amount. In the early part of the 1980's, the City pleaded with us to leave Medicare in exchange for a "City Sponsored" retiree medical program so THE CITY could save money. The City promised a better plan than would be provided by Medicare upon our retirement. We stopped contributing to Medicare and the City began providing retirees with medical insurance.

Over the years the City asked to take on portions of an employee's retirement contribution, in-lieu of salary increases. This was done for three reasons; One, the cost of taking on a percent of an employee's contribution was less than a similar salary increase; Two, the employee was able to increase his/her net salary by that percent; Three, the employees base salary did not rise, keeping the City's actual contribution into the retirement fund lower. To the uneducated this seems a fair deal. To those who understand these plans the City saves a ton of money and the employee loses in the end with a lower base for which retirement is calculated. The citizens screamed because they did not understand the motives of the City and believed employees were taking advantage of the city and taxpayers; hence the "Cadillac Benefits" moniker.

Problems began to surface when it was learned the City was not making their full contribution on the employee's behalf into the Retirement System. Money was being diverted for various reasons; Faberge Egg Exposition; Republican National Convention; Convention Center Expansion; Petco Park, to name just a few. Creative financing and Manager's Proposal One followed by Manager's Proposal Two created a mess which ultimately collapsed, bringing an end to the games being played with the Employee's Retirement System and the payments owed on their behalf. Managers Proposal One and Managers Proposal Two were developed to hide the City's creative financing policies. MP1 was actually done because the Retirement Fund was creeping up on 100% funding and IRS implications would kick in if that happened. With MP1, came an increase in contribution rate for the employee which resulted in a number of senior City Employees retiring; the reason, to not have to pay the increase. MP1 was the beginning if the City's underfunding the Retirement System.

MP2 brought increased benefits and the lure of even less payments by the City into the Retirement System. The City failed to make their required contribution on behalf of the employees as actuarially determined. The City also changed the method used to determine their actuarially required payment (ARC) that was first illegal and second provided for a much lower payment. It was said; "San Diego officials cultivated and accepted a culture of financial management and reporting premised upon non-transparency, obfuscation, and denial of fiscal reality. Under the pressure of short-term needs, City officials gave expedience a higher priority than fiscal responsibility and came to view the law as an impediment to be circumvented through artful manipulation."

Enter the Union Tribune; the assault began on employees, the unions and their benefits. The UT long known for their anti-union position and extreme right bent, began an all out attack of everything union and everything employee. Facts be damned; it's the employee's and their unions that were at fault in every story. Truth and fact be damned; the Union Tribune has a Pulitzer Prize in the making. DROP and other benefits became known as "Cadillac" benefits; a fleecing of the taxpayer; criminal acts. Try as we may; fighting a war of words with someone who buys paper by the truck load and ink by the barrel; we were in a no win situation.

Dick Murphy resigned over the UT created controversy and incompetence of past City Councils and Mayor. Enter the ex-chief of police as a candidate to "fix" these problems. An Internet Web Site is created to enable the candidate for mayor to put forth his platform of "change" as he begins his campaign to fill Dick Murphy's seat. Prominent on this site was the candidate for mayor pledging to reduce retirement benefits for City Employees and eliminate DROP. The candidate for mayor continues the rampage against employees, perpetuating the lies and spin surrounding employees and their "Cadillac" benefits. The sad part of this; of all people, he had the opportunity to kick that band wagon over and tell the truth; but no. When challenged, the candidate for mayor said; "It's politics; I would never get elected telling the truth." (A clear indication of who he is and what was to come.)

The candidate for mayor / ex-chief of police eventually snows the electorate and takes his position as mayor of San Diego. Since that first day; the mayor has made it his calling in life to eliminate the DROP, reduce the City's workforce, cut wages and benefits and carry the water for the Downtown Power Brokers, Republican Party and Union Tribune. When challenged on the legality of his actions, his often used comment is; "The courts will decide." When challenged on his ethics, his often used comment is; "That's politics." When caught in a lie or found to be providing false or miss-leading information he or his office places blame at the feet of someone else.

