Headed to Yosemite to Hike Half Dome

I'm finishing up my packing and putting things in order to head off early tomorrow morning (4 a.m.) for Yosemite. The plan is to climb Half Dome on Friday and return to San Diego on Sunday. I have this extreme fear of heights, so getting to the top of that rock may be a feat all to itself. Getting back down??? If you never see another post on here you will know why.

In the last few days the e-mails and telephone calls with questions have increased and I will try to capture the essence of the concerns most have had. I would suggest the questions you have related to DROP, Retiree Medical, DROP Interest, and the current contract; call a Board Member for the SDPOA. I do not have the answers to most of your questions. The answers I have offered come from my understanding of the Charter, MMBA and what I have gleaned from the information put out as of today by the SDPOA Board. I am still confused, as it appears many of you are what changes if any came from discussions on Thursday, May 21, 2009, between the SDPOA and City.

The message coming from Board Members seems to be very clear. Those Board members who have discussed the Retiree Medical have all said there is little hope anything will change in the foreseeable future and if you are in DROP and concerned with the loss of the COLA for your medical, you need to speak to your financial advisor NOW and make a decision based on your specific needs and desires. You need to do what is right for you!!!! The pre-1986 people who have no Medicare; there is also little if any hope the City is going to make accommodations or changes to the LBFO and we are "SOL" as they say.

Mike Conger is working on preparing litigation to address the DROP issues; 55 age entry; DROP interest and elimination of the benefit from Chiefs and Captains. He is also working on researching the Retiree Medical issues. The word from those Board members who are speaking is this is a tough issue and will take longer to work through. So if you are waiting for something to come of this litigation, you may be standing at the door waiting for a while. Do not gamble with your future if you do not have Medicare or some other form of insurance to sustain you through your golden years.

The good news is the Voice of San Diego has picked up on the shenanigans of the mayor and his negotiations team. They are asking the right questions and pointing out the underhanded, unethical and illegal manner the mayor and his henchmen have comported themselves. There is more to come and we can all hope this will in some way put the mayor in check and force him to pay attention to the law and stop with his illegal behavior (Don't hold your breath; but we can all hope). As this all plays out you will see a lot of finger pointing and shifting of blame in the mayor's office. Someone's head is going to roll; any bets on who will be first? Lunch on me at the "Green Fly" for the person who identifies who in the mayor's circle will be first to lose their job as the mayor throws his patsy under the bus.

To all of you who are still on the fence and trying to make a decision; you need to get your paperwork together if you are going to roll your annual leave over. The cut-off date for this to happen is, June 12^th. Contact payroll NOW to get the specifics of what you need to do and by when. Do not get caught holding a large bag of cash only to have to give it over to the IRS because you procrastinated and could not take advantage of this option. Call SDCERS and get down there and figure out what it means if you stay and if you go. Get ALL the information you can to make an educated and intelligent decision based on what is best for YOU. Time is ticking folks!!!!

I just received a message from the mayor via Twitter; "CASupremeCt decided some can take away certain rights from others. Neither justice nor equality were on the court's agenda today #prop8" (I love following the mayor) without getting into a discussion either way related to this issue; does anyone see the contradiction here? If Lisa were a police officer, would the mayor be as eager to violate the law and eliminate, reduce or otherwise change vested benefits she would stand to receive as part of her employment? Another raw example of the mayor's penchant for picking and choosing what law is acceptable or important. His attitude is clear and his actions speak to his ethical digressions. It is the little things.

I will be checking in, off and on, but will not post to this BLOG again until Sunday, May 31, 2009. I will be lounging under the large pines and oaks in Yosemite, reading, listening to music and sipping cold beverages. I hope to hike daily, do some writing and photography; then the climb of Half Dome. I am looking forward to this much needed break and will finalize my decision; do I stay or do I go? We shall see. Until Sunday; Keep the faith, be safe and enjoy family and friends.

Memorial Day Muse

A day to remember those who have given their lives for our freedom.... Thank You!!!!

If you have not heard; the mayor is going to Sacramento on Tuesday (May 26, 2009), on what is being called a "high-profile lobbying trip" to "protest" the possibility the Governor will divert 8% of revenue from the City, to the State. Kind of like the pot calling the kettle, black? This guy is unbelievable!!! He thinks nothing of taking 6% from his employees; eliminating and cutting benefits; at the same time he begins taking his full salary as well as his retirement payment. He is going to Sacramento to "protest possible confiscation of local government money." I wish him well. Hope he has better luck challenging the take away than we did!!!

Did you hear about the inaugural "Harvey Milk Diversity Breakfast" held at the Holiday Inn at the Bay, the other day? The event was co-chaired by Robert Gleason and Nicole Ramirez. Nicole is a very active member of the Gay and Lesbian community and well known for his (yes, his) hair, makeup and fabulous gowns. Catch Nicole in most settings and he will be wearing a suit and tie. The mayor was the emcee for the event and was heard making what can only be described as an "Unbelievable" and "Completely Inappropriate" comment to Nicole Ramirez. The mayor is standing on the stage with his daughter, Lisa. The mayor makes the following statement; "I know this makes her nervous. She doesn't know if I'll cry, crack an inappropriate joke or throw the F-bomb out there." Then he says this to Nicole Ramirez; "I think this is the first time I've shared a stage with Nicole; but I believe we did share a patrol car once, when I was a cop. I was the chauffeur. Nicole was in the back seat wearing silver bracelets." Think there might be hell to pay for anyone else who may make such a comment? I'm no prude, but what on earth was he thinking? That was a rhetorical question; the mayor seldom thinks about his actions or the consequences. Why should he; there are no consequences as evidenced by the multitude of ethical and illegal actions he and his staff has been involved in of late.

The Padres won again today in 10 innings. They beat the Diamondbacks 9-7, for their 10^th win in a row. Go Padres!!!

MORE LIES FROM THE mayor’s OFFICE

I love Twitter!!! I am sitting on the couch switching between basketball playoffs and the Sunday Night Baseball game, when my Blackberry pings a message from Twitter. I look at the message that says, "VoiceofSanDiego: Bombshell Dropped on Labor Plan, Putting Savings in Peril: Changes to DROP." I'm thinking to myself, what now? I click on the link and start to read the article when I can feel my blood pressure start to spike. I am thinking all types of things that I can't write in these pages as I read the words of Jay Goldstone. I have had to edit and then re-edit this post to remove the profane language and extremely caustic manner I used to address the latest lies to come out of the mayor's office by way of Goldstone. If you have not had an opportunity to read the article by Rani Gupta in the Voice of San Diego; "Bombshell Dropped on Labor Plan, Putting Savings in Peril" it is a must read. It has taken a while, but it appears Voice of San Diego and Gupta have finally started seeing what we all know; if the mayor or one of his minion's are speaking; they are NOT TELLING YOU THE TRUTH!!!!

Case in point; the latest round of labor negotiations and the mayor's actions related to the changes to DROP and the blatant lies before, during and now after the fact. The mayor and his henchmen entered negotiations with a set of demands they expected from the five labor groups and NOTHING, including the law was going to get in their way. From the start, the City violated the Myers, Milias, Brown Act (MMBA) which governs collective bargaining. The City was participating in unfair labor practices by the manner they conducted themselves during these negotiations. AFSME Local 127 has filed an "Unfair Labor Practice" complaint with the Public Employees Relations Board (PERB) for the actions of the City during their negotiations. The SDPOA does not have the protections afforded AFSME and is not protected by PERB.

