Chances Missed in Life

At a time we are all giving thanks on Thanksgiving, I was unknowingly saying goodbye to my younger brother, David Michael McMillan. Growing up, David preferred to be called Mike. Mike has lived in Texas for some time and was here visiting and helping our mother who had open heart surgery last month. Mike has had some physical ailments of his own and was struggling with health issues brought on by the life he lead. On Thursday, November 19, 2009, Mike was having trouble breathing and was taken to Sharps Hospital. Within a couple of days and after a series of tests, it was discovered Mike had cancer. The cancer had taken over his lungs, liver and lymph nodes. This was Tuesday the 24^th and treatment options were being evaluated. Wednesday the doctors told Mike's wife the outlook was grim and treatment options were limited to making him comfortable. If Mike wished to prolong his life, the only option for adding a limited time was oxygen delivered by a machine.

Mike and his wife Debbie discussed the options and Mike made the decision to be kept comfortable and not allow any other measures to prolong his life. Hospice was notified and they were to take over his case on Friday morning. I visited Mike Thanksgiving morning and he was struggling to keep his focus. The pain medications were suppressing the pain and also suppressing his ability to communicate. I returned that evening after Thanksgiving dinner and spent time with Mike's wife Debbie, his three daughters; Kristine, Patti and Amanda. Our sister Julie and her daughter Taylor were also there spending time with Mike. Mike was, for the most part out of it from the pain medication. I left that evening telling Mike I would see him tomorrow.

Friday morning I got up early and headed off to Iron Mountain for a hike to work off some of the calories piled on the day before. The morning was crisp and cool but clear, sunny and perfect for an early morning hike to the top. I met several friends along the way and sat at the top for a bit chatting with others before heading back down. I had just started down the mountain when my cell phone rang and the number showed Mike's daughter Patti was calling. I got a cold chill in my spine when I saw her number. Something told me before I answered the news on the other end was not going to be good.

I answered the phone and Patti struggled to say my name. Fighting not to cry, Pattie said, "Uncle Steve?" She didn't need to say another word. I knew from her voice, what was to come next, "Dad just died." I felt numb and all of the sounds became muted as I stood on the trail processing what Patti had just said. What do you say to a niece who just called to tell you her father, your brother, has just passed away? The pain and anguish in her voice was unmistakable. I told her I would be there as soon as I could.

I ended the call and stood there for several minutes thinking about Mike. I was not prepared for his death. I'm not sure what I expected but for him to pass 48 hours after deciding to forgo life sustaining methods was not even considered in my mind. I started down the trail moving faster than before. I was three miles from my car and the hike was a blur. My mind drifted to our childhood. Mike and I shared a bedroom until I left home. Mike got married before I did and had his first daughter in 1978. I graduated the Police Academy and was married in 1979, having my first child in 1982. Mike worked at General Dynamics like our father. Dad was an engineer who worked first in the space systems, working on the Apollo, Gemini space modules. Mike worked on air frame fuselages and became a lead supervisor.

Mike's last years were spent in Texas with his second wife Debbie. A serious traffic accident almost took Mike's life two years ago. The injuries from this accident had taken their toll. A heavy smoker from his teen days, Mike struggled with diabetes and other issues that restricted his ability to work. Mike drove to San Diego several weeks ago to assist our mother who as I said earlier had open heart surgery to replace a heart valve. Mike was helping out around the house and driving his mother to and from various appointments. When Mike's breathing became difficult and he was admitted to the hospital it was thought at the time he may have had pneumonia.

Mike's two daughters, Patti and Amanda live her in San Diego and were at the hospital checking in on their father. Kristine was in Texas with her husband and was told of her father's illness and decided to drive out to be by his side. Kristine left Texas on Friday last week never thinking her father's life would end so suddenly. Kristine is a special education teacher in Texas and her husband Chris is a volunteer caregiver for hospice. When Kristine arrived in San Diego it appeared Mike was improving, even if slowly. Debbie arrived and after a series of tests she was told the seriousness of Mike's illness.

Friday morning, Debbie, Kristine, Patti and Amanda were by Mike's side when he took his last breaths. There is little to prepare a child for the death of a parent. The feeling of loneliness and fear hit hard as the reality of Mike's passing hit home. The realization of never being able to call their dad to ask for advice or tell him of a first for his grandson or the break the news of an engagement, strikes a pain so great it cannot be expressed in words. The realization of a daughter her daddy is gone is overwhelming.

I was not close to my brother. We travelled different paths in life and as we wandered down these widely different roads we moved further and further away. I loved my brother and will miss him. I have many regrets and wished we had an opportunity to talk more before his sudden passing. Mike is in a better place and his quick passing meant he did not suffer long. His three wonderful girls have grown to be great young women and with the support of the family and friends will get that playful life back in time. Mike's wife Debbie will head back to Texas and her son will take leave from his military post to help her through this difficult time.

Remember how precious and fragile life can be. In the blink of an eye any one of us can be taken from this planet. Cherish every moment with family and do not put off talking to one another and telling them what they mean to you. Do not put off calling a loved one just to say hello. If there is a bridge that needs to be re-built; be the first to make that happen. If you don't, you may not get the chance.

Happy Thanksgiving to all and be safe. Hug your loved ones and tell them what they mean to you.

Re-arranging the deck chairs

The mayor presented his proposals for cuts and reductions today. The good news is there are no actual sworn police officers facing layoff (That's what they want us to think). That is about the end of the good news, if anyone could really call it good. I have been following the Twitter posts of those tweeting about the cuts and am flabbergasted at the range of comments.

• Ron Nehring;
  San Diego's Mayor Sanders (R) proposes closing $179M deficit w/ spending cuts, not taxes. It CAN be done.
  
• Andrew Donohue;
  His friends disagree. Emphasis from Sanders is that onetime cuts ok because deficit not structural but related to recession.
  
• Andrew Donohue;
  if SDPD equestrian unit eliminated, city COO says horses will be sold. But doesn't know whether it'll 2 a rendering facility.
  
• Kevin Faulconer; my initial thoughts on the Mayor's budget proposal are positive. (Press Release)
  
• SDPOA; San Diego Police Officers Association Response to Mayor Sanders' Proposed Budget Adjustments. (Read More)
  
• Scott Lewis/VOSD; But Kevin Faulconer says it's "a good start"? Lani Lutar: City Budget proposal: Mostly one-time tricks ... kicking the can down the road.
  
• Andrew Donohue; He's continuing to push problems into the future, like predecessors. Key difference: He promised, not only not 2 do this, but to fix this.
  
• SDNN; is writing about Sanders pushing mid-year cuts: Under Sanders' proposal, fire pits on city beaches would be eliminated.
  
• The Little Rube; hear my interview on KOGO, Chris Reed Show; about charter amendment for Competition and Transparency in City Contracting. (This is a must listen)
  

The police department has taken the brunt of the cuts being proposed by the mayor. The mayor's proposal calls for reduction of the Mounted Enforcement Unit. Under the mayor's plan, the Mounted Enforcement Unit will be eliminated and the equipment will be stored or auctioned and the animals will be auctioned or donated; the Harbor Patrol Unit will be eliminated and the ability to conduct proactive boating under the influence investigations will be greatly reduced as well is the ability to conduct boating collision investigations would be limited to shoreline investigations. Calls for service on the waterways will be transferred to the lifeguard service or the US Coast Guard.

Forty-one full time civilian positions will be eliminated. This will impact wait times for investigation support, fingerprint analysis, and other lab support, and will prolong the backlog of requests for assistance. Vacant dispatch positions will result in increased over time. Administrative job duties may either be delayed, canceled, or require sworn personnel to complete, depending on priorities or demand.

Twenty-one Investigative Aide positions will be eliminated. Responsibilities associated with these positions will be deferred to sworn police officers who will be assigned to handle the significant number of misdemeanor arrest cases that are normally assigned to the investigative aides.

Forty-eight Police Service Officer II positions will be eliminated. This will result in increased response times to priority 3 and 4 radio calls for service, which will now have to be responded to and investigated by sworn police officers, increasing the patrol officers out of service time, thereby increasing police response times in all categories. The wait time for citizens in need of accident, petty theft, grand theft, residential and commercial burglary investigations will increase substantially.