The facts are finally seeing the light of day; the lies and spin put forth to perpetuate the political agenda of the mayor are now being torn apart. The mayor fired the first shot that turned the heads of people who have begun to question his motives and ethics. The mayor wanted to take DROP to court in an attempt to eliminate it from employees. He has filed the necessary papers to start the process. The problems with his case are already starting to shine bright. In his blinded quest to eliminate a vested benefit from the City's Employees, the mayor uses made up numbers and false information in his pleadings. His team have grasped at air in an attempt at swaying public opinion by putting out false "Memorandum of Law" and press releases, and espousing legal theory that has no legal support in reality. The fight has just begun and as the truth is shown for all to see; the mayor and his minions will soon be seen for the incompetent, unethical lot they are. Patience, honesty and the rule of law will prevail. We will soon be able to focus on our responsibilities and service to the taxpayers.

DROP “Bottom Line” Illusive

It is refreshing to see a news reporting agency in San Diego refusing to take the word of elected people when writing stories about people, events and issues. My case in point is the latest story by Rani Gupta of the Voice of San Diego; "The DROP Bottom Line" and her questions about DROP and what it costs. Her refusal to accept the numbers of city officials, union members or others is refreshing and hopeful for the truth in journalism in San Diego. Take some time and read her article and you will see what I am speaking of.

Ms. Gupta's questioning is clearly placing stress on the mayor and his minions. Their ability to flippantly pop off with numbers and assertions not based in fact, has finally caught up with them. They are now going to have to justify their baseless babbles in the press, but also court. Did you all note the highlighted third paragraph? This is taken from the mayor's lawsuit against the SDPOA and DROP. Playing fast and loose in legal papers is surely to come back to bite the mayor and city in their collective asses.

I have a prediction of what will soon happen to Ms. Gupta and her ability to get answers to these pointed and hard hitting questions. Ms. Gupta will soon be put on hold when calling for answers to questions; she will have calls go unanswered and not returned; she will be ignored at press conferences; and she will be black listed by the mayor as a person to exclude from receiving any and all information. It will soon be clear how vindictive this person is when someone has the courage to stand up to his antics.

The use of Lamont Ewell's analysis of DROP in 2005, as a basis for argument by those of us who believe in its usefulness is as Gupta points out, far from definitive. Many pieces of the puzzle are missing with this analysis but it is a fair representation of the value of this employee benefit. Ms. Gupta moves past this and the comments of the mayor and his people and demands supported facts; facts that cannot be provided because they do not exist. Ms. Gupta is not beholding to the Downtown Establishment, Republican Party; Lincoln Club or the mayor and his many minions and has shown her ability to sift through the lies and double speak.

There is hope for the future if reporters like Ms. Gupta keep the pressure on and demand facts to answers. Holding those accountable to the public is in the best interest of all of us. If any person entrusted with the taxpayer's money and interest, find it cumbersome or difficult to provide facts to answers, then find another position in life and get out of public office. The taxpayer and all who serve them deserve better.

Suggestions for Change

Ranting for the sake of ranting gets old and annoying to most people after a certain period. I could rail on about the city council, mayor, city attorney and life in general, all without ever offering a suggestion for change or something positive. There is so much wrong with San Diego's political arena and those who occupy the seats of power; it provides a landfill full fodder. But, today I want to offer some suggestions from the cheap seat I occupy in this game of life.

The mayor continues to posture and play to the press and taxpayer; painting himself as the reform mayor who is reeling in the unions, employees; their wages and benefits and all that is bad with America's Finest City. His biggest supporters; the Union Tribune, San Diego Republican Party, Lincoln Club, Downtown Power Brokers and the San Diego News Network supporting his every appearance. These groups fawn all over his every word (note for future reference I did not say action). The mayor and city council slash pay and benefits of City Employees; the Union Tribune, San Diego News Network and local TV stations jump on the story as if Osama Bin Laden had been apprehended by an enthusiastic rookie cop recently hired to fill one of the hundreds of positions vacated by the mayor's latest cuts to pay and benefits. The mayor stands at the podium espousing to the gullible public all is well.