Half way through negotiations, the City's Negotiators (The mayor hired the firm
"Burke, Williams & Sorenson" to provide legal services and lead negotiations with the five labor groups in the City. Attorneys William Kay and Timothy Davis of "Burke, Williams & Sorenson" lead separate teams for the City during the negotiations with the five labor groups) served the SDPOA notice of the City's intent to sue the SDPOA regarding DROP. An act clearly indented to shut down negotiations and allow the mayor to impose a contract he knew would fuel an exodus of the most senior, experienced and knowledgeable of the Police Department. The mayor's intent was to rid the City of as many officers as possible who had more than 25 years service. This would further increase the savings the mayor and wrecking crew were seeking.

During negotiations the SDPOA Board of Directors held fast and refused to engage the City in negotiations related to DROP. The SDPOA rightly asserted DROP was a vested benefit and could not be bargained away and thus refused every attempt by the City's negotiations team to engage in discussions to remove, alter, or in any other manner change DROP. The City in prior negotiations made similar attempts at bringing DROP into the discussions during negotiations and were quickly rebuffed. Then comes revelations from SDCERS that they would not follow the mayor's lead in violating the Charter and law, related to DROP and the changes the mayor was demanding. Not a word from the mayor or his office for well over a week. Maybe someone finally got tired of the silence and started pushing some buttons?

Rani Gupta wrote an article in Sundays Voice of San Diego about "a much-ballyhooed set of compensations cuts to address the city's financial woes, changes to the city's controversial deferred retirement program were a major part of the mix." Gupta outlined clearly the issues surrounding the mayor's efforts to change, alter and eliminate DROP. She then talked to Jay Goldstone and asked about SDCERS actions and what impact their refusal to implement those changes proposed in the latest contracts would have on the budget. Goldstone told Gupta it was news to the mayor changes to DROP would require a vote of the members of SDCERS (LIE NUMBER ONE). Gupta writes; "It was a bombshell that was dropped after the fact," Goldstone said. "I'm not necessarily suggesting we would have taken a different position, but we would have known going in that the imposition was only step one of a two-step process."

If for a second there is anyone in San Diego who believes this ignorant attempt at playing dumb, I want to pay for your psychological help. This was a "bombshell" that was "dropped after the fact?" What flavor of kool-aid is the mayor giving his people?

Gupta goes on to write; Goldstone said it "would have been nice" if Goldsmith's office had told city officials about the requirement beforehand. He added, "I will tell you candidly, they will claim they told us and told our lawyers at least, our negotiators, but we (in the Mayor's Office) were not aware up here." (LIE NUMBER TWO)

This is where my blood pressure began to rise significantly and I could feel the blood boiling in my veins. Words (I can use here) escape me as I try to formulate a response to this bold faced, totally and completely false statement. The arrogance and complete disregard for the truth is appalling and a clear window into the thought processes of the mayor and his people. The mayor knew; his people knew, Bill Kay knows; Joan Dawson (City Attorney) knows; Timothy Davis should know; Scott Chadwick knows and others in the City Attorney's Office know changes to DROP or anything to do with Retirement Benefits are protected by the Charter and cannot be unilaterally changed as demanded by the mayor.

Then things get even worse. Goldstone can't help himself. He does after all work for the mayor and as the saying goes monkey see, monkey do. Goldstone calls Gupta back and she recounts the next chapter of lies. Gupta writes; "Several hours later, after a reporter called for comment from the city attorney, Goldstone called back to offer a different version of events, saying a conversation with the city attorney had refreshed his memory about the situation. Goldstone said that the city's outside attorneys from the firm Burke Williams & Sorensen had talked to SDCERS officials during negotiations and, based on those conversations, had advised that the city had a "very strong argument" that the provision of the city charter requiring a vote didn't apply to the changes the city was seeking to make to DROP. The City Attorney's Office, Goldstone said, never told city officials or even strongly suggested that changing DROP required an employee vote." (LIE NUMBER THREE)

Several hours after trying to cover the mayor's large behind, damage control and shifting of blame (A common theme of the mayor) to someone else is beginning in earnest. Now Goldstone is shifting blame from the City Attorney, to Bill Kay and Timothy Davis of Burke Williams & Sorenson. Does Goldstone think no one is going to follow up on what he is spewing? Does he think everyone is going to roll over and allow him to scratch their bellies, while he lays blame on the easy patsy? It does not stop here!!!

Gupta continues; "Goldsmith wouldn't comment on whether his office weighed in on the issue and wouldn't say what Burke Williams & Sorensen -- which is also handling the city's DROP lawsuit -- said about the issue. Bill Kay, an attorney with the firm, said he couldn't comment on what advice his firm gave the city because of attorney-client confidentiality.

But SDCERS' administrator and CEO, David Wescoe, said his staff never talked to the city or its outside attorneys about the issue during the bargaining process. "We never advised them or gave them any advice during meet and confer at all," he said." So who do we believe? Goldsmith won't comment and neither will Bill Kay. The collective covering of asses is now starting to get out of hand. The attorney's are all hiding behind, "Attorney-Client" privilege. Goldstone is not an attorney but should hide behind his bosses behind and keep his mouth shut. He should let the mayor do the talking and let him be the one who lies to the press, taxpayer and then have to repeat these lies in court when he takes the stand to tell what he knows and when he knew it. The paper trail is long and detailed.

The paper trail I am referring to is spelled out by Gupta in the following; "Retirement system officials say they gave fair warning to city officials about the city charter provision back in 2006, when Wescoe sent a letter to the mayor saying SDCERS couldn't implement the results of the 2005 bargaining process without an employee vote." There is much more in the way of written documentation related to this issue that clearly shows the mayor and his staff was well aware of the Charter requirements and its applicability to DROP. Gupta follows with; "City officials said they knew about that requirement but didn't believe it applied to DROP because they considered DROP workers to be retirees, not active employees. (LIE NUMBER FOUR)

Wescoe pointed out that the municipal code makes clear that DROP employees are considered active employees. In any case, the recently approved changes apply to employees who haven't entered DROP. "It's crystal clear," Wescoe said, "which is why I'm surprised that they're surprised." The retirement system's general counsel recently sent a letter to Deputy City Attorney Joan Dawson indicating that Dawson agreed with the conclusion that the DROP changes require a vote. Dawson declined to comment."

Did anyone catch that; "City officials said they knew about that requirement but didn't believe it applied to DROP because they considered DROP workers to be retirees, not active employees." Come again? What City official said this? Goldstone? The mayor? Who? This is another example of the ignorance and arrogance of "City officials" working in the mayor's office.

In the last passage it is clear Joan Dawson in the City Attorney's Office was aware or made aware of the requirements of Charter Section 143.1. There is clear documentation the City Attorney's Office was aware of the requirements of the Charter and shared the information with the mayor's office. What is also clear is the mayor did not like the answer and shopped for an attorney who would provide him the answer he needed to make the political changes to employee's benefits he was and is hell bent on eliminating. It is after all part of the "Master Plan" of the Downtown Establishment; Republican Contingent; Union Tribune and Republican Mayors across America.

This is but the start of the collapse of the house of cards the mayor built. He will not be able to sustain the lies and deceit as the papers start to surface and the truth is known. The blame game has started and there will be no end to it, if history repeats itself; knowing how the mayor works. His tyrannical methods will soon cause his downfall and ouster from City Hall. It cannot come soon enough. The City is facing an astronomical deficit and the mayor's posturing has done nothing to help address the problem. Politics have no place in the realities of the critical issues created by incompetence and arrogance. It is time the mayor cease the destruction of this City and hand the keys to someone who cares about the City and the employees.

Confusion is Everywhere

Just when you think you think you know what you think they mean when they imposed their "Last, Best and Final" offer for a contract and you have made life changing decision based on what you thought you understood you find out that what you thought was not what they meant or what they said. Did you get that? I'm confused too. I was reading the SDPOA Blog this afternoon and caught a post from a member who was obviously upset about this same thing.