Twelve Police Code Compliance Officer Positions will be eliminated. The responsibilities associated with these positions will be delegated to sworn personnel and will create increased delays and wait times for citizens needing assistance and licensing and the many other tasks currently performed by these officers. These code compliance officers are responsible for inspecting and regulating businesses such as pawnshops, peep shows, nude entertainment, massage parlors, street vendors, tow companies, residential and commercial alarm companies, and many other police regulated businesses. The duties performed by these 12 officers generate upwards of $8 million in license fees and fines. Their elimination will simply require sworn police officers to complete these tasks to maintain order in these highly volatile business ventures.

One Hundred Thirty Three and Three Quarter (We still have ¾ of a sworn officer?) sworn vacant personnel positions, will be eliminated from the budget. The savings from these positions being eliminated have already been included in the vacancy savings that was already part of the calculation of the fiscal year 2011 deficit. The elimination of these positions will effectively shut down any and all recruiting of officers for the San Diego Police Department. This will in turn effectively eliminate the need for Academy personnel. The Police Department is currently woefully understaffed and struggles daily to meet the staffing needs necessary to respond to citizens calls for service. The danger faced by officers responding to calls is increasing as every day passes that the department continues to be understaffed. The fatigue and stress coupled with long work hours and constant vigilance to ensure their safety and the safety of others is taking its toll on every member of the department.

The proposed cuts to the canine unit are the most alarming. Under the mayor's proposal, a reduction of K-9 operations by 40% will leave twenty-four (24) K-9 officers to cover three patrol watches. The elimination of these 12 K-9 officers will further jeopardize the safety of officers and citizens. Those suspects who in the past submitted to arrest without physical altercation, simply because a K-9 officer was available and present on scene, will no longer be commonplace. The need for officers to enter canyons, fields and buildings in pursuit of dangerous suspects will now place the officers at a much greater risk for having to use force and the potential for injury will be dramatically increased. The incidence of claims due to injuries resulting from these physical confrontations will greatly reduce any cost savings sought by this proposal. I liken the proposals the mayor has presented to nothing more than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

The elimination of the K-9 officers; the Police Code Compliance Officers; the Police Service Officer II positions; and the Investigative Aide positions, is simply penny wise and pound foolish. One of the greatest tasks and responsibilities of government is the protection of its people. The shortsighted reductions proposed by the mayor will have a profound effect on the ability of officers to provide for the public's safety. Of even greater concern is the peril officers are now being placed unnecessarily so elected officials can gain political capital.

In the coming weeks, changes will no doubt take place, as politics enter the fray and a gaggle of cooks entered the kitchen. The mayor is going to receive pressure from his "fiscal task force" for these one-time cuts and continued shuffling of the deck chairs. There is nothing in the mayor's proposal that addresses the unfunded liability for the retirement system or retiree medical. There is nothing in the mayor's proposal to increase revenue to a level necessary to sustain basic core services in the city of San Diego. The mayor's proposal is a superficial and haphazard proposal for what the mayor terms an 18 month budget. We will be back at this again in very short order (LESS than 18 months).

We are supposed to be thankful that there were no sworn officers laid off. As I sit here writing this I do not feel thankful in the slightest. The bottom line is there are going to be citizens and officers alike injured and in some cases killed because of these reductions. Who will be held to answer?

The Little Rube aka Carl DeMaio Strikes Again

I am no doubt going to have to edit my language in this rant tonight. Tweet after tweet from this bombastic activist, posing as a city council member, I found myself swearing at the computer as I read this moron's press release; statement titled, "Competition and Transparency in City Contracting"; and last but not least the "Full Text of the Initiative" this self appointed savior of the city has presented to the City Clerk, to begin the process of collecting signatures to qualify an initiative for the ballot in November 2010. This ballot initiative is signed by the little rube as well as Bob Glaser. Bob Glaser, for those who do not know, is the goof who sued the city, when at a Charger game a woman ponies up next to him at the urinal trough and dropped her pants and urinates, embarrassing and traumatizing him. He is also a political consultant in San Diego.

The actions of the elected officials in this city are about as pathetic as any city in this nation. The unethical, secret, backdoor political actions are completely and totally out of control. The mayor and his "Fiscal Task Force" secretly planning and plotting the actions of the mayor and now the little rube; writing, signing and presenting for signatures a proposal for a ballot initiative. This is just another in a string of actions by this person that shows his true character and agenda. If he can't get his way at council, he will use the initiative process to further his agenda.

I find his actions, as a sitting council member, to be wholly and totally inappropriate. The initiative process was not designed to be used in this manner. As an elected politician, his first course of action should have been to calendar this issue for discussion with his colleagues on the city council. He owes a responsibility to the other members of the council, an opportunity for input and discussion. I know this may come as a surprise to this "Napoleonic Rube" but he is not the savior of all mankind and the City of San Diego.

The reality is the little rube is a phony and when specifics are required his arguments evaporate. His sound bites, taken alone, sound great and it is hard to find fault with many of his recommendations because of the brevity and ability to comingle facts and information. Begin to ask questions and demand specifics and things begin to fall apart quickly for the little rube. Who would argue it is appalling for city workers to retire with a retirement salary of 178% of their salary at age 50? Just one of the many facts the little rube puts out at every opportunity to the ignorant and misinformed taxpayer. I could go on for hours with the misinformation I have heard from this activist poser.

If the little rube is as smart as he purports to be, his task is a simple one; use his intelligence, fact and logic to garner the necessary votes to place his initiative on the ballot by convincing his council colleagues to agree with the need and voting among themselves to do just that. He has done none of this and has again jumped upon a stool and lambasted an apathetic mayor, disparaged his council colleagues and pounded upon his chest he is the know all, save all, savior of the City. I also want to point out, the initiative, in its current form, is inaccurate and cannot be enforced. There are repeated references to a "City Manager" for which we no longer have in the strong mayor form of government to fulfill the responsibilities as spelled out in this initiative.

The little rube's Press Release, notated at the end; "Paid for by San Diegans for Fair and Open City Contracting, FPPC # Pending 7185 Navajo Road, Suite P, San Diego 92119." Care to venture who these "San Diegans" are and what their connection is to the little rube? I have already marked my calendar to check with the registrar when filings are completed to identify contributors and supporters of this initiative. How much money is the little rube advancing this committee to further his agenda? My guess is the same players as usual. Time will tell.

Wake up San Diego; it's all smoke and mirrors; you are about to be taken for another ride. If you need to see a picture of our future, take a look at Detroit.

San Diego’s Secret Committee

I believe the "Task Force" put together by the mayor to be illegal. The more I read and understand of the actions taken by the "Mayor's Fiscal Task Force" I believe their actions and the actions of the mayor to be in violation of Government Code Section 54950, known as the "Brown Act." Reading from the draft report's first paragraph, given to the Voice of San Diego; "the group met weekly for four months to study the overall status of the City's fiscal position. The task force reviewed relevant City of San Diego data and records, (IBA Report #: 09-75, Personnel Expense Analysis, Per Capita Income Comparison, City Revenue Comparisons, Fiscal Year 2001-2015 Five-Year Financial Outlook), as well as similar data from other comparable municipalities. The task force interviewed members of the City's executive staff (including Jay Goldstone and his fiscal team). Also interviewed were the City's Independent Auditor and the Independent Budget Analyst - Andrea Tevlin - with her fiscal team. The task force met with representatives from the County of San Diego, various local constituents, including organized labor, non-profits, private business and citizens groups, and various subject matter experts" it is clear this is NOT an "Ad Hock Committee."

In enacting the "Brown Act," the legislature declared public commissions, boards and councils as well as other public agencies in the State exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It was the intent of the legislature, actions be taken openly and the deliberations be conducted openly (in public). The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to those who serve them. The people, in delegating authority do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.

The law requires the meetings of this group of civic individuals, brought together by the mayor, to be noticed and open to the public. The secrecy of this group and the actions undertaken on behalf of the mayor, demand the public's knowledge and ability to participate. As stated above, the legislature's intent was to ensure all actions on behalf of the public be done openly. I said in my last post the mayor would attempt to identify this task force as an "Ad Hock Committee" which is not governed by the Brown Act. After reading the draft, linked in a Voice of San Diego article on Friday, November 20, 2009, titled; "Bankruptcy an Option, Says Mayor's Fiscal Task Force" written by Liam Dillon, I believe the mayor and members of this "Task Force" have violated the Brown Act.