Things are not well in San Diego, no matter what the mayor and press report. The public's safety is not at the forefront of the mayor or council's agenda and if you think otherwise you better wake up and soon. The exodus of three hundred (300) public safety personnel from the ranks of the police and fire departments, in short order is going to have a negative impact on our collective abilities to provide BASIC safety services. You need to forget the other services once taken for granted that were supplied by storefront officers and fire safety personnel. The mayor's quip; "Replacing Experience with Enthusiasm" is the biggest joke of the century in San Diego, next to the mayor "feeling our pain" by taking a six percent reduction to his $192,464 combined salary. This coming summer is going to be long, hot and dangerous for citizens and public safety officers alike.

The recruiting units for both the Police and Fire Departments are working feverishly to locate those individuals who meet the basic qualifications for hire. The mayor and others babble on about the number of candidates available and see no problems in quickly finding those willing to fill the many vacancies. I have a news flash for you all; the San Diego Police Department hoped against all hope to find fifty (50) qualified candidates for its next academy. They have struggled to clear 36 and have run out of time to locate 14 more to meet their goal. This is just the beginning of what is in store for public safety in San Diego. The mayor has helped immensely with drawing qualified candidates to San Diego by proclaiming his need to lay off 124 police officers and an equal number of fire fighters to close the budget gap created if the Governor takes money from San Diego to balance the State's budget. Those smart enough to connect the dots (the same candidate sought by other agencies) sidestep San Diego and go to other jurisdictions offering a more stable working environment and better pay and benefits. Thanks again mayor for the positive words and support.

So now that I have gotten my days rant off my chest and I can take a deep breath, I want to offer some suggestions for change. Before anyone gets their underwear in a bunch reading my suggestions, I am thinking out loud and throwing suggestions into the air for dialogue. When I was on the SDPOA Board I was able to cajole the City into using the "Interest Based" model of negotiations. In this type of bargaining, ideas are offered from each side and no value judgment is made on the proposal or idea. The ideas or suggestions are placed on a board and later discussed in depth for their value in meeting the needs of both sides. So as you read some of my suggestions or ideas for change; do not dwell on the suggestion; think of what, how or if, this idea or suggestion could provide BOTH sides a benefit. To digress; we found in 2005, the City and their negotiators worked this system very well and we (collectively) came up with viable ideas for a contract that in the end never materialized because those in elected positions could not get their heads out of the box and understand the concepts of change.

• Making amends with Police Officers; change line-up times to 15 minutes after the hour and end of shift times to 15 minutes before the hour. This would allow officers to prepare for their shift while on the clock and finish their shift as well by being on the clock. This was the basis of the FLSA law suits that faltered in San Diego but have been successful in every other court in America. This small recognition by the City would go a long way toward making amends and recognizing the work of its Police Officers day in and day out. (Cost; Nothing)
  
  
• Return the "On Call" status for EVERY investigative Unit; the reduction of this way of doing business has greatly reduced the effectiveness of units to investigate crime. The savings was minimal, but the impact great. Return the "On Call" positions and allow the investigator to drive their city vehicle to the station closest to their home while on call. (Cost; Nothing)
  
  
• Reduce the budgets of the mayor and city council offices by 33%; these bloated offices and staffs have grown to "Kingdom" status and cannot be justified no matter how hard they try. Their importance over public safety and the need to provide basic services to the taxpayer, far outweigh the need of the mayor and council to have multiple staffers doing similar jobs. (Savings; $2.7 million dollars)
  
  
• Install parking meters and pay stations at ALL city parks and beaches; installing parking meters in beach communities (parking passes can be purchased for residents) will provide needed revenue to ensure clean beaches and necessary public safety; charging for the use of parking lots in parks and beaches will ensure those using these venues pay their fair share. (Revenue generating; Est. $12 million gain)
  

• Place on the ballot an initiative to charge for trash collection; provide leadership; argue for and support this fee ($12-$15 per month) for refuse collection in the City of San Diego. (Revenue generating; Est. $42 million gain annually)
  