The post starts; "I hope I am not the only one but I find this whole issue of Retiree Medical Benefits very confusing. On one hand we are told our future medical benefits are capped at $740. Many of us have had to make life changing decisions based on this. Now we are being told the COLA alone is being frozen for two years." I pulled out the papers I received when we all met at the SDPOA to hear the news of what the mayor was going to cram down our throat. The papers I have clearly indicate the COLA for Retiree Medical was going to be frozen at $740. I believe it was stated on more than one occasion and by more than one person, this is NOT a temporary freeze, but a permanent freeze. This was re-enforced by the analysis offered by Mark Sullivan showing what the freeze to this COLA would mean to the member over years.

I re-read what Jeff Jordon posted regarding the meeting the SDPOA Board had with the City on Thursday. Jeff said the meeting; "primarily addressed our new litigation involving DROP age at 55 and the interest rate change, along with potential litigation over retiree medical if the City moves forward with the changes in their Last Best and Final Offer." Jeff went on to explain discussion regarding Retiree Medical. Jeff wrote; "They also made it very clear that it is unlikely that changes will be made to the retiree health care language already contained in their LBFO.  Per the City, they are arguing that nobody is harmed by this agreement, because they could choose to stay and that the automatic COLA on retiree health is only "suspended" for the next two years.  This suspension could be lifted and they would not be harmed if agreements are reached on this issue in the future.  It is only until the COLA is actually eliminated that they will be harmed and able to litigate per the City." I would argue the moment I did not receive a COLA for my Retiree Medical I have been harmed. I don't think I need to wait two years of harm to know I was harmed. But that's just me.

OK, so I thought I understood what the "Last, Best and Final" offer for a contract was when presented to us. I thought it was clear to everyone present; this was a permanent freeze of the amount of money ($740) the City was going to provide Retirees. It now appears this is not correct. Could it be Jeff just miss-spoke when he wrote this short synopsis of the meeting with the City? Could it be the City back-peddling in an attempt to cover its ass? Could it be they are just confused? Maybe I am confused!

The post I was first talking about goes on; "WTF!!! Why were we not informed of this language? Was this in the original impasse imposition or is this something that was just now changed? I am tired of being F(*&(&(&(K'd with! WHAT IS GOING ON?? It appears to me the wonderful city we all work for is doing their best, and doing a wonderful job of it too, to cause as much confusion, hatred, and discontent with our employment so we decide to abandon ship. Was this all just a strategy worked up by our Mayor? It would seem so. Somebody clear this up for me."

I have fielded a dozen calls about this change and honestly do not have an answer for you. I am as confused as the person who posted in the SDPOA Blog. The confusion is creating anger, frustration and more lost hope. People are angry because they do not believe they have all the information necessary to make the life changing decisions many are struggling still to make. People are frustrated because they can't seem to get straight answers to their questions. People are losing hope because the cut-off date to make their decision is fast approaching and there is no sign of honest answers.

The last line of Jeff's post may be the most telling of all. Jeff closes with the following; "People that are looking to preserve their retiree health care as it exists now, should continue to meet with their financial advisors and their families to determine what is right for them." Maybe it's not as confusing as we are making it out to be. The mayor has clearly shown his hand and is hell bent on TAKING. He is not going to give anything back to us and as the economy continues to swirl in the toilet, the sign of anything good coming of retiree medical is not good. Thanks mayor for the caring, honest, support you have shown over the years.
 

Opportunity Ahead

June 30, 2009, is fast approaching. With this date, comes a new chapter for the San Diego Police Department and law enforcement as a whole in San Diego. Whatever the numbers turn out to be of those who retire; you can be assured it will be painful for the Department. When any organization looses over ten percent (10%) of its most talented, dedicated and experienced members in such a short period of time, that loss is devastating. The timing of those leaving makes it difficult if not impossible to plan, prepare and train replacements to step in and continue the level of productivity of those before them. Examples abound, but take the Lieutenant and two Sergeants leaving a highly specialized investigative unit; the Sergeant and one Detective of the Cold Team; ten (10) people at every level in Communications; Traffic Division loosing supervisors, investigators and motors; ten (10) people, including a Lieutenant, Sergeant, Agent, Detective, four (4) Patrol Officers, a PSO, and the Senior Clerk, all from Northeastern Division; to highlight some of what is about to occur. This will no doubt have an impact on the ability to provide for the safety of citizens. The mayor can ply the public with his political two step of replacing experience with enthusiasm all he likes. The reality is the replacements are years away and the crisis is here today.

If you are one of those staying to continue the tradition of "America's Finest" and fulfill the oath you took when you first pinned on your badge; opportunities are in front of you for the taking. Promotions, transfers, openings in specialized assignments, and the ability to move throughout the department will present themselves in the coming weeks, months and years. You are well situated to help lead and re-build this department and improve on the great reputation earned by those retiring. The officer, detective, supervisor and manager who wish to advance or move will have opportunities never before seen. The positive influences of change can bring satisfaction and a new desire to excel.

Take advantage of this time and talk to those heading for the beach and retirement. Pick their brain and ask for advice; discuss their jobs; ask what skills or training are necessary to fill their shoes; soak up their knowledge and advice; get their contact numbers and e-mail addresses for future questions and consultation. Little things like this may mean the difference in solving a crime or finding a contact to help locate a missing child in another jurisdiction.

The attitude you take forward will determine the success you have when taking advantage of these new opportunities. Make the best of this time and try your level best to stay above the water line. The worst may still be ahead in terms of budget cuts and the ability to attract new, enthusiastic people to this profession. That in no way should dissuade you from taking a leadership role and stepping up to take on these new challenges.

Remember why we all joined this profession; focus on the fun; the excitement; the challenge; and look at the opportunities ahead. Take on new challenges and find your niche. Don't be afraid of new challenges and most of all do not be afraid to fail. If you do not make a mistake here and there, you are not taking risks and most likely are not doing your job to your fullest potential. Be professional and compassionate but above all be safe. Look at the challenges ahead as a new beginning for a proud department and make the best of it. You owe it to yourself and your brothers and sisters in blue.

To those heading off to retirement; leave with those behind the wisdom and experience you have gained through the years. Allow them to pick your brain and make yourself accessible during transition. Withholding contacts and not sharing the little nuances of the job will not get back at the mayor; it will only make it harder for your replacement to learn the job and maintain the reputation you spent years to build. We owe it to those who are picking up the torch to keep the flame lit so they can see their way during this difficult time. Leave with the dignity and professionalism you have earned; hold your head high, shoulders back and a smile on your face. You have earned that right. You have given your all and now it is time to allow those remaining to take up where you left off.

Padres win again… 7^th straight…. Padres 4 Cubs 0

Retirement Parties Abound

I will try and keep up with the many Retirement Parties in the coming weeks.

June 5, 2009, 5:00 PM

The Brick House at the Police Pistol Range

Sergeants Bill Nemec and Alan Hayward

June 10, 2009, 1100 – 1300

The SDPOA Meeting Hall

Lt. Tom Orden
Sergeant Mike Volberg
Agent Mark Annis
Detective Lee Orsino
Officers Dave Kersch, Craig Myrom, Paul Lennon and Alphonso Williams
PSO Tuan Nguyen
Sr. Clerk Pat Sexton

June 12, 2009 5:00 PM

The Brick House at the Police Pistol Range

Sergeant Andes "Andy" Rios

June 18, 2009, 5:00 PM

The Brick House at the Police Pistol Range

Detective Steve Sloan

June 19, 2009, 4:30 PM

The Brick House at the Police Pistol Range

Detective John Tefft

June 20, 2009, 3:30 PM

The SDPOA Meeting Hall

Sergeant Joe Wood

June 25, 2009, 5:30 PM

The Balboa Park Club

Chief Cheryl Meyers

July 10, 2009, 5:00 PM

The Brick House at the Police Pistol Range

Detective James McGhee

Retiree Medical Questions

I said I would address the issue of most importance to many sitting on the fence trying to decide between retiring to preserve medical benefits or staying and rolling the dice in hopes things change, before your DROP period is up. Well, I have got to tell you, I have more questions than I have answers. I spent the better part of this evening reading the brief prepared by Jeffrey Sloan, for the City. Keeping in mind the brief was answering the question posed by the City; is retiree medical a vested benefit? I have relied on another brief written by Sloan related to DROP, where he opined he believed case law indicated DROP was a vested benefit. So if I am to follow suit and rely on an attorney hired by the City to provide them a legal opinion, I do not think I can pick and choose which brief I believe or rely upon to talk about this issue.