The recommendations contained in the "draft" document demand public discussion and input from members of the public. To do so after the fact has proven in the past to be futile and meaningless. The secret activities of the members of this "Task Force" and mayor bring into question the integrity of those involved, as well as the process. Their lack of open discussion and debate leaves one to question the process and outcomes. Reading the draft document leaves a lot of questions unanswered and presents questions of legality. The document is rife with assumptions that in some cases are incorrect and could have been vetted, if discussed in a public forum.

I would urge everyone to read the draft of the mayor's "Fiscal Task Force" report. It is imperative we all understand the issues and recommendations from this group; there is a clear agenda present in their writings. This group and the work they have presented cannot be ignored nor allowed to proceed unchecked. We must become an active participant in our future and demand to be included in the discussions and actions of this group, constituted by the mayor.

Open Government & Transparency

The mayor is at it again! On Tuesday, twelve prominent (if you consider "former" whatever's prominent) well connected, downtown money elite individuals, delivered a "draft" report to the mayor with solutions for fixing the city's budget deficit. The Voice of San Diego attempted to get a copy of the report from the mayor only to be told he did not have a copy to give them. To make this clear, the Voice of San Diego made a public records request for the report and was told the mayor's office did not keep a copy (I find this unbelievable).

In an article titled, "Private Task Force Delivers Report on Finances to Mayor" Liam Dillon of the Voice of San Diego, identified the members of the task force and attempted to shed light on the information being presented. In a prior post here, "The mayor's Legacy" I discussed the mayor's "Civic Leadership 2009-2012" an action team of "civic" leaders picked by the mayor to provide him policy suggestions and help push his agenda. I spoke about the various topics being discussed by these handpicked individuals, all behind closed doors and out of the public's view.

The names of those on the mayor's "Fiscal Task Force" are interesting to say the least. Vince Mudd, owner of Office Interiors; Neil Derrough, former Executive for CBS; Pete Garcia, former Executive with University Mechanical and Engineering Contractors; Mark Koop, Executive for Quan Investment; Marshall Merrifield, Founder of Clark Security Products; Bill Roper, former Executive of Verisign Inc; Dan Shea, Owner of Donovan's Steak & Chop House; Susan Snow, Executive with Odyssey Capital Group; Mark Stephens, Managing Partner with Ernst and Young; Bob Tjosvold, former Executive with Bank of America; Dick Vortman, former Executive with National Steel and Shipbuilding Co; and Barbara Warden, former San Diego City Council member.

Reading between the lines, it appears the mayor and his committee is at odds with who "owns" the report. Vince Mudd is the chairman of this Fiscal Task Force and said the report will be "comprehensive and free from any mayoral vetoes over its content." Sounds as if the mayor was not happy with the report and wanted changes. Mudd continued, "The concept of the report is looking at the fiscal situation as a whole from a real honest perspective, one that's not filtered in any way through a political lens." So help me mayor, the report looks at the fiscal situation of the city from a "real honest perspective" and because it was not in a manner that would be politically correct or in keeping with your agenda, you told this secret committee to take the report back?

Rachel Laing said the mayor created the "Civic Leadership Team" to push his (the mayor) agenda, not to promote the agendas of others. Laing is quoted in the Voice of San Diego article, "When you know it's going to change and you get your marching orders for change, then there is no reason to keep one." Even more light is being shined on this secret committee and their report. Laing is telling us clearly the mayor was not happy with the report and wanted changes. Laing continues, "If there's something in the report that's not accurate or not in keeping with the mayor's agenda then we don't want that out there." Trouble is brewing in Emerald City. Vince Mudd did not share Laing's views. Mudd said, "When the report comes out, I have a tremendously high level of confidence that the mayor is going to want to see what's in it, and there's going to be things in it that the mayor's not going to like it."

The bigger issue with all of this is the secret meetings and the public's business being kept from the public. The "Civic Leadership Team" put together by the mayor will no doubt be called an "ad hock committee" to avoid the need to follow the Brown Act. It is these exact types of actions that caused the California State Legislature to enact Government Code Section 54950-54962, known as the "Brown Act." In enacting this law, the legislature declared public commissions, boards and councils as well as other public agencies in the State exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It was the intent of the legislature, actions be taken openly and the deliberations be conducted openly (in public). The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to those who serve them. The people, in delegating authority do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.

The secrecy of these meetings, reports, discussions and actions, if not illegal are in the very least, appalling and destructive. "Open government and Transparency" is simply political double speak, lacking any semblance of reality relative to the mayor and his administration. The repeated lies, denials, and secrecy of the mayor have caused the council to keeps its distance and caused employee groups to distrust anything presented by him or his administration. Trust is easy to destroy and virtually impossible to restore. The mayor does not have time to restore the trust he never had. The only thing transparent in the mayor's administration is the mayor himself.

Fundamental Priority

Keegan Kyle of the Voice of San Diego wrote an article today (11-18-2009) titled, "Next on the Chopping Block: Public Safety." The issue addressed in the article was the discussion by city government of cutbacks to public safety. Keegan correctly identified why this is an important issue that people need pay closer attention to. Keegan goes on to explain why this is now being considered.

"There is no room to cut in either department," said Jeff Bowman, a former San Diego Fire chief. "I realize the city has budget problems, but the city has immense public safety problems." Bowman said public safety should be the fundamental priority of city government over other obligations like infrastructure, recreation or social services.(Taken from VOSD article)

Erik Bruvold, president of the Institute for Policy Research at National University, compared a trimmed-down public safety force to a less costly insurance policy. As the city invests less money in public safety services -- mostly police, rescue and fire -- its residents are going to receive less coverage when an unexpected event happens. (Taken from VOSD article)

We are being told things are not as bad as first thought; things are getting better; the stock market has rebounded; there will be no layoffs; and there will be no cuts to wages or benefits (guaranteed). The city is spending money like a drunken sailor and the police department moves forward with the promotional process for sergeant and lieutenant. Consultants were hired TODAY to begin evaluation of the downtown site for a new stadium for the Chargers; the land necessary to begin the expansion of the Convention Center was purchased this week; and work continues on the planning and development for a new city hall and downtown library.

Yesterday's revelation from the mayor's Financial Director the city's revenue projections are off by $10 million, pushing the projected deficit to $190 million does not sound BETTER to me. Things are getting better folks. Things are not as bad as first thought. I still have that land for sale and I know it's expected to be cloudy the next couple of nights, so if anyone wants to check the land out I am available.

Jeff Bowman, former chief of the San Diego Fire Department seems to be the only person willing to point out the obvious. His honest, reasoned comments are and always have been refreshing. Chief Bowman points out what the mayor and council seem to forget; government's fundamental priority is public safety. Infrastructure, social services, recreation, and other obligations, while important fall in line behind public safety. As Eric Bruvold points out, trimmed down public safety is akin to a less costly insurance policy and the less money invested in public safety will result in less coverage when an unexpected event happens. Keegan understands fully why cutting public safety should be avoided at all cost. Keegan writes, "Reductions in public safety funding could lead to slower response times for some neighborhoods and increase the risk of property damage and loss of life."

Is there anyone in this city willing to stand up and demand the city's politicians focus their priorities on those fundamental priorities that make sense? Public Safety; safe and passable streets; refuse collection; clean water; and adequate education for our children need be the priorities before a stadium; convention center expansion; new city hall or library; parks; pools; seals; fire pits; museums; operas; needle exchange; DARE; STAR; staffing in the mayor and council offices; or any of the other political social service programs provided by the city.

Glen Sparrow, professor emeritus at San Diego State University's School of Public Affairs was quoted in Kyle's Voice of San Diego article as saying, "I don't think that there is any good way that [the City Council] can come out of this. This is going to be a bloodbath." I could not agree more with Mr. Sparrow's assessment of the situation. The sad part is Sparrow is referring to the cuts to employees and services; I believe the bloodbath is going to be the human loss by way of serious injuries and the loss of life. Who is going to accept responsibility for this blood?

Land of Oz and the Emerald City

When I was growing up, one of my favorite movies was the Wizard of Oz. The first time I watched it was on a black and white television and I was scared out of my wits. The scarecrow; tin man; cowardly lion; Dorothy and Toto; Aunt Em and Uncle Henry; Wicked Witch of the West; the Wicked Witch of the North, Glenda; Munchkins; and The Wizard of Oz; are but a few of the characters in this fairy tale. Their journey to the Land of Oz and Emerald City turns into a quest to find a brain for the scarecrow, a heart for the tin man and courage for the lion and for Dorothy to get back to Kansas. Toto inadvertently outs the Wizard as a fraud and simply an ordinary man hiding behind a curtain, operating a giant console that makes him appear bigger than life.