• Eliminate subsidies for "Special Events" in San Diego; charge "full cost recovery" of costs for all events in San Diego. Require the hiring of "Private" security, using "off duty" police personnel who are paid by a private vendor who supplies workers comp insurance and salary. (Savings; $15+ million annually)
  
  
• Provide a free city-wide WI-FI system open to the Public; this would generate revenue from advertising and enable more citizens to access the internet. (Cost; $4 million instillation - Revenue Generating; $2-$4 million annually)
  

These are just a few of the suggestions I have to offer. What are yours? There are many other ideas floating in the minds of people who are reticent to join the discussion. I urge you to post your ideas and to expound on those already voiced. The more discussion generated; the more ideas put out; the better chance we have at doing what the elected officials have failed to do; fixing the ills of San Diego. One voice is easy to silence; a hundred voices will be heard and hard to silence; one thousand voices will be cause for change. It starts with one; who will be the second voice to speak up?

Keeping it Safe

I finished my Internal Affairs "Training" today and took the evening off. Three days of "training" and an evening of relaxation, alcohol and a few laughs. I think it may be inappropriate for me to go much further this evening as the alcohol to plasma ratio may be a bit skewed. To ensure I do not get myself in trouble and in keeping with my pledge to refrain from profane language and maintain a professional BLOG; I will stop here and say "Good Night."

I will return on Friday evening with a post to share my thoughts, rants and impressions of the day. Until then, thank you for checking in and be safe. Remember safety is your responsibility; the mayor has stripped the San Diego Police Department of sufficient officers to provide for your safety. Our ability has been reduced to responding to "Priority" calls for emergency services where a person may be in serious jeopardy of injury… BUT… our ability to respond in a timely fashion even to these calls has been greatly reduced by the exodus of officers created by the mayor's latest imposed contract and elimination of promised benefits.

Good evening and be safe…..

The mayor AKA Chicken-Little?

Tell me the mayor of San Diego does not remind you of the picture you have in your mind as I describe Chicken-Little; running around screaming and crying and yelling the sky is falling? San Diego is defined in this State as well as the Nation by the words and actions of its mayor. San Diego is the second largest city in the State of California and the 7^th largest city in the nation and yet we have the biggest (you supply your own descriptor) as our mayor. How many of you caught Chicken-Little's comments, regarding the Governor's plan to take money from the City to close the State's budget gap? Chicken-Little is now telling taxpayers/citizens if the Governor takes the money he is planning on taking, Chicken-Little will have to lay off as many as 124 police officers and just as many firefighters. Police officers cannot strike by law because the legislature believed the public's safety was so important and cherished, we must endure imposed contracts and poor treatment at the hands of city and county politicians with little if any recourse. It appears clear Chicken-Little does not have the same belief as the legislators who crafted the law against law enforcement strikes.

Who is this (again, you provide the descriptor) kidding when he threatens laying off 124 police officers and an equal number of fire fighters? Chicken-Little is again pandering to the press and making statements not based in any semblance of reality. Reality today is our streets will not be maintained and will fall further into disrepair; libraries will be opened fewer hours if at all; longer lines will be common place when seeking permits and licenses; beaches will be cleaned less often; storefront offices will be closed and abandoned; deferred building maintenance will be put off or eliminated all together; fire inspections will be eliminated; community pools, skate parks, and libraries will be closed for the summer.

When is Chicken-Little going to start at least acting, like the mayor of the second largest city in California and doing what is right? While painful and unpopular; shutting libraries, parks, and pools; eliminating deferred maintenance and street repairs; as well as eliminating Community Storefronts and other City Services must be done long before even thinking of eliminating a single police officer or firefighter. It is completely asinine to even suggest laying off ONE SINGLE police officer or firefighter. Chicken-Little's mere utterance of such a thought, suggests his total and complete disregard for the citizens of San Diego and a clear picture of his integrity and competence.