I have had discussions with various attorneys whose practice centers around collective bargaining and employee benefits. Without exception, the reply was the same when asked if Retiree Medical is a vested benefit; "as a general rule, no." I added the fact employees hired prior to 1986 gave up; at the City's request, Social Security with the promise of 100% retiree medical. The answer shifted to what could only be described as a "wobbler." Most said there is little case law to support medical insurance as being a vested benefit, even with the knowledge of not participating in Social Security.

During discussions related to Retiree Medical, I kept coming back to a belief I had when the change was made and we opted out of Social Security; the City would pay 100% of the premium for my medical insurance when I retired. The SDCERS Retirement Handbook explains the medical insurance and what employees are entitled to receive upon retirement. The Handbook states in part; "You may participate in a City-sponsored health insurance plan, a union-sponsored plan, or any other insurance plan of your choice. The Retirement System will pay or reimburse the applicable Medicare-eligible or non-Medicare eligible retiree-only premium up to but not to exceed the cost of the retiree-only premiums for the highest cost HMO plan sponsored by the City that is made available to Health Eligible Retirees. If you chose to select a private health insurance plan, the City will reimburse the actual premium cost incurred up to the maximums stated above, provided that you meet the criteria established by the Board." There was little if any thought given to this NOT being a vested benefit as it was part and parcel to our vested Retirement Plan.

It is now apparent the City has been plotting since at least 2003, to reduce or eliminate Retiree Medical for employees. In 2005, the SDPOA attempted to enter agreement with the City to begin a "Medical Trust" for "New Hires" to provide for a means to fund Retiree Medical Insurance; knowing the changes caused by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Rule 45, would create a political issue for the City. GASB 45, requires municipalities to show on their financials, the "future" debt related to retiree medical payments. The City of San Diego is a "pay as you go" plan sponsor and has never put money aside for "future" benefit payments. The SDPOA, trying to look ahead at what could happen, began to negotiate a way to protect our members from a City who was not well known for future planning or paying its bills.

Now the discussion turned to those employees participating in DROP. The mayor makes unilateral changes to DROP and Retiree Medical. Those of us who signed up for DROP were ALL told our benefits were frozen. We each had to initial twenty-four (24) items on the election to participate in DROP and agreement to terminate employment agreement. On page one of four, the following statement appears; "The Retirement System and your employer will rely on the following facts. Each is important because it demonstrates you have carefully considered your election to participate in DROP." Then on page two of four, there is the following admonition; "I understand that if benefits are improved or otherwise changed after I enter DROP, through meet and confer or any other process, I will not be eligible for any of these benefit improvements or changes."

I'm no attorney but it appears to me, once I enter DROP, my benefits are frozen. I cannot derive any increase to my benefits, nor can I lose any; or so I thought. The Retirement System views me as a "Retired Member" and thus my benefits frozen. The City views me as a "active employee" and subject to any and all changes in contract and working conditions. The attorneys I have discussed this with, cannot answer the question; can the City change, alter, or eliminate my Retiree Medical once I enter DROP? I am not sure we are going to get a straight answer to this question until we put it before a judge. This will not be done anytime soon. So, those of us who are on the fence and cannot decide if the change made by the mayor to this promised benefit; will have to make our decisions without the help of a definitive answer.

I want to believe a judge would side with those of us who are participating in the DROP and find we entered into a contract that secured our benefits and the mayor's unilateral changes are illegal. Will this happen? Not in time to be a deciding factor in making a life changing decision, forced upon us by a system that lacks credibility. I wish there were more to provide, but I do not have any answers.

The SDPOA met today (5/21/2009) with the City and there has been no word of what occurred or what was discussed. I will not speculate and neither should you. Contact one of the Directors and see if there was movement on this issue, for the positive. If not, make your decision based on what is best for you, your family and the circumstance most likely to present itself in the future. Do not gamble with your future.

Six Days and Counting

Six days ago SDCERS told the mayor and all that would listen they would not follow the mayors lead and violate the law by implementing the changes proposed for DROP. SDCERS followed the Charter and the law when they told the mayor the changes to DROP could not be done without a vote of the membership of SDCERS. This decision was made public on Friday morning and as of Thursday morning, has anyone heard or seen the mayor? The mayor's staff appeared at the City Council meetings on Monday and Tuesday. They took a beating for failing to provide the financials for the mid-year budget changes. The mayor was noticeably absent and the Council was not pleased. Not a peep from the mayor. The questions are beginning to mount.

I spent time reading a Confidential Memorandum addressed to Mike Rivo of the San Diego City Attorney's Office from Jeffrey Sloan of the Law Firm Curiale, Dellaverson, Hirschfeld, Kraemer and Sloan. The memo was dated September 23, 2003, and was in response to questions asked by the City regarding DROP. The City asked, "If and how it may lawfully lower, or mandate SDCERS lower the 8% interest rate currently paid on DROP accounts. The City requested advice regarding four (4) groups; New Hires; Current Employees who have not yet entered DROP; Current DROP participants; and Retired who have DROPPED and are currently receiving non-lump sum distributions. In addition the memo addressed; Employees/retirees currently or at the time of their retirement represented by the SDPOA or Local 145 Fire."

The short answers provided said, "Under the current Municipal Code, discretion over the interest rate for DROP participation accounts lies with the Retirement Board. The City's influence is essentially limited to the votes of City appointed Board members. The City can re-negotiate the DROP benefits of future hires at any time; Current employees who have not yet elected to participate in the DROP probably have an interest, vested on their first day of employment, in being eligible to participate in a DROP program under the terms offered. Those terms may be modified, but only if necessary to ensure the survival of the overall system, in a manner related to the theory of the pension system and if any disadvantage created is balanced by a new contravening advantage." Plain language; DROP is a vested benefit!!!

"It is almost certain that current DROP participants have a vested interest in the current provisions related to interest rate, such that the current rules set forth in the Municipal Code provisions may only be re-negotiated on an individual basis." Plain language; the mayor cannot change the interest rate for DROP accounts nor can SDCERS chose some arbitrary manner to determine the rate.

"In the case of police and fire employees, MOU language arguable controls over Municipal Code to give such employees a vested right to receive DROP participation account interest at the same rate as that assumed for employee accounts under the City retirement plan." Plain language; The MOU for SDPOA members spells out again the manner DROP interest will be paid and cannot be changed by the mayor or SDCERS without the members approval.

Jeffrey Sloan went on to say; "It is almost certainly within the City's authority to terminate the program entirely as to new hires." He continues later, "The availability and terms of a DROP may be viewed as either a term and condition of employment or a retirement right comparable to a pension. If the DROP is a term and condition of employment, it is subject to negotiation consistent with the bargaining requirements imposed by the MMBA. However, if it is analogous to a pension benefit then it is a form of deferred compensation and a right to receive the benefit on the terms offered vests on the very first day of employment. Such rights are not subject to forfeiture." Plain language; DROP is a vested benefit and cannot be taken away from current employees.

"City Charter Section 143.1 putatively allows changes to the vested defined rights of retirees if approved by a majority of such retirees." Sloan went on to say, "We would note that vested rights are personal in nature and we do not believe they may be waived by majority vote." Plain language; ANY changes to the vested benefits must be approved by the person who holds the benefit.