I have watched this movie more times than I care to count or will ever admit to. I still enjoy the music and story and have found as I grow older, I often correlate the story line with life in what was once "America's Finest City." Can you place the scarecrow; maybe the tin man or the cowardly lion? When you think of the Wicked Witch of the West; what comes to mind? The Wizard of Oz; he is bigger than life and revered by the people until exposed as a phony; who could this be?

Many people believed the movie, written during the height of the U.S. Gold Standard monetary system, which in the end failed miserably and harmed everyone, depicted various players of that time in history. I liken the movie to the goings on in San Diego and the players who control the strings. Written in 1939, The Wizard of Oz is as relevant today as it was 70 years ago. The cast of Oz is interchangeable with the cast of so called leaders in San Diego. Pick the leader/politician and assign him/her a character from the movie and cringe at the reality of today.

Today seemed to bring more light related to the budget deficit we are facing next year. The mayor initially listed the deficit at $179 million and of late was attempting to persuade people that things were not as bad as first thought and with the growth of the Stock Market a smaller payment necessary to the Retirement System. I still have that land for sale. At the City Council today, it became apparent the mayor and staff are stone walling. Council member Frye got into an exchange with Nader Tirandazi, Financial Director for the mayor. During the exchange, Tirandazi let it slip revenue projections were off by $10 million which puts the deficit at closer to $190 million. The IBA put the deficit at $200 million some time ago and if history repeats, she will be closer to reality than the mayor.

So what does this all mean to us? In my estimation, anyone still saying things are not as bad as first thought are living in fantasy land (Emerald City) and doing a disservice to the people they impart this baloney. Things will not turn around until everyone acknowledges the depth of the problem we are staring down and begins to openly and honestly discuss them. Cheerleading from the sidelines and trying to get the crowd into the game will not put points on the board. A game plan, with a leader willing to risk, and players who know the play are what is required to move the ball and put points on the board. Cheering from the sidelines and telling the players on the bench things are getting better and not to worry is in no way productive nor helpful.

Someone needs to pull the curtain back and expose the wizard. Unlike Dorothy clicking her heals three times while saying "There's no place like home" to get back to Kansas, no amount of clicking heals while saying "Things are not as bad as thought" will not get us through this economic crisis. The words to "Over the Rainbow" are perfect for the dreamers in San Diego; "Somewhere, over the rainbow, way up high. There's a land that I heard of once in a lullaby. Somewhere, over the rainbow, skies are blue and the dreams that you dare to dream really do come true. Someday I'll wish upon a star and wake up where the clouds are far behind me. Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops. That's where you'll find me. Somewhere, over the rainbow, bluebirds fly. Birds fly over the rainbow, why then - oh, why can't I? If happy little bluebirds fly beyond the rainbow, why, oh, why can't I?

The Wizard of Oz is alive and well in Emerald City, or is it San Diego?

Message from Anonymous

The tenor of the comments to my latest BLOG posts seems to have taken on a much different tone of late. Frustration, anger, disgust and a bit of fear have begun to dominate. The focus of these words seems to be the chief officers occupying the 7^th floor. I have deliberately stayed away from bashing or joining in the discussions when it moves in that direction. I walk a fine line as I write at times between the protections afforded under the First Amendment to the Constitution and violating department policy. Taking on the department brass in a public forum has proven to be an unprotected right and has in the past subjected individuals to discipline.

I have had several discussions with various members of the 7^th Floor (for non members of the San Diego Police Department the 7^th floor is where the offices of the Chief's are situated) and have observed visible anger as they would discuss a particular BLOG post and the "Anonymous" poster. The common theme among them is their view of those persons who post comments as "Anonymous" they are "cowards; trouble makers; idiots; not to be taken serious; and meaningless" and they (chief officers) reject out of hand what is posted by those using this label.

To some degree I agree with this view; and again I said to some degree. I would prefer people select a user name when posting comments and stick with it. This accomplishes several things in my mind; allows for dialogue back and forth with me and others; provides a name, albeit a pseudo name for others to identify with; and brings the writer of the comments more respect. BUT, I completely understand why people chose to remain "Anonymous" and not provide any hint or glimmer of their identity. I will hold myself up as the poster child for why it is better at times to remain anonymous when writing things that are not politically correct or may offend the target of the rant.

This BLOG started out "Anonymous" and my intention was to keep it that way. I had not thought through the name I assigned to the BLOG and a couple of people called me out. They did this innocently and not with any malice to injure or create problems. After about 2 weeks I came out from behind the monitor and identified myself and took ownership of the contents of this BLOG. It was not long after I became known as the author I started hearing certain people (management) were upset with me. I was careful not to rant about the department or its members and stayed clear of the dialogue about the perceptions many people voiced about the members of the 7^th floor.

I have on several occasions been challenged for the content of my posts to this BLOG by members of management. These same individuals have expressed the perception my comments about the mayor, council and others in some way creates a climate that somehow makes their job more difficult. I was asked by three of those on the 7^th floor how the chief could promote me to lieutenant with my BLOG being so negative toward the mayor and council. I believed then and still believe my BLOG and the content of my posts should have had no part of the discussion relative to my abilities and qualification for promotion. I am also not so naive as to believe my BLOG would not become a topic during these discussions.

Back to my initial topic; "Message from Anonymous" and the implications of being identified or worse, ignored. Sometimes we reject out of hand a message from someone we do not like; have a low opinion of; or have a poor relationship with. We take the position, "consider the source" and close our minds to what it is this person may say or write. We all do this, some of us more often than others and some of us are not even discreet about the manner we take when rejecting the information. The problem is we miss important information by doing this.

I am aware the people on the 7^th floor are regular readers of this BLOG. I am also aware these same people take issue with the comments posted by "Anonymous." I believe the messages being put out by "Anonymous" are being missed and not being taken serious. The frustration with a perceived lack of support from the chief officers is a common theme among posters. The frustration is growing by the day and incidents mounting giving cause to the frustration turning to anger and disgust. Officers, detectives, sergeants and others grumble openly about their perception no one is willing to stand up and support them. They watch with anger and frustration press conferences where the public is told crime is down and all is well in San Diego with the police officers and the department. They see interviews where the lack of staffing is downplayed and the mayor discusses further reductions to wages, benefits and personnel. They speak out at the perception no one is standing up for them. They point north to Los Angeles PD and the chief standing on the steps of city hall challenging the council to provide additional personnel. They grumble about the perceived lack of communication from management and have grown weary of hearing bad news in the press when the belief is the information should be provided from within. Many feel they are being lied to and would prefer open, honest discussion from management about the budget and other issues facing them.

The frustration, anger, disgust and fear coming through the comments on my BLOG cannot be ignored or discounted because the person posting them wishes to remain anonymous. The messages need, at the least, to be viewed and discussed by the management of the police department. Individuals who may be the focus of the comments must take the comments in and determine if there is a cornel of truth and act accordingly. "Anonymous" has a message that must be taken seriously. Discount if you must the messenger, but take heed of the message and make this a better place tomorrow than it is today.

OneSD or Not; Just Volunteer?

So I have to wonder what the future holds for OneSD and the City of San Diego. Currently the program is being rolled out city wide; bills take forever to get paid (if at all) and the next roll out is to take on payroll. If you have not heard, Tom Flemming, the head of SDDPC has resigned and the owners of the program being used by OneSD have sued the City and SDDPC for breach of contract. The company Axon, has demanded the software and supporting documentation be returned and has asked for an injunction preventing the City from continuing to use the program. In a suit filed in US District Court, Axon is seeking $5.6 million for breach of contract.

I wrote about this debacle a while back in a post titled, "OneSD Joke is on YOU" where I talked about the cost over runs and the management of this program. The initial project coordinator, Rick Reynolds was fired and filed a law suit claiming wrongful termination. This entire program has been a joke from the beginning and with every turn more problems than a college calculus math book. There is no end in sight for the incompetence in leadership when it comes to the City of San Diego.