Enough has been done to impact the public's safety and the Police and Fire Department's ability to provide services to the taxpayer. The legislature saw fit to bar law enforcement from striking for a reason. This same reason would apply to any such thought of layoffs of police officers and firefighters in San Diego. The posturing and playing to the press is pathetic and has become tiresome in the face of continued battering of the employee. The Chicken-Little
mayor is digging a deeper hole for himself every day. Day in and day out he places blame directly or in-directly on the employees of the City of San Diego. Employees have been affected emotionally, physically and psychologically by the continued battering at the hands of the city's Chicken-Little mayor. Most batterers are arrested and prosecuted for their abuses. When will this batterer be removed from and barred from further infliction of pain in San Diego?

Until the mayor, city council, city attorney and the elected state representatives, ALL take a reduction to wages and benefits; eliminate perks and fat from their offices (drivers, free coffee and meals, trips at taxpayer expense, body guards, vehicle allowances, trimming of their staffs) any further reductions to law enforcement and fire is unacceptable and CRIMINAL.

One last note; the sky is not falling as Chicken-Little declares. The stuff falling from the sky is the remnants and contents of the outhouse (City of San Diego) the mayor has blown up. Don't look up until Chicken-Little mayor is out of office.

Federal Court Ruling June 10, 2009

If you have not seen this you need to read it and understand the thinking of the City and mayor.

Union Tribune Article

9^th Circuit Ruling on DROP (June 10, 2009)

City Attorney Press Release (June 10, 2009)

This is just in and I have read it once and do not see the same thing Goldsmith is espousing in his release.

6-10-2009 1745 hours (Addition to above)

OK, I have read and re-read this ruling and the subsequent idiocy of the City Attorney. I am no lawyer but being a participant in this litigation and involved from the beginning the question as I understood it before the court was in simple terms; "Was the 3.2% equivalent being taken from DROP participants legal?" The SDPOA believed this reduction from DROP participants to be punitive and illegal. We believed at the time the City was TAKING AWAY a benefit without providing something of a similar value. Non-DROP participants had the 3.2% placed into their retirement accounts and the money was of a benefit to them. DROP participants LOST the money as it was taken and no benefit was provided.

I do not see anywhere in this decision from the 9th District that it opined DROP was NOT a VESTED BENEFIT. Someone help me out here. Goldsmith is all over this as a ruling in the City's favor saying it vindicates him and the City and they can now move to eliminate, change or reduce DROP. I do not see it!!!! On Pages 6924 and 6925 the judge frames the issue and on page 6926 she clearly discusses "DROP Salary" not the DROP as a benefit. I must not understand the English language or writings of judges or attorneys. Maybe I am in the wrong field of work to be making decisions on case law and legal rulings since I am a complete idiot in this area.

6-10-2009 2100 Hours

I appear to have read the ruling correctly. Several attorneys have reviewed the ruling and agree there is nothing in the language that deals with Charter Section 143.1 nor the question of DROP and it being a vested benefit. The City Attorney is AGAIN jumping the gun and making foolish statements and putting out incorrect information. This is reminiscent of the last four years with Mike Aguirre. This is a sad state of affairs to have to deal with such incompetence not only in the mayor's office but the City Attorney's office at the same time.

The local news reporting on this issue is a feeding frenzy and also indicative of the lack of experience and knowledge of REAL Investigative reporting and the ability to do their due diligence BEFORE putting false information out to the public.

The scary part of all of this is with the total inept, pathetically incompetent people in positions of authority within city government; even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while. God forbid when this incompetent lot gets something right.

Check VOSD article

Another Clown on the Block

Did you catch the article on San Diego News Network (SDNN) titled "Pocket Change: a DROP in the bucket"
written by Steven Bartholow? It is another in a long list of false, misleading, slanted, caustic, pathetic examples of the lengths the Downtown Establishment, Republican Spin Machine, San Diego News Media and professed experts will go to convince the taxpaying public; City Employees are taking them for a ride.

Erik Bruvold is one of the professed "experts" quoted by Bartholow in his article. Bruvold is President of the National University System Institute for Policy Research (What?). If Bruvold is an "expert" in something I would be interested in knowing what that expertise is in; it is surely NOT the DROP or anything to do with San Diego City Employee Benefits.