"Lastly, current and retired members of the bargaining units represented by the SDPOA and Local 145 Fire have language in their MOU'S that probably limits the Board's (SDCERS Board) discretion. Those MOU'S have consistently stated since July 1, 1998, that interest will be credited to the members DROP account in the same manner and at the same rate as that interest is credited to employee CERS accounts." Plain language; PD and Fire employees will be paid interest on their DROP accounts based on the accrued rate set by the actuary; currently 7.75%. The City is on the hook for anything less than this.

So what does all of this mean? The SDPOA is headed to court to litigate these issues. (I will talk about Retiree Medical tomorrow night) The basic premis is DROP is a vested benefit. What I find appalling is the mayor had this information and chose to ignore it. There is more information on these issues from other legal experts the mayor was provided and was well aware of the law when he took this city's employees down this path with the latest imposed contracts and illegal changes to DROP. The actions of the mayor in light of the information starting to surface; when he knew it; and what he knew, if true, is criminal. The absolute destruction of America's Finest Police Department in a span of months; entirely created, orchestrated and directed by the mayor who knew what he was doing was contrary to the law, is unconscionable. How he can look in the mirror is beyond me. How he shows his face in public; with sworn police officers doing their jobs by his side; all the while knowing what he did was contrary to ALL legal advice is beyond description or explanation.

The taxpayer needs to know the mayor is taking on fights his legal experts opine he has little if any chance of winning. They need to know he is not being honest with them about the benefits of City Employees. They need to know his actions are politically motivated and not in the best interest of the taxpayer. The facts need to be shown in open light for all to see. The imposed contracts, forced upon members of the San Diego Police Department and Local 127, are in jeopardy of being ruled null and void because of the mayor's deceit and flaunting of the law. The money the mayor was demanding from employees to close the budget deficit is in danger of not being provided by the employee if these imposed contracts are undone. Then what? The State propositions were soundly defeated and the Governor will no doubt be raiding what money the City does have. The $60 million dollar deficit will no doubt grow to over $100 million. I shudder at the thought of what the mayor will do next.

The mayor will punish City Employees even more; layoffs; explaining it is the only way. He will blame unions and employees for his failures and further turn the unknowing public against us. The house of cards the mayor has been building is now beginning to cave in. There is little chance the mayor is going to prevail when the SDPOA gets these issues before a judge. In the interim, employees will make life changing decisions necessitated by uncertainty created by the illegal changes forced upon City Employees. A once proud police department is being decimated by the exodus of over 150 senior, experienced officers and over 50 experienced, senior, civilian support personnel, all leaving to preserve retiree medical insurance and maintain the 7.75% interest to their DROP accounts.

When the mayor surfaces, the spin will no doubt be working overtime to "explain" why SDCERS is wrong. When this occurs, will anyone point to the legal opinions he has been given by several legal experts to the contrary? Will the mayor be taken to task for his ethical lapses? Will anyone put the facts together and figure out the mayor is taking this city for a ride? Who will be the first fatality when officers are unable to respond in a timely manner to an emergency; where the caller first had to wait for communications to answer the call for help; then dispatch has to wait for officers to clear so they could respond; and the citizen has to wait while the officers responded from the other end of the division do to a lack of staffing in all areas of the department? Will it be your son, daughter, mother, father, brother, sister???

Breaking the Cycle of Abuse

Six years of counseling is generally what it takes to break the cycle of abuse (violence) in Domestic Violence situations. As a City employee, can you kind of relate to the cycle? Why is it we seem to mimic the abused victim of a psychological tormentor; physical abuser? Why do we leave and then return; knowing we are in store for more abuse at the hands of the abuser? Why do we make excuses for the abuser and downplay the pain and suffering? How do we continue to go through our day as if all is well? Do our children suffer too; seeing and hearing the strife and struggle to maintain normalcy?

The mayor has been abusing this city's employees for several years now, with no remorse or shame. His actions toward employees have created more human pain, both psychological and physical than the most violent of abusers. The stone faced, double speak; do as I say not as I do; you will give back; I am taking; I am responsible to the taxpayer, not employee; we are replacing experience with enthusiasm; we struggle with thoughts of leaving and giving up or in to the abuse. Then the stealing of promised benefits; moving the date one could retire; capping or removing retiree medical at the end of a career; forcing employees into furlough and cutting pay; eliminating possibilities for promotion and advancement; all at the hands of our tormentor, abuser; mayor.

Why do we stay? Why do we accept the abuse? Some would say because we know nothing different. Some would say there is no way out; we have bills, kids, too much invested to leave; no-where to go; fear of starting over; not wanting to feel as though we failed; or is it because we just don't know any better? In some way do you feel responsible for HIS actions; did you make him do it; did you cause the reactions and the pain?

What do we tell our victims when we sit and listen to them recount years of abuse? What do we do when we see the fear and pain in the children's faces while mom wipes tears from her eyes and snot from her nose? Do we help them take the leap and promise a better life if they would only take charge of their life and stop allowing the abuser to abuse? Do we tell them it will never get better; once the abuser has struck out in anger there is nothing to prevent it from happening again; the violence and abuse will only escalate and get worse?

How about we city employees call the YWCA and see if they can intervene and prevent the abuse and offer a helping hand? Maybe a trip to Becky's house in hopes of finding solitude and peace of mind as we city employees get our feet under us again so we can make a better life for us and our children? Can we call Focus and seek advice and reassurance we are doing what is right, when we finally decide we have had enough and make the decision to leave? We have to do something; we can no longer afford to go along to get along. We must confront our mayor and tell him we will no longer take his abuse; psychological or physical. Our children are suffering and we must BREAK THE CYCLE OF ABUSE!!!

The light at the end of the tunnel has been turned off due to budget constraints.

Elaine Ambrose

Let’s NOT forget our Civilian Support

I have been ranting away and so focused on the loss of sworn officers, I have neglected to address the astonishing losses we are facing in our civilian support personnel. Over 30 of our most dedicated, hard working, experienced and talented people in Communications, Human Resources, Crime Analysis, Fiscal Management, Lab, Records, Northeastern Division and Investigations will soon be departing.

Over 800 years experience will leave service before June 30, 2009, because of changes the mayor has forced on employees nearing retirement. The men and women who work tirelessly behind the scenes (some side by side with officers) to provide world class public safety to the citizens of San Diego are being forced to leave to preserve retirement benefits changed by the mayor during the last round of collective bargaining. Many, who like their sworn counter parts, are neither ready nor wanting to retire.

The combined loss of support personnel cannot be replaced over night. The selection and hiring of talented, qualified replacements will take months and in some cases a year or more. Human Resources is losing their top person; Communications already below staffing struggles everyday to fill positions to answer calls for help from the public is losing ten highly experienced personnel; Crime Analysis also below staffing has a back log of requests for assistance from Investigators seeking help in solving crimes from Car Prowls to Murders; Fiscal Management is trying to keep the books balanced and ensure we have the money, equipment and other resources necessary to get the job done will now have to make do with three less, senior, experienced analysts; The Lab faces a one year backlog of fingerprint analysis, the inability to process DNA requests, and will now have to make do with three less senior, experienced Criminalists'; Records Division like the others, is already understaffed and struggling to meet the needs of officers, detectives and the public will lose five (5) of our most experienced specialists'.

The public needs to be made aware of the additional loss to public safety that will result on June 30^th because of this loss. Yes, police officers in uniform will continue to respond to the public's calls for service. The wait for callers seeking help will stretch from 3 minutes to 5 or more; the delay will result in more calls to 911, which will soon over load the system resulting in emergency calls being placed in the queue and made to hold; Investigators will wait months and in some cases longer to have evidence processed and analyzed; crimes will lag in file drawers waiting for the answers to the questions posed from the evidence; crime will increase and the ability to solve these crimes will dwindle.