Is it any wonder the city is facing a deficit of between $179 and $200 million? There was another article in the Voice of San Diego talking about the proposed cut of 800 "vacant" positions within the city. The article, titled "Emptying the Notebook: City Vacancies" talks about the many "provisional employees" and the fact they are not on the books and do not show up anywhere. Just another example of the City cooking the books and playing games all the while cutting positions. Why do people come back to do this for less money than they were making when working? They do it because in most cases they were not prepared to leave when they did; need additional money because their retirement is NOT what all the pundits and naysayers put out; or they just are not ready to let go. The problem is a full time employee faces layoff because the city can show the layoff, save the benefit costs (including retirement costs), pay less salary and get the job done, thus giving the appearance to the taxpayer all is well and they see and feel no adverse affect.

There is virtually no way of tracking these positions and how many there are city wide. There are even those who are "volunteering" their services out of miss placed loyalty and a feeling of dedication to the public to make sure the job they once did is still being done. Police officers are violating their training every day answering calls alone when they should not; cutting corners when completing investigations; talking victims out of reporting crimes and not taking the time to arrest misdemeanor criminals or issuing traffic citations to remain clear for priority calls. There is virtually no pro-active police work being done today due to a lack of experience and adequate staffing. Responding to radio calls for service is the norm today and not much else. The telephone report unit takes at times two to three days or more to call victims back to take a report. In many instances the victims decline to follow through due to the delay in call back and or do not call back when asked to do so. Is it any wonder crime shows down?

There is word out that the city's financial condition is improving due to an uptick in the Stock Market. Officers are being promised there will be no cuts to wages or personnel. To all those who believe this poppycock I have some land I need to sell. I can show you the land any evening where the moon is hidden and the tide is low. It's a great piece of waterfront property where you could easily build a retirement home for not a lot of money.

Anyone saying there will be no further cuts to wages and benefits is either smoking wacky tabacky or has lost touch with the reality of life in San Diego. The stock market surge will have little if any affect on the budget for next year. The failure of housing prices to rebound; sales tax revenue is still at an all time low; the state is raising income tax by 10% further reducing spendable income; and revenue is still lagging behind projections; all of this means things are about as bad as they can be. The deficit is on the low side $179 million and on the high side over $200 million. The projections are for the deficits to be at or over $100 million for the next 5-7 years. The only way to cut these deficits is to reduce expenses and increase revenue. The mayor has steadfastly refused to discuss increases to revenue by way of increased fees or taxes. That leaves his idiocy of simply cutting. My projection is he will be gone before people realize what a joke he and his policies were and how much damage he truly has done.

The city continues to spend as if there is no problem. The city council told the mayor they were not going to reduce their office staff or spending. In an article in Sunday's Union Tribune, "Council ignoring mayor on cutbacks" Ben Hueso is quoted as saying, "The current structure reflects essential staff. Any reduction of personnel would make it nearly impossible to conduct effective committee ad council meetings." So if I understand Mr. Hueso correctly the city council believes they are operating with minimum staffing right now. Can someone get a call to these people on the city council and share with them the REAL numbers of police officers and clue them in the police department is and have been operating with WELL BELOW MINIMUM STAFFING for some time now? Let them know we need help; no matter what they have been told; we are in dire need of help and someone is going to get seriously hurt or killed if they do not do something NOW!

Welfare Queen; GED Uneducated Dolts; Cadillac Benefits

These are descriptors of you if you are a city employee; past or present. Do those words cause any reaction? Whose words are these? He goes on, "Well it seems the chickens have come home to roost. All your bitching and whining will do nothing but prove to the taxpayers you're are overpaid crybabies. With a $200M shortfall, you trough feeders will soon be earning what GED uneducated dolts ought to be paid." These words have been written many times by this same individual. He has a bent toward police officers and public employees.

"You only have yourselves to blame...that gold plated cadillac pension program has bankrupted the city. Retiring at age 50 is not sustainable and being gifts of more than you supposed earned for retirement is just another example of government workers sucking the life out of the those of us who have real jobs." The words are crude; written at a mostly 5^th grade level and sadly believed by a large, miss-informed public.

Many of our friends, neighbors and even family members have read the lies, twisting and gross exaggerations related to our retirement. The twisting of the General Retirement and Safety Retirement leads most people to believe we are all retiring millionaires at age 50 and never paid a dime as we earned our retirement. "Government workers feeding at the trough at the higher levels is a given but in San Diego its an art. Combine those reductins with a 12 percent pay cut then contribute 50% of the costs of your own retiree medical is whats fair to the taxpayrs who pay your bloated salary and cadillac benefits. Change the retirement age to 60 like the rest of us and get rid of the DB. You loose creditibilty when you want to raise taxes. Welfare queens always want more taxing more is not the answer. Taxpayer have been raped over the years by govment workers now all of you must come back to reality like the rest of us. These changes would reduce the unfunded retirement deficit substantially. But BK is the solution where we can take it all back and bring wages and benefits to a more reasonable rate."

The above written in red (copied exactly as he wrote it) was written by arguably the number one hater of public employees in San Diego; BILLY BOB HENRY. Who is Billy Bob Henry (BBH) and why does he hate city employees? BBH is the pseudo name he uses as he hides behind his computer and bashes employees; chides and harangues those who attempt to correct his inaccurate writings and refuses to identify himself. He purports to be an attorney. One of the many lies he has told. "You loose creditibilty" is not the writing of an individual who obtained a Juris Doctorate.

Over the years BBH has been a prolific poster to various BLOGS on the internet. He was a regular on the Voice of San Diego, always supporting Michael Aguirre and writing caustic, misleading and outright false diatribes about city workers and retirement benefits. BBH often used the pseudo name "Johnny Vegas" when positing on SignonSanDiego. Many theories as to who this coward is have floated here and there. He has said in the past he is a police academy graduate. He has said he does not have a POST certificate (Not even a Basic certificate) but insists he graduated from "a police academy in San Diego." OK, so he graduated but either failed or quit before he completed probation.

He claims to have earned a Juris Doctorate and is a practicing attorney. I will let you be the judge of this claim. The writings above are EXACTLY as he wrote them. I understand sometimes we write faster than we can type and mistakes happen. But the dribble above is so bad in structure, spelling and word use it cannot be explained away as typos or being in a hurry. Maybe a little too much alcohol on board; but the first one was posted on the 11^th at 0823 hours and the second on the 12^th at 0659 hours. Knowing his past posts, it is possible alcohol was in play, but I actually think he is just a "GED Uneducated Dolt" whose writing in phase training was so poor he failed out and had to go to work for Wackenhut.

I could go on about this poor excuse for a human, but you all get the picture. I want to ask you all to ignore his posts and not pay him any mind. The more attention he gets the worse he gets. I have made it a policy not to delete any posts from others and do not want to start now. He relishes in the attention and this will be the last time I will spend any space here talking about him. Please do the same.

This morning I was talking to another sergeant who told me of an incident yesterday at the Veteran's Day Parade the mayor attended. As the mayor rode along the parade route, a citizen yelled out to him, "Save the Chargers" to which the mayor yelled back, "I'm trying." A lady then yelled out, "Give the police officers a raise" to which the mayor gave a look of disgust, shook his head no and looked away. Priorities, priorities, priorities mayor; you need to get a clue. Convention Center Expansion; Downtown Library; City Hall Taj Mahal are all three high priority items for the mayor. The police department and its employees are not part of the mayor's priorities.

Yesterday the mayor held an impromptu press conference regarding the budget deficit and allowed the few reporters who attended to ask questions. During this exchange the mayor tipped his hand as to the numbers of layoffs to be expected. In a Voice of San Diego article, "Deficit Busting by Attrition" by Liam Dillon, he addressed the mayors comments, although cryptic (as usual) very telling. If eliminating 800 vacant positions is saving only $20 million dollars, what will it take to close the estimated $179 to $200 dollar deficit?

There is ALWAYS Hope; or is there?

There are those who view life as a glass half full and there are those who view the same glass as half empty. Whose right and which view is most realistic? We have been through some very trying times over the last few years. Hundreds of senior and experienced officers were forced to retire; some before they had planned, to preserved benefits earned over many years. Repeated attacks to benefits and reductions to wages and benefits, have taken their toll. Today we face down the possibility of further reductions to wages and benefits and an even more real possibility of losing officers and support staff to layoffs.