In the article, "Pocket Change: a DROP in the bucket" Bruvold starts out saying; "The DROP program is a testament to the adage that one has to look at all the moving parts. Adopted by local and state governments throughout the U.S., on the surface it can – and I stress the word can – be an attractive program. Obligated to make the pension payout anyway, the employer can retain a valued and experienced employee and cap pension payouts." So as I read this first paragraph I am thinking someone finally gets it and understands the reasons for the DROP and how it works. I was curious to his emphasis on "can" and continued to read his analysis.

Bruvold continues; "The actuarial issues can give one a headache. But at their heart is the question of whether the specific DROP program works in concert with other benefits to encourage employees to retire at an earlier age and, if so, whether that earlier retirement age is balanced by reduced pension payouts so that the total lifetime payout to the employee remains generally the same. Well-constructed plans coordinate the various aspects of the retirement benefit plan so as to ensure that the plan remains cost-neutral." I'm now having my doubts Bruvold knows what he is talking about. The statements above gave me a headache. Bruvold is absolutely correct in his assertion well constructed plans are cost neutral. The rest of the babble is just that. Where these "experts" come up with this stuff is beyond me.

Then Bruvold throw the gauntlet down and says; "Then there is San Diego." Yes Erik, then there is San Diego and all the professed experts; professed "Investigative Reporters"; professed News Reporting Agencies and News Papers; professed "Editors" penning editorial after editorial on the Cadillac Benefits of City Employees; and the professed "expert" Eric Bruvold. Please excuse me while I go rinse my mouth out; the thoughts of all this caused a VERP (Vomit-Burp).

Here we go with the spin cycle, exaggerations, and completely false information being put out as fact to the taxpaying public by a professed expert. Bruvold writes; "Taxpayers in San Diego are presently burdened with a plan where nearly all the incentives encourage an earlier and earlier retirement but which do not also reduce benefit levels. The laundry list of features encouraging early retirement include allowing many employees in the past to buy extra pension credits at an artificially low price, lifetime retiree health benefits which are 100% protected against inflation, very generous guaranteed rates of return for the money employees put into their DROP accounts and caps on pension payouts after employees work a certain period of time. Together these can allow a public safety officer who started with the city at age 20 and who purchased five years of service time to enter DROP at age 45 and retire at 50 receiving a pension payout of 90% of his or her final salary, a DROP account comprised of 5 years of that pension payout guaranteed to earn 7.75% interest, and lifetime guaranteed healthcare." Please explain to me where these idiots come up with this crap?

Someone please call this dork and tell him his buddy the mayor took lifetime medical away from employees even though those hired before 1986 are NOT covered by Medicare and it was a promised benefit for which we agreed to leave Social Security to help save the City money. While you are talking to Erik tell him first there are 1 in 2000 safety employees hired at the age of 20 and if he or she was hired at age 20 they still could not retire at age 45 and would be foolish to purchase 5 years service credit since they would have over 30 years when they ARE eligible to retire. Be sure to tell this guy the purchase of service credit is cost neutral today and have been corrected for some time. Be sure to tell him NO ONE can retire and enter DROP at 45 and for him to write this is a distortion of reality and inflammatory and noting more than a way to rile the unknowing, gullible public into further directing their anger at City Employees. Ask Bruvold if he is interested in raising money for his favorite charity. If he is, tell him he just needs to last three rounds in a boxing match with a police officer (we will make it fair and let him box Binky) in the Battle of the Badges. I think we could raise a lot of money with this idea. I digress I know, sorry. I really want to box the mayor!!!!

Bruvold follows the last fairy tale with another; "The results are scary for taxpayers. By one estimate San Diego's DROP program costs has added hundreds of millions of dollars to the city' pension liability. Politically, it has set taxpayers and workers at each other's throats, reducing to nil the opportunities to have a constructive dialogue about taxes, benefits, and what the city needs to do to be a competitive employer providing high-quality services." The "estimate" this professed expert cites is a Voice of San Diego article written in 2006, by Evan McLaughlin. The information in this article has been cited in various circles to show cause for eliminating DROP. What all these experts fail to disclose is the information provided in the article and attributed to Actuary Joseph Esuchanko has been proved incorrect. Esuchanko was hired by the City and our mayor to assist the past City Attorney, Mike Aguirre in an attempt to eliminate DROP (Check out billing information). Aguirre was unsuccessful in his attempts in court and Esuchanko was of little help when his testimony was attacked.