The loss is not just blue. The loss is more than color. The loss is more than sworn. The loss is so deep and wide the effects will be felt for years into the future. Yes, we will continue and we will do our level best to provide the best possible customer service possible. But I say to you mayor; working as hard as we can for as long as we can will not fill the holes left by those you forced to leave before their time. The public will pay in more ways than can be described in these pages. When they (The Public) are affected maybe then they will see what you have done and hold you accountable for your actions.

Strike three you’re out mayor!!!

Spent a wonderful afternoon at Petco Park with my wife watching the Padres. Jake Peavey pitched a complete game victory over the Cincinnati Reds. The weather was perfect San Diego; sunny, 71 degrees, light breeze. You could not ask for a better Sunday afternoon in San Diego. I ran into several retired and active members of the department as I headed to my seat. Thank you all for the kind words and encouragement.

I was doing some reading when I got home and came across a piece by Ken Singleton. Singleton wrote about the right balance of leadership and management. Singleton said, "Leadership is about doing the right thing and management is about doing things right. Success is about achieving the right balance of both." This passage jumped off the page as I thought of the actions of the mayor and what he has accomplished in the time he has held office.

"Leadership is about doing the right thing." Strike one mayor. Somebody help me out here. I have been racking my brain to give him a ball, but no such luck. Doing the right thing would require the mayor to care about people and before doing anything, consider the impact on people, before taking any action. That is clearly not something the mayor has done since elected.

"Management is about doing things right." Strike two mayor. Violating the City Charter and other Laws, is not doing things right. Doing things because they are politically expedient can not be considered doing things right.

"Success is about achieving the right balance of both." Strike three mayor. When you only care about yourself and how you are perceived, it is next to impossible to care about others. When you don't care about the people, it is easy to break the law and violate the rights of others and not do things right. You cannot balance something you have not done in the first place. Caring more for one, over the other, is even worse. Which of your daughters do you care for more mayor? We know you care more for taxpayers than you do City Employees (Regardless of what you may say; your actions speak louder than your words).

Have a seat on the bench mayor. Allow someone to come into the game who understands the Right Balance of being a leader and managing the huge problems facing the City of San Diego. You have struck out in your attempts at balancing the leader, manager thing and people are leaving the park.

Today's police officers are opting for employers who care about them professionally and personally. You have shown you clearly do not care about police officers; professionally or personally. Strike three mayor; you are out. You failed.

Where is the mayor?

On Friday it was revealed SDCERS was not going to follow the mayor's illegal attempt to change, reduce, or eliminate DROP; a vested benefit. The question for many is, "Where is the mayor?" Since this revelation there has not been one word from the mayor or his office. Word on the streets is the mayor was told some time ago by the City Attorney his attempts at changing, reducing or eliminating DROP would be a violation of the City's Charter. The mayor hired the firm "Burke, Williams & Sorenson" to provide legal services and lead negotiations with the five labor groups in the City. Attorneys William Kay and Timothy Davis of"Burke, Williams & Sorenson" lead separate teams for the City during the negotiations with the five labor groups.

Timothy Davis led the City's charge against the SDPOA. Hell bent on eliminating DROP, Davis and company threw as much mud onto the walls during negotiations as they could muster in hopes something would stick. The SDPOA Board of Directors held firm and refused to discuss this vested benefit. The law did not allow them to "negotiate" changes, reductions or elimination of this vested benefit (Why did they know this and the attorney for the City did not). Davis was getting no-where and knew it. His only alternative was a law suit. So, in the middle of negotiations the mayor gives the go ahead and the SDPOA is served notice of the City's intent to sue the SDPOA for their refusal to negotiate this vested benefit. Does anyone think this had a chilling effect on the remainder of negotiations? Does anyone wonder why the mayor chose the SDPOA for this law suit? It would not have anything to do with PERB or MMBA, would it? Why is "Burke, Williams & Sorenson" handling negotiations and this law suit? Why is the City Attorney NOT handling these two issues? Could it be Jan Goldsmith told the mayor he could not do what he set out to do?

The silence is deafening from the mayor. Might be he is holed up at home in Kensington nursing a black eye? Maybe trying to spit the blood from a swollen, split lip and not capable of talking? Oh, rest assured, his statement when he does break his silence will berate SDCERS; extol his solid legal footing in making the changes he did; plead his case for taking the issues to court for a legal ruling; and assure taxpayers he is only looking out for them and not the employees of this city. Care to venture a guess how much the taxpayers are paying for the outside firm of "Burke, Williams & Sorensen" to handle negotiations and the law suit regarding DROP? The mayor attempts to plead his case for; cutting wages; reducing and cutting benefits; holding onto services; raising revenue by increasing fees; not raising taxes and then turns around and hires an outside firm to do the City Attorney's job?

The mayor had the pleasure of playing with San Diego's American Idol; Adam Lambert last week. If you missed it, a young lady took her shirt off (still wearing a green bathing suit top) and ran onto the field and stage. The mayor cracked he would not take his shirt off (Thank God). Someone needs to let the mayor know; he is not wearing ANY clothes. He shed them long ago.

The Law Prevails? In San Diego?

If you have not heard; SDCERS has told the mayor they are not going to follow his lead and break the law when it comes to imposing the past contract on City Employees. In the Voice of San Diego, Rani Gupta wrote; "Rebecca Wilson, chief of staff of the San Diego City Employees' Retirement System, said the city charter makes clear that all current employees must sign off on several changes to DROP that were part of the contracts imposed on the police, blue-collar workers and city management employees not represented by a union. All changes were to take effect July 1."

It is clear the contracts that were imposed on police officers as well as employees working for Local 127 and managers (Chiefs and Captains) making unilateral changes to DROP must be approved by the employees. That means it is our turn to tell the mayor what he can do with his changes to DROP. The entry age, elimination of the annuity option and the complete elimination of DROP from managers CANNOT be implemented as the mayor demanded. Let's hope someone recognizes the capping of Retiree Medical Payments is similarly flawed and re-instate this promised benefit.

Finally someone is following the law and refusing to blindly follow the mayor's wishes.

The Numbers as we Know Them

It has been a cat and mouse game of who's going and who's staying. Some are holding the cards close to the chest. Those who have declared their intent to leave have been added to a list in order to capture the extent of the loss. Below is a breakdown of the number of each rank and the years of service lost. The names are irrelevant; it's the people who matter. The loss is going to be devastating in terms of human loss and the organizations ability to provide excellent public safety.

TOTAL NUMBER OF SWORN MEMBERS LEAVING

...........Quantity...... Years

Chief's....... 1 ..............33

Captains........1............31

Lieutenants...3............95

Det. Sgts......13..........396

Sergeants...20...........591

Detectives..27............757

Agents........3..............92

POII's.......36............870

Total......104...........2865

(These numbers are as of 5-13-2009)

These people will ALL be leaving by the 30^th of June. We will go on and there is no closing of the doors. We cannot fold as an organization; that is not an option. What we need to do is get the word out to the citizens of San Diego that they should be worried. There will come a time officers will not be able to respond in a timely manner to their call for help because the mayor and city council have refused to acknowledge the dire situation created by the types of cuts they imposed on members of the police department.

To those reading this; pass this information to family and friends. Send it to groups and organizations thinking of coming to San Diego for business or vacation. You owe it to yourself, family and friends to take the initiative and do your part in getting this message out.

Getting the Word Out

How do you inform a public, who's only real source for news is a failing news paper that has shown a decade long bent on destroying anything labor? The local TV and radio stations simply read the writings of San Diego's only news paper, re-enforcing the slant provided by this so called news organization.