The question of if we will lose officers is really more of how many we will lose. The question of how much more the city will take is also looming in the minds of officers. The mayor has repeatedly said police and fire will not escape the cuts facing workers in the city. The deficit is closing in on $200 million and projected to be as much the following year. Simple math dictates serious and deep cuts will be necessary to close such a huge deficit. The portion being attributed to the police department is $74 million. The mayor is graciously giving the department a $24 million dollar credit for the 300 plus vacant positions currently on the books. The down side is these positions will be eliminated permanently from the budget, thus again decreasing our ability to effectively provide for the public's safety.

The proposals floating around the department of eliminating various units (Horse Patrol, Harbor Unit, Division Narcotics Teams & others) does nothing to eliminate spending and close the deficit. The only way to make up $50 million will be to eliminate positions (people) from the payroll and cut spending. The elimination of overtime, holidays, take home cars, training, equipment and maintenance will help some. But when 70+% of your budget are personnel costs, the only effective way to close such a large deficit is huge cuts in this area.

When will someone stand up and demand the mayor and council take a step back and first decide where their priorities are? The taxpayers have consistently listed public safety as the number one priority of their government. While I am a fan of the Arts, Libraries, Park and Recreation, after school programs, senior and homeless outreach and many of the other social programs provided by government, I am a firm believer these programs are not priorities. I am not advocating the elimination of any of these programs either. But I do believe the programs need to be self sufficient and sustained by those who use them.

The mayor and councils refusal to seek increases to income is not a sustainable or realistic position today. They need to suggest and then support increases to the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT), a sales tax increase to support public safety and develop a ballot initiative to begin charging for refuse collection in the city. The fees for use of park and recreation facilities need to be more in line with the cost of the use as well as after school programs and the Arts. More assistance needs to be sought for adult/senior and homeless programs. Federal dollars need to be sought out and a more collaborative effort with the county and state. This is ONLY a beginning and will do little to close this year's deficit.

The department needs to re-structure from the top down. The department is top heavy with redundant responsibilities being shared and duplicated. The elimination of two chief's positions, the legal advisor, four captains, ten lieutenants and as many as thirty sergeants are possible. The department also needs to determine priorities. Taking a page from the taxpayers; what is important to them? What is it they expect of us? What are their true priorities? I am a firm believer if the right questions are asked of the right people we will understand the priorities of the people we serve. I do not mean listening to the loudest yellers or the agenda driven small groups of people who seem to push their way into the spotlight.

I am sure to have pissed off some chief's, captains, lieutenants and sergeants, not to mention the chief's legal advisor. In an effort to step out of the box and make changes that are meaningful and have the least impact on providing the services we do, I have thrown some things out to begin a process of changing the way we think. Do we really need six chiefs? Do we really need a captain for every division? Do we honestly need two and three lieutenants in divisions? If we re-structured our field units and teams could we not eliminate a number of sergeant positions? The trade off is the responsibility for leading this department is driven lower and closer to where the work is actually done. Lieutenants would take on many of the responsibilities of the Captain and the sergeants would take on many of the responsibilities of the lieutenants and some of the political activities we have become involve in will have to be eliminated. Getting back to the basics of police work and leaving the social work and politics of seals and other issues to others is a good first start.

To reach $50 million in savings/cuts there is going to be pain. I said in a prior post we are going to be made the bad guy when we refuse to accept additional wage cuts and fight further reductions to benefits. The threats of large layoffs will loom and the department will have to make some tough decisions. There will be coveted assignments eliminated and people moved to priority positions. Before any of this takes place we first need to know what the priorities are from the taxpaying public. I am a taxpayer and am tired of listening to a mayor and council tell me what my priorities are. We as a department are not in a position to tell those we serve what their priority should be. Politics needs to be removed from the equation and honest assessments of crime and trends need to be presented. That does not mean we use the flawed FBI statistics to paint a picture of everything is great and crime is down. We all know better and are tired of hearing this.

There is always hope things will get better and we will come out of this unscathed. I am the type of person who looks at the glass as still having something to offer and yet room for more. I am the type of person who would rather be told honestly of the perils of the future than listen to someone blow smoke. What is going on today demands honest, frank discussion and leaders willing to confront misinformation and publicly support their employees. To do otherwise is a failure and disservice to those who count on this leadership and support. The reality of today is the outlook for the future is bleak and hope for a turnaround anytime soon is not good.

Changing Values

Lou Holtz who once coached Notre Dame used the acronym, "W.I.N." or "What's Important Now" to motivate his players and keep their focus on winning. Holtz wanted his players to ask themselves "What's Important Now" at least 35 times a day. When we first joined the police department we each had a set of values and an idea of what was important to us at that time. Ask yourself; "What's Important Now."

While you think of the thoughts that popped into your mind to this short but very important phrase; has the answer changed since you first put on that badge? Family; compassion; friends; honesty; integrity; doing what is right; getting promoted; securing a special assignment; your partner. Many of us came into law enforcement with the idea and desire of helping people. We developed a level of integrity and honesty as we matured and became adults. Our values were shaped and what was important in life reflected our values. What's Important Now?

We became police officers and began to see a different world. We experienced the human race at its extreme and our values began to change. The changes for some were drastic and not always for the better. Some of us maintained our core values; and what was important when we became police officers, changed very little. Why did some of our values change more than others? Why is it that what was important when we joined the world of law enforcement, for some, was no longer on the radar of importance? Could it be the "What's Important Now" changed?

As we gained experience and begin to shape our careers, we either maintained our values or we began to compromise them to meet our desire for advancement or "What's Important Now." We began to do and say things that reflected "What's Important Now;" and this in some cases began to challenge the values once held. Some failed to conform and challenged the changing values of others. These individuals became known as "trouble makers" or "malcontents" or "disgruntled" for challenging the status quo of those whose values changed. So the question remains, "What's Important Now?"

The higher the level of decision maker, the less that decision over time, appeared to be value based. The further removed from the decision makers rank or position one stood, the more he or she seemed to question or challenge these decisions. Compromising ones values came easy for some and never occurred to others. "What's Important Now" seemed to change the values of some and not for the better. Getting promoted began to be the, "What's Important Now."

The process has begun anew for the next round of promotions. The values of those participating will be tested as the process plays itself out. I challenge each of the candidates to ask yourself "What's Important Now" as you move through the process. I challenge you to first evaluate your values and rank them in importance. Write them down and keep them fresh in mind as you start playing the game. Changing or compromising ones values so you can grab that carrot held just out of reach is not what success is about.

We need great leaders whose decisions are driven by solid values. In today's climate, honesty, integrity and compassion are the values most important for a leader to possess. If a leader can act and make decisions that are driven by honesty and integrity and be compassionate in doing so, he or she has succeeded. We have enough leaders whose decisions are not value based. Your challenge will be to challenge the status quo and maintain your values as you ask yourself, "What's Important Now."

YOU are going to be the BAD GUY

In the next few days the mayor will announce proposed cuts in city services to close a $179 to $200 million deficit. The mayor will also tout new indicators of lower crime and a safe city. Various chief officers are doing all they can by spreading the news there is hope in the air. The stock market has rebounded and the mayor is telling everyone the payment to SDCERS is going to be less than expected. The joy in their voices is unmistakable and the glee in their eyes is akin to a young child coming around the corner Christmas morning to see a new bike under the tree. In the next couple of weeks the city and SDPOA will begin the process of "negotiations" for a new contract. History does not offer even a glimmer of hope of being treated fairly by this mayor. Yet there are those who want all of us to believe otherwise. I have a few predictions.

CUTS are in your future for sure! There will be reductions in benefits and cuts to wages. The mayor will seek to reduce overtime by demanding the elimination of holidays from our contract. There will be other demands made by the mayor in an attempt to reduce the overtime paid to police officers. The mayor will continue his push to reduce or eliminate retirement benefits and further the divide between police officers of this city and citizens. The mayor has an agenda and he could give a damn about fairness, equity or the men and women who protect and serve.

The chief officers are doing all they can to rally the troops and provide a measure of hope. The chief, always the cheerleader, continues to lead the cheer section as the rest of us watch time tick down on the clock. The score is so lopsided it would take a miracle to even get a tie at this point. But let's take a look at reality for a few minutes and recognize what we are up against. Before I do this, I want to share a sentiment I hear every day from officers and supervisors alike throughout the department. I innocently asked a detective if they were studying for the sergeant's test. The initial reply from this detective, "Trying, but not nearly as much as I want; no freaking time. I probably won't even take it, what's the point?" The frustration is clear and the drive obviously gone from an employee who has always had a very positive and upbeat attitude.