The DROP has indeed been turned into a political football the City, mayor, city attorney, local media and press and the all mighty Downtown Establishment Money and Republican Party et al, keep kicking into the sun. EACH of these entities has refused to provide accurate information in their attacks of DROP. The reason; the facts do not support their argument against DROP and fearing a backlash now of honesty, it is easier and politically expedient to continue to perpetuate the lies. To assist in the fanning of this fire, if you did not notice, is a listing of all of the City Council Members and their e-mail addresses with the comment; "Want to offer your two cents? Contact your official." Think there is an agenda here?

It does not appear the attacks will end anytime soon. It is easier to make the employee and the unions out to be at fault than to admit their incompetence and lack of intelligence have created this mess and prevents them from doing what is necessary to meet their obligation and uphold their end of the agreement. Where is the evaluation promised by the mayor three years ago of DROP to determine if the plan is cost neutral? Why has it not been done in all this time? This is the question the public should be asking the mayor. Put up or shut up mayor.

Battle of the Badges

I was driving to San Jose today with a colleague to attend a class on Internal Affairs (Don't go there, I don't want to talk about it) and we were chatting about the political climate in San Diego. I likened it to an El Nino; wet, unpredictable, ever changing and seldom for the better. The up side is we are in a drought, and could use the rain so maybe that is not a bad thing. Then we started discussing this BLOG. "What am I going to write about tonight?" I laughed and said I had a few ideas but was not really sure.

Well, I have been thinking all day about the "Battle of the Badges." I started wondering how much fun it would be to get the mayor in the ring. Think of the possibilities; retired chief now mayor taking on his number one antagonist, sergeant at the PD; all money goes to the winners charity choice; three rounds; no save by the bell; 10 oz. gloves; no three knock down rule. I figure he would need six months to train and be able to last that long in a ring. Not that it would matter; I don't think it would last that long anyway. I think we could sell out the venue (any venue); there are a ton of people who would pay to see him get his ass kicked (sadly I think just as many would pay in hopes it was my ass that got kicked) and knocked out. Think of the money that could be raised???

I would donate my share to the SDPOA Widows and Orphans Fund in the name of Jerry Griffin. Jerry has been on my mind a lot of late. He was killed in the line of duty in 2003. Jerry was a friend of mine and we enjoyed many good times and laughs; two trips to Sturgis; several trips to Mammoth, mountain biking; numerous motorcycle rides and rallies; as well as the many trips to his favorite entertainment venue. Jerry's daughter Ashley is graduating from UC Santa Cruz this coming Sunday, with a degree in Marine Biology. To honor her and Jerry, I am going to take a side trip on the way home and attend her graduation. Ashley was the apple of his eye; he loved and cherished his daughter. I hope to be there to show her we will never forget her or her dad.

Did anyone out there see the latest with our illustrious city council? At today's meeting council person Emerald won a "pay-cut reprieve" for her and her fellow council persons and their staffs. With a vote of 5-3 the council approved using $315,000 in reserve funds to stave off the 6% cut the rest of us are taking. Emerald reasoned; "We do need to have resources within council offices to be able to do the legwork necessary to make informed decisions on behalf of the public," she said. "I think these funds are vital to our being able to do our job."
He Marti; I have a news flash for you; we need resources to be able to do our job on behalf of the public and provide for their safety. I hate to burst that freshman bubble you are living in as a council person but YOU ARE NOT THAT IMPORTANT!!! The arrogance of the people elected in San Diego is unspeakable. She is serious about HER needs but has given not a single thought to Public Safety or what is happening in her council district to crime as she plays her little games. Can we add her to the card? I think I could find an able bodied female police officer who would love the opportunity to pound some sense into her. We could make it a dual card.