I have attached four (4) clips from YouTube. Three are news clips related to the exodus of Police Officers from the San Diego Police Department. Pay close attention to the numbers provided in each of these clips (I will povide accurate numbers when available). The last clip is one made by Officer John Graham, titled; "Happy Happens in San Diego".

News Clip One

News Clip Two

News Clip Three

Happy Happens in San Diego

The topic is fresh and relevant TODAY. We need to keep the pressure on and continue to focus on the public's safety. Put a face to the experience that is leaving. Educate the public with the realities of this exodus and how they stand to be affected; fewer police officers in the street; slower response time to ALL calls; inability to respond or handle "Quality of Life" issues; inability to adequately investigate misdemeanor crimes and property crimes such as residential and commercial burglaries and grand thefts; the potential for citizens to perceive excessive force when officers are faced with a combative subject and no cover, doing what is necessary to protect him/her self and the public and ensuring the arrest of the subject; officers who will burn out from being stretched to the limit, working long hours with fewer days off and no ability to take time off for the lack of adequate manpower; officer mistakes in judgment due to stress and fatigue. All of these issues are faced by soldiers in Iraq, Afghanistan or any other war zone. I am in no way saying what we are facing is anything like what our military continues to face on a daily basis in the middle east.

The POA needs to take the lead in this campaign. The membership needs to get involved. Sitting back and complaining about the lack of action is as much the member's responsibility as it is the Director's of the POA. Who is going to step up and LEAD? Who among you is willing to put your brother and sister officer's needs above your own?

We have not seen the worst of what is to come. This summer is going to be extremely difficult and will require a commitment never before seen from everyone; POI's; POII's; Detectives; Sergeants; Lieutenants and Captains, if we are to survive the heat of this summer. Taking care of one another first; ensuring each other's safety at all times. Help is a long way off when you get yourself in over your head by answering that Domestic Violence call; that fight in the park; the check the welfare; burglary alarm all without cover available. DON'T DO IT!!! Trying to help people, save people and make things better is what we are all about. But you can't do any of that if you are hurt, maimed or killed by violating your training and going against everything you know to be right.

Tell your friends, family and anyone that will listen, the crisis facing law enforcement in the City of San Diego. Share with them the realities of staffing and your inability to respond in a timely manner to any and all calls for service. Educate yourself about the numbers and the effect the exodus of experienced officers has had on protecting the public and fighting crime. Then take responsibility and educate the public. You owe it to yourself and your brothers and sisters in blue.

My last thought is about the Chief Officer's. I often hear anger, frustration and condemnation for the Chief and Assistant Chief's for the perceived lack of support or leadership. When the Chief appears on TV telling the public things are under control and the department has a plan he is doing his job and supporting his officers. The Chief's job is to balance the politics of the job and his commitment to his men and women. That is a difficult job in good times and impossible in times such as these. The mayor is pulling the strings and writing the script for the Chief's words and actions. The Chief could go rogue and say all the things we all want him to say and would pack his office within the next hour. The Chief has said openly the job of representing the officer's interests and needs is the POA. He is correct!!! Do not think for a second the Chief does not care or fight behind the scenes. (Holy-smokes; I sound like a suck ass; sorry) Let us take a step back and focus our energy where it will do the most good. That would be educating the public and getting the word out and most of all watching out for each other!!!

Pick your song!!!

I found a few videos on YouTube I felt appropriate for what is going on around us. First is; Should I Stay or Should I Go? Many people struggle with the decision of leaving to preserve benefits taken by the mayor. The second video sums up the feelings of many in this; Health Insurance video. This last video is being played for the mayor by over 100 of our finest officers who are leaving a job they love. I hope the mayor likes Johnny Paycheck; he is going to be hearing a lot of him over the next 50 days.

The satirical humor is getting brutal around Headquarters. There is a group retiring who have begun calling themselves, "Gerry's Unenthusiastic Kid's" ; then there is a group who have taken on, "Kicked to the Curb Club" ; or the group calling themselves, "Gerry's Other Casualties" . There were others but I will stick to my pledge to keep the profanity out of my writings. The numbers are growing daily. I predict when the dust settles and the summer begins in full swing (July 1) the San Diego Police Department will have lost 140 of our most experienced, dedicated, professional; managers, supervisors, investigators, and officers.

I found it interesting today to see one of the City Council members pontificating on about "all those retiring are getting 'bonuses' from the City" when they sell or convert their annual leave upon retirement. I could not control my initial thoughts. This guy is a true idiot!!! Selling back earned annual leave is a "BONUS" to this maroon. My guess is the mayor's minions did not factor in (or did not share with council) the amount of money the city would be required to shell out when the most senior of employees left city service. Think of the numbers for a minute. Let's assume the average person with 30 year's service is holding 500 hours of annual leave. Multiply the 500 by the salary of the employee; let's use a Sergeant's base of $43.00 an hour (I'm picking a number for argument sake); the city is shelling out $21,500 for this ONE employee. Now for the San Diego Police Department we are looking at 140 sworn members leaving and taking an average of this $21,500 for a grand total of $3,010,000. That's right folks, three million dollars.

(Click on red link for youtube link)

Hiring Disaster Ahead?

The San Diego Police Department is facing a man made crisis of epic proportion. In the late seventies and early eighties the department went through an exodus of officers, when surrounding agencies were offering substantially more money and a better working climate. The officers leaving the department had five (5) to twelve (12) years experience and were going to agencies that valued their experience and were providing more money. The average experience of the 100+ senior officers, detectives, supervisors and managers leaving the department in the next 50 days, is 27+ years. In 1978, 1979, 1980 academy classes contained 75 to 100 recruits in each class. Currently the classes range from 25 to 50 recruits per class.

The latest contract imposed on members of the San Diego Police Department by the mayor and endorsed by the city council has created the exodus of the most experienced and senior officers. A mayor who is more concerned with politics and the Republican agenda and how he looks and sounds to the public, created this crisis; a crisis that DID NOT have to be. Broken promises and vindictive, posturing by the mayor created an environment where those of retirement age were forced to choose between the careers they love or preserving a life after their dedicated service to the citizens of San Diego is complete.

The mayor espouses the ease of hiring replacements for those leaving. He gloats as he discusses replacing experience with enthusiasm. The mayor is banking on a large pool of candidates to draw from to fill the vacancies he has created. WAKE UP people!!! The San Diego Police Department is on a precarious ledge as they move to hire large numbers of officers from a LIMITED field of QUALIFIED candidates. The mayor will paint a bright picture; large numbers of candidates because of un-employment and layoffs all around the nation. I have a wake-up call for the mayor. One only need to look at Los Angeles, New York or Miami and the results of failing to hire or retain qualified police officers. We are in an "emergency" RIGHT NOW; our ability to hire and retain qualified police officers is going to be a struggle and will not occur over night. This emergency will ultimately result in hiring practices that significantly reduce the quality of candidate the department is able to hire. I won't begin to discuss the ability to "RETAIN" those who make it through training.

The ability of the San Diego Police Department to provide excellent customer service to our citizens has greatly been undermined by the mayor and city council's actions. The safety of the public is no longer guaranteed and should not be assumed. I will say it again; come July 1, 2009, there will be less than 1700, ABLE BODIED police officers, to police America's 7^th largest city; at a time when crime is rising and the public's expectation exceeds our abilities.

One last thought; let's not forget the mayor's plan calls for a large number of the vacancies he created to REMAIN VACANT. The mayor is banking on the inability of the Police Department to hire replacements for those leaving. When positions remain vacant, he can place, rather than accept responsibility for this disaster.

Enthusiasm over Experience?