I pried a bit more and offered encouragement and talked about the positives of good people moving to the supervisor ranks. His reply was one that struck me as a systemic disease killing this once great organization from within. "I know. But honestly I really don't care because the drive has been lost during the last 5 years. You have to believe in the system, believe in the company, believe in what you are selling, and I don't believe anymore. The 7th floor could absolutely care less about their officer's and their people. If they did they would come out publicly and challenge the wrongs that are being said, challenge the city council, challenge the 'mayor' and essentially publicly back their officers. I, we, haven't heard a peep out of these people. I see it everyday around here and it's sickening to watch a once great department whittled down to a shell. Bitter? Maybe, but mostly I'm just disgusted."

The comments by this detective are reflective of what I have heard for the past several years from officers and supervisors alike. These sentiments seem to be getting stronger and deeper in the organization and have created a cadre of employees whose mantra seems to be "fuck-it; who cares." The ability to keep a happy face; positive attitude; and not allow reality to get in the way of the cheering from above has all but come to an end. People are fed up with the politics of smoke and mirrors and listening to a mayor and chief tell the public crime is down and all is well. They are tired of being made to feel as if they are the reason for the ills of the city and the constant haranguing in the press with no support from the leaders of this department. Loyalty is not a one way street and it appears many have reached the end of the pavement and are no longer willing to travel the bumpy road ahead.

The title of this rant is "You are going to be the BAD GUY" for a reason. The views in this rant are mine alone and developed while standing on the sidewalk, watching the masses chase the carrot of hope. As negotiations begin with the city, the tables have been set and cards dealt from a stacked deck long ago. Facing a deficit of $179 to $200 million dollars will require reductions across the board. The mayor is telling the chief; who is telling employees; the deficit will be less than expected because the stock market has rebounded. I will concede the stock market has made some upward movement. The cuts are going to be deep and to say otherwise is not facing reality. As with everything the mayor has done during his years in office; it is all in how it is presented.

The reductions necessary to close the deficit will require, as I said above, wage and benefit cuts and the elimination of employees. The catch will be how many employees need to be eliminated to meet the demands of the mayor to close the deficit. Where we become the "BAD GUY" is the "either / or" public demands the mayor will employ as negotiations stall. The mayor will publicly demand these wage and benefit cuts, "OR" he will have to lay off a large number of officers. So, you and I become the "BAD GUY" if we say NO. But before that happens, you can count on a heavy campaign, at the mayor's direction, from the 7^th floor for all of us to accept the wage and benefit cuts so the department does not lose another officer.

The carrot is being dangled in front of those who want to promote. The carrot is already being held in front of those who took Saturday's promotional exams. The sixty or so sergeants who took the lieutenants test will all be competing for maybe 2 or 3 spots? The carrot is the promotion; the fact it will always be held just out of reach will not matter to those who hold out hope for a small bite. The one hundred and fifty or so who took the sergeant's test will chase the same carrot. That carrot keeps over 200 employees volunteering for special assignments and doing more for less in hopes of getting hold of that cherished carrot. The sad part; all this is a complete and total waste of money, to keep people "hoping" they will be the one who gets the carrot.

The next five years will see exponential increases in crime; officer injuries; civil lawsuits against officers and the city; officers facing bankruptcy and foreclosures; and citizen complaints. The department will struggle to hire and retain officers and we will be made the "BAD GUY."

 

The mayor’s “Legacy”

The doors are closed, the blinds turned down, music plays softly inside to muffle the sounds of deals being worked out behind those locked and secured doors. "Fiscal sustainability; water reliability; economic development; and community legacy projects" are but a few of topics being discussed outside of the eyes and ears of the taxpayer/voter. The list of "civic" leaders, movers and shakers and connected downtown money elite, grace the hidden "Action Teams" the mayor has secretly put together. To those of us who have lived through years of "decision by committee" where nothing ever got done when the mayor was pretending to be chief, it is now becoming obvious why the city is in such disarray.

The "Mayor's Civic Leadership 2009-2012" reads like the high society list of San Diego's rich and famous. The list is stacked with the well connected, downtown elite of who's who. Now I know I don't read every council agenda since leaving the SDPOA Board but I do stay up on the goings on and pay close enough attention I would have seen the approval of these individuals to the various committees enacted by the mayor. The question begs to be asked, "Was proper vetting done of the individuals and various committees put in place by the mayor?"

1. "Fiscal Sustainability"
   
2. "Water Reliability"
   
3. "Economic Development"
   
4. "Community Legacy Projects"
   
   1. Convention Center Expansion
      
   2. Civic Center Project
      
   3. Airport Expansion
      
   4. New Central Library
      
   5. Regional Charger Stadium
      
   6. Charter Reform
      

These are but a few of the topics being discussed and planned behind closed doors at the mayor's bequest. This "Kitchen Cabinet" as it has been referred, was first discovered back in August. John R. Lamb of The City Beat wrote an article, "A Sanders kitchen cabinet? An insider's dream team is forming to advise the mayor" back on August 25. In the article Bill Geppert, Cox cable honcho and Chairman of the Economic Development Corporation, said of the Civic Leadership Team; "I think the idea is to try to identify and organize people who are absolutely passionate about a particular project or area." "Then, in some cases, these people can bring their expertise and be credible supporters when they speak to the City Council or the community."

The mayor's Civic Leadership Team sprang into action when the City Council's "Land Use and Housing Committee" was taking up discussion related to a new policy to require the City Council to sign off on major downtown hotel projects. The members of the committee came to the mayor's aid after Geppert sent an e-mail out to members asking them to attend a meeting or get a message to the Committee members to help "rebuff an ill-advised ploy by organized labor." At the end of the article Geppert is boasting in the e-mail, "Our team had a great success last week with the Civic Center vote."

Is it a wonder why the priorities of the mayor are clearly focused on his legacy and helping out his financial supporters? The picture is becoming more and more clearer every day, as the film curls from around the edges of the glass and glimpses of the inner workings of a man possessed are exposed. The pattern of "Decision by Committee" is ever present and being kept from public view. The arena the mayor occupies does not allow for such back room discussion and deal making. The public's business is required to be conducted in public. The public's right to know is being trounced upon by the unscrupulous actions of a self centered egotist.

Where is the ethics commission and why is this being allowed in San Diego? Why have the actions of the mayor been ignored and others simply accepting of his politics? The city is headed to ruin and no one seems to care. Wake up San Diego and demand the priorities of the mayor reflect YOUR PRIORITIES.

Prediction; Jim Barrett Becomes Fall Guy

Who can tell me who Jim Barrett is? His name has been in the news of late and many of his comments have been at odds with the mayor. He has spoken before city council several times. He is a city employee. Have you come up with who he is yet? OK, here is some help; "Sanders: We're Studying Water Budgets."

Mr. Barrett is the Director of the City of San Diego's Water Department and for the past several months has been in the news as he attempts to carry out yet another of the mayor's failed and flawed polities. Back in March of this year as the city struggled to implement a plan for reducing water consumption, Barrett's assistant, Alex Ruiz made some incorrect statements about a plan being used in Irvine to penalize those who used excessive amounts of water. Ruiz said the Irvine program would be impractical to implement in San Diego and said Irvine took 8-12 years to refine their program for 90,000 customers and San Diego was facing 240,000 accounts and only four months to implement a program. In short order, the Voice of San Diego wrote a story disputing these comments, "A Water Plan That Worked—And The City Ignored."

The VOSD showed this assertion by the city's water department to not be accurate and painted a picture of a city department unwilling to take a firm stand for political reasons. The VOSD wrote, "Michael Shames, executive director of the Utility Consumers' Action Network, a utility watchdog, said San Diego's resistance to the Irvine Ranch approach is likely political. Mayor Sanders and Water Department officials likely fear that inefficient customers who fall into more expensive billing tiers "could be used to fan some political fires against the proposal," Shames said in an e-mail. "I believe it is more of a political calculation than a legal or ratemaking justification."