Then I got to thinking; maybe we could make it a triple. I am doubly sure we could sell out the Cox arena at SDSU if we added Carl De Maio to the card as the third bout on the card. We could get a police officer who would jump at the idea to punish the "Little Rube." Think of the money we could raise for the SDPOA's Widows and Orphans Fund. Is there a promoter in the house?

I think I better get up and do some push-ups and sit ups and start my training. I want to be ready when the mayor accepts my challenge. Until tomorrow; be safe and enjoy life.

What IF?

With tongue in cheek, I sit here wondering about the possibilities. What IF; the mayor acted with integrity and pulled the "Last, Best and Final" offer for a contract from the SDPOA and went back to the bargaining table? What IF; the mayor sat down at that table with an open mind and a willingness to listen without judgment to suggestions for cuts? What IF; the mayor stopped thinking "Politics" was saying what he thinks people want to hear and told the truth? What IF; the mayor stood tall and told the truth about DROP and employee benefits? What IF; the mayor actually put the public's safety as the number one priority in the City of San Diego? What IF; the mayor stopped the rhetoric and provided the realities of the public's safety after the exodus of 200 employees of the Police Department? What IF; the mayor presented a realistic budget to the public that included the necessary increases to fees and taxes to pay for the service provided? What IF; the mayor sat at the dais and actively participated in EVERY City Council meeting, showing the taxpayer he is the leader of this great City? What IF; the mayor hired Assistant Chief Javier Mainar as the new Chief of the San Diego Fire Department; saving thousands of taxpayer dollars and building morale for a department that is losing over 10% of its most experienced and dedicated of employees? What IF; you chose the next one……

I could go on with; "What IF" for hours. There is so much that is wrong with the mayor and his response to the problems of this city. I keep hoping against all hope he will slip in the shower and bump his head and have a change of attitude or see the light or get a clue or wake up or stop the nonsense or anything that would allow him to see what he has done is not working and only making things worse. I refuse to believe inner circle confidants are steering him in the direction he is taking the City. When Rear Admiral Ronne Froman left the mayor's office it was the first glimpse of trouble on the 11^th Floor of City Hall. The exit of Fred Sainz offered a glimmer of hope. Then the hiring of Gerry Braun and his "Ass-Kicks of Virtue" brought back indications he was in need of a new spin doctor to help navigate the press. It has not gotten any better, when last week he hired James Waring of the Sunroads debacle.

The mayor toots his own horn as he boasts "transforming organizations so that they become more effective and efficient" over the course of his 30 year career. There is not a leader alive who does it all themselves. Their successes were and are a direct result of the work and support of those below him. I said in my "VVM" post, the mayor has lost the trust, faith and support, of the workers in the City of San Diego. While the mayor may have surrounded himself with people he believes will best help him carry out his agenda; it is apparent those same people are the ones giving him advise that is destroying this once great City. The transformation taking place in the City of San Diego is NOT for the better, nor what taxpayer's want or bargained for. The mayor, in his quest to provide a more efficient workforce, has cut over 700 positions and forced an additional 350 to retire before they were prepared, to preserve benefits unnecessarily reduced or cut. This will in short order have a negative effect on the effectiveness of ALL City Departments from Water, Street, and Parks; to Police and Fire.

If I were able to sit and talk openly with the mayor, I would tell him it is not too late to change course. I would tell him to pull back the imposed contracts of Local 127 and the SDPOA and sit down at the table with them. I would tell him to open his mind and listen to their ideas for cuts and changes to their contracts. I would tell him to trust them and believe they do understand what the economy has done and what needs to be done to stay afloat. I would tell the mayor to leave his ego at home and think outside of the box of ordinary collective bargaining and work toward "YES." I would tell the mayor there is no downside to telling the truth. To do anything less is cowardly and what is wrong with politics. I would tell the mayor he has no time to waste and if there is any hope of keeping this City together and safe from ruin he must stop the destructive course he has set and immediately change course and begin to build the trust necessary to work together and make positive changes for the good of EVERYONE who lives, works, or visits San Diego.

What IF the mayor actually did any this???