When I read the mayor explain to the public he is exchanging experience with enthusiasm in the police department, I had to read it again to make sure that is what I read. I'm not sure why I was surprised at this political satire, but I was. He is after all a politician whose daily mantra is, "It's Political." What I find extremely offensive is the manner in which he ignores the importance of the amount of experience he is forcing into retirement with the latest imposed contract, before many are ready or wanting. There seems to be a pattern here. (See post, "It's the little lies mayor" May 1, 2009)

Think for a minute what it is exactly the mayor is espousing. He is OK with a young officer, with little experience, taking the place of an experienced, dedicated, energetic police officer with 25+ years of learning the craft of law enforcement? Who is going to mentor this young officer when he/she enthusiastically races to a call; speeding through your community; failing to stop at stop signs; racing through intersections; enthusiastically trying to be first on the scene of a fight of 5-10 people? The young, enthusiastic officer promoted to detective; at the same time his young, enthusiastic supervisor is moved into Investigations; with no prior investigative experience; the two of them arrive on the scene of a stabbing and begin their investigation. The two enthusiastically gather evidence and take witness statements. Their investigation leads them to a suspect. In their zeal to close the case, the two violate Search and Seizure laws and the Constitutional Rights of the suspect. It is your son, brother, father who was stabbed and the suspect is walking free.

We all had to learn at some point in our career. Most of us learned from watching those around us with experience doing the job. We had an experienced officer tug on our ear and slow us down; point out the pitfalls of our enthusiasm and eagerness to run when we should be walking; tell us to put our gun back in the holster and use our mouth or hands; explain why a warning was just as good or sometimes better than a citation; point out the subtle human traits that if missed will result in injury or death. We learned to walk before we ran; we learned to talk rather than fight; we learned that driving safe and sane allowed you to arrive at a scene instead of racing recklessly through intersections and causing a traffic collision and not arriving at all.

Enthusiasm without experience and guidance is a danger in law enforcement. The guidance of a young, enthusiastic officer by another young, enthusiastic officer is a recipe for disaster. Throw in to this mix; first time, young, enthusiastic officers promoted to supervisor who are learning themselves how to do the job. The blind can lead the blind; so long as one of them has been blind for a period of time; learning how to navigate without sight. Two newly blind people run the risk of walking into traffic or off a cliff.

Over 100, experienced, dedicated, enthusiastic managers, supervisors, detectives and officers are leaving the San Diego Police Department between now and June 30. The average years experience each of these professional officers has is 28 years. These 100 officers are in addition to over 125 officers who have left service since July of 2008, totaling 225 (OVER 10% of the department). Law enforcement is not a job conducive to "Trial and error" or "Learning as you go." The most enthusiastic, young officer, who lacks experience is also the most dangerous when he/she does not have an experienced mentor, trainer to guide and channel that enthusiasm for law enforcement.

There is no replacement for experience in law enforcement. Those enthusiastic officers (44) the mayor is so gleefully touting as replacements for the experienced 100 he has forced to leave will not even begin to police the streets of San Diego for six months. The San Diego Police Department will field less than 1700 active, able bodied police officers on July 1, 2009, to police a city of 1.7 million people. All the enthusiasm in the world will not prevent crime from escalating if you do not know what you are doing; what you are looking for; or what you are looking at. Law enforcement is an art that is learned from experience. Lacking experience, the art is lost and crime goes unchecked. When unchecked; crime increases and people suffer.

Are you willing to accept the consequences of enthusiasm over experience?

The Membership and SDPOA Information

I have been away from the SDPOA for over 2 ½ years now and I still get daily questions and calls from members wanting to know what is going on and asking what the POA is doing. It amazes me when I explain I am no longer on the Board and have as much information as they do; the incredulous looks or comments I get. The follow up is always; "Yes, but you still have the inside information." When I stop laughing the answer is always the same, "Nope; I'm not in those loops any longer."

There are glass enclosed bulletin boards in every station; two at Headquarters (Watch Commander's Office and Outside Cafeteria) and one outside the front door of the POA. With the exception of the enclosure at the POA, the information in these enclosures is at best spotty. I make it a point whenever I am in a station to check out the POA Bulletin Boards. It is no wonder there is constant complaining regarding the lack of information coming out of the POA. Let's take the bulletin board I pass every day at the entry to the cafeteria in Headquarters. The latest information inside the enclosure was over a year old. (When pointed out to Marvel, he removed everything inside) Today the bulletin board is a piece of cork with nothing attached to it and has been in this state for almost two months now. The bulletin board at the Watch Commanders office is at times a clutter of copied blog postings and a miss-mash of news articles posted by pissed off people (many taped to the outside of the enclosure).

I completely understand the frustration and difficulty of getting information out. I sat in that hot seat and struggled to find ways to force feed members information during my tenure. I was involved in the starting of the POA Blog as a tool to convey information and exchange ideas. Brian Marvil and Jeff Jordan do a good job of putting information out and answering rumors and questions. The rants of Woodie Dubois are just that and do not have the intended affect I am sure he is trying to convey. I learned over the years and it was re-enforced when I started this Blog; keeping it professional and eliminating the swearing allows readers to take you serious and view your information in a better light. Woodie would serve the membership to find creative ways to put forth his message without the use of profanity and rants that reflect poorly on himself and the people he was elected to represent. Conveying anger and frustration can be done without the use of profanity. I have to remind myself of this as I rant here; so I get it.

The BLOG is a great tool for getting information out. It requires constant vigilance and input. A BLOG can be a double edged sword. Too much information when trying to negotiate a deal with the City allows the other side to counter proposals and prepare defenses for items placed on the table. Lack of information creates a sense of nothing being done and an aura of secrecy. The balance is like walking on a tight rope at 100 feet of the ground. The other problem is who reads the BLOG. While many members of the POA are enrolled and capable of accessing the BLOG; how many are accessing it on a regular basis? It appears from looking at the BLOG, a handful of members use the BLOG on a regular basis. That should be an indication to the Board the BLOG cannot be the only avenue of information delivery.

Finding a balance of delivery tools and mediums is difficult. Members of the POA want current, accurate, up to date information. The rub comes in how to meet this desire. I said earlier I found it difficult to "force feed" information to the members. This task is made harder when members start rumors or spin information they heard by adding or taking away some of the information either consciously or not. Obviously I did not do a good enough job when I was there and the result was being voted out of office. So obviously, I don't have all the answers. What I do know is the Board today is failing in their delivery of current, accurate and up to date information.

The membership needs to step to the plate and accept some of this responsibility. When only a handful of members attend membership meetings; participate in the Blog, attend monthly Board meetings, as well as demand a more rapid reply to daily events; nothing will change. Being complacent and waiting for information to come to you only adds to the problem. Seek out and ask for the information you need or want. You owe it to yourself to be informed. Just because it's always been like this; does not mean it is the way it should be. Seek, ask, digest, provide information and then get involved. We will all be better for it.

Can it be fixed?

How do you know something needs to be fixed? Do you to try to use it; find it's not doing what it is suppose to do, before you can fix it? Can you fix it if you don't know it's broken? What if you know it's broken, but don't want anyone to know it's broken; can you fix it without anyone knowing? Maybe just keep quiet and hope no one notices? Maybe it will fix itself?

Experience tells me before you can fix it; you have to acknowledge it's broken. When what you have is wanted and needed by everyone; admitting it's broken is sometimes hard to do. So how do you get management to acknowledge it's broken and begin to fix it, when the owner is telling everyone, it is fine?

What if you have a big project coming due; you know it's broken; the higher ups down play the need to fix it; the customer is floating along thinking everything is fine and a deadline looming; when at the golden hour; you can't deliver the goods because it's broken?

Does it matter what IT is? IT is broken and refusing to acknowledge that fact will NOT make the problem (IT being broken). Who will step up and tell the truth; explain how and why IT is broken; and provide an HONEST account of WHEN IT will be fixed enough, to do what IT is truly suppose to do?

What is IT ?