It appears three weeks ago, Jim Barrett again told the City Council that the city was not evaluating a water rate structure like the one used in the Irvine Ranch Water District. Lani Lutar stepped forward and said the city's Water Department wasn't being straightforward about its intentions to consider a water-rate structure designed to reward conservation and penalize excessive use. In another article in the VOSD on October 5, 2009, Rob Davis wrote, "Lutar said Alex Ruiz, the Water Department's deputy director, and Rod Greek, another water official, led business leaders, large water users and lobbyists to believe that the city was seriously pursuing the Irvine Ranch model. Lutar said at meetings in August and September, the water officials indicated they were open to the idea and having a consultant study it." Lutar was clearly upset and frustrated with the mayor when she said she felt "insulted that Sanders' office had asked for input it didn't seem to want."

If history repeats itself and the mayor acts as he always has in the past, Jim Barrett will be looking for a job before Thanksgiving. Politics being what they are in this city, the mayor will need a fall guy to provide cover for yet another failed policy and glaring indication of the right hand not being attached to the body and thus not knowing what the rest of the body is doing. Alex Roth, another of the many spinmeister's in the mayor's office, wrote a memo in an attempt to explain the mayor's position. I personally think the memo failed in that attempt.

While all of this is going on there was a very important discussion on Municipal Bankruptcy taking place last Thursday morning at a breakfast conference of sorts. The topic being discussed was an attempt to help people understand what a municipal bankruptcy proceeding would entail. The panelists were: Retired Judge John Ryan, who oversaw Orange County's 1994 bankruptcy case; Margaret Mann, an attorney at Sheppard Mullin; and Ali Mohdehi, a lawyer from Baker McKinzie. The program was moderated by April Boling and hosted by the San Diego Taxpayers Association.

Noticeably absent from the breakfast was the mayor and his staff. I get he does not want to be seen in public at a function discussing municipal bankruptcy, but to not at least have someone from his office in attendance to hear the discussion is mystifying. Is the mayor's head buried so deep in the sand he can't break the suction and free himself to at least make a decision to have a staffer attend? Discussions of this magnitude demand city leaders understand all the nuances of such a decision and to gage public opinion and concern. I am not an advocate for bankruptcy and believe the problems staring the city down at the moment are fixable. They are not though going to go away without decisive action on many fronts. The mayors simple action plan of cut, cut, cut, and cut some more, is not the answer and is simply exasperating the problems.

Jim Barrett may be the lucky one in all of this. He will be made the scapegoat and forced to find another job.

San Diego; America’s Most Dangerous Destination

A recent memorandum from Nader Tirandazi, Financial Management Director, dated October 19, 2009, talked about current vacancies within the City of San Diego. Tirandazi was responding to a City Council request to provide a list of current vacancies in the City by department. The memorandum detailed 832 vacancies city wide with 320 of these vacancies in the Police Department and 106 in the Fire Department. The memorandum does not tell the whole story.

The ability of officers to protect citizens has been impacted by the policies of the city council, mayor and last year's imposed contract. The exodus of officers, almost all of them with over 25 years of experience and the inability of the department to retain younger officers, has created one of this nation's most dangerous destinations. The mayor and others will paint a picture of all's well and tell people a larger number of officers does not equate to safer streets. They will boast of lower crime statistics and a safe city while explaining the exodus of almost 300 officers in one year. There is much they are not telling citizens.

The actual numbers of officers available to protect citizens have shrunk every year since the 1990's. There are currently 1,862 sworn police officers, which includes all ranks, to police the City of San Diego. This is 262.75 short of budgeted strength (Someone help me understand the .75 officer). Of these 1,862 sworn officers, 61 of them are recruits, who may be enthusiastic, but are of no help when it comes to providing police protection to our citizens. An additional 64 of these sworn members of the department are managers (Lieutenants, Captains, and Chiefs) who do not participate in the protection of citizens and do not answer radio calls or respond to emergencies. There is an additional 126 sworn officers who are unavailable for service for a variety of reasons (Industrial Leave, Workers Comp, Military Leave, Long Term Disability, Light Duty to name a few). This leaves 1,611 sworn officers from a budgeted strength of 2,124.75, available to provide for the public's safety. A far cry from the numbers provided to taxpayers by the mayor and others.

The population of the city of San Diego is 1.3 million people; with 470,000 households; living in a land area of 324 square miles. Between 2000 and 2008 the population of San Diego grew 9% from 1,223,000 people to 1,337,000 while at the same time our police department shrunk in size. In 2006, the mayor commissioned a pay and benefit comparison report where he declared he wanted to "Stem the loss of officers" who were leaving in droves for other agencies offering better pay and benefits. In the report the mayor boasts of the city being the "4^th safest city in America" citing a drop in overall crime of 2.3% for the first ten months of the year. The report, conducted by Buck Consultants, and presented December 19, 2006, showed the police department had 1,895 active sworn personnel (Today 1,862). Of those, 153 are on some kind of leave for a total of available sworn personnel of 1,742 (Today 1,611). The Department was budgeted for 2,089 officers in 2006 (Today 2,125.75). 683 officers have left the department since 2003 and only 390 have been hired.

In July of 2006, the mayor and police chief announced the "City's Comprehensive Police Recruitment and Retention Plan" in which the mayor called the loss of experienced police officers "a crisis for our community." On page 4 of this document, an e-mail the mayor sent police officers was re-produced. The diatribe has proven to be simply words, to buy him time to continue his failed policies. The entire "Plan" as you will, was and continues to be nothing more than empty words on a piece of paper. The pay and benefit study, as well as the recruitment and retention plan, were used as pacifiers to appease officers contemplating leaving.

In 2008, the RAND Corporation conducted a study of the San Diego Police Department's hiring and retention of officers. The study focused on recruiting and offered suggestions for reaching the budgeted staffing level of 2,125.75 sworn officers. After only hiring a record three (3) officers in 2003 and 2004; a lofty goal of hiring fifty (50) recruits for each academy class was proposed in hopes of reaching budgeted levels. It became clear, with the recent exodus of officers in 2009; this goal was not going to be realized any time soon. The ability to safely police a city the size of San Diego with roughly 1,000 patrol officers, is akin to asking our SRT Unit to travel to Tijuana and handle police duties there while their officers come to San Diego for the training the mayor has so generously offered. It may work for a short period of time but eventually someone is going to die.

The mayor is now demanding a reduction of $74 million dollars from the police department's budget for next year. If you eliminate the positions currently vacant (262.75) the result will be a $32 million dollar savings. The mayor is only willing to recognize a $24 million dollar savings because he does not view benefits as being part of the equation. This is another example of number and cost manipulation by the city's administration. So where do you cut $50 million dollars from a department budget that is already operating with insufficient resources? The elimination of personnel is the fasted way to coming up with this money. There is always the elimination of overtime; elimination of holidays; reduction of benefits; wage reductions; elimination or reduction of medical insurance; or the demotion of supervisors at all ranks that will still leave the need to eliminate positions.

How many people would need to be eliminated to make up the $50 million dollars? My calculations indicate somewhere between 320 and 360 employees (Sworn and non-sworn). So those individuals in the academy; field training; POI's and even a few POII's will be staring down the possibility of losing their jobs. Realistic? Possible.

Today the San Diego Police Department has fewer resources on which to draw to recruit and retain officers and to protect our citizens. Yet our responsibilities are expanding to include homeland security, immigration, cybercrime, and human trafficking, and there is even an increase of traditional duties in all areas of our communities that have rising levels of crime and violence. All of this is being made even more difficult because of the policies of the mayor and city council. The taxpayers have clearly placed public safety as their number one priority, yet the mayor and council have not. They have used smoke and mirrors to cover their actions by putting out twisted and in some cases false statistics related to crime. Their glowing words have painted a picture full of lies and deception.

It is time the mayor and city council stop playing politics and start making public safety their number one priority. This will require the chief to stand up and provide realistic and honest crime statistics and the current status of the police department's ability to provide adequate police services to this community. The current level of staffing has created an environment in San Diego that is dangerous for citizens and police officers alike. The lack of sufficient officers; coupled with the lack of experience; has already resulted in an increase of 113% in preventable traffic accidents by police officers. I could go on about the issues facing the police department as a result of the exodus of officers and the lack of experience in the ranks. One of the most telling numbers not talked about is that of the Police Officer One. Currently there are 252 POI's or one third of our uniformed officers providing police services. This is clearly an un-acceptable number and a recipe for disaster.

If you think it acceptable for a city the size of San Diego to have fewer than 120 uniformed police officers available from midnight to seven in the morning; 150 uniformed police officers available between five pm and midnight, patrolling your communities providing for your safety, you are living in the right city.