Have You Seen a Pay Telephone Lately?

Have you attempted calling a co-worker with the police department lately only to find the number has been disconnected or is no longer in service? How many of you working various assignments have had your department issued cellular phone taken away? Sex Crimes detectives are the latest to fall victim to the budget cutting, cost savings by the department. Many have already forfeited their department telephones and more are yet to be eliminated.

It is hard for anyone to argue the need to cut costs and save money. The department was running a cellular telephone bill in the area of over $700 thousand annually. The goal is to reduce this bill to no more than $250 thousand annually. The telephones were in small part a handout facilitated by a project with Qualcomm. The PDA telephones were a project to get more PDA devices in the hands of working police officers to make their jobs more efficient.

Times have changed and we need to take several steps back in time. To a time when there were few cellular telephones and communications dispatchers relayed information for us. Remember pagers? Old school yes but better than nothing? Oops; I forgot, they are all gone also. What are we going to do? We surely won't be able to be as efficient as we were when we had a department cellular telephone in our pockets or on our belts. Have you tried lately to find a pay telephone? Good luck!

Now I am not going to try and make a case for the department providing a cellular telephone for very member. I'm not sure I could do that with a straight face and at the same time defend my logic. Heck, the doctors in Haiti are doing surgery without all the high tech instruments, machines and equipment they were use to before the earthquake. This is a pathetic comparison I know. But the point I am making is we were able to do the job before cellular telephones and we will be able to do it now. The sad part is there are many detectives out there who never did the job before cellular telephones and have come to rely on them for their primary source of communication with their office, informants, victims, witnesses, their supervisors, partners and allied agencies. We will re-adjust and simply go back to the old way of doing things; less efficiently and with less expediency. We will get the job done but the boss will have to wait until 10-19 to get updated information on incidents. This will not go over well. Do you have your own cellular telephone? Will you be willing to use it for department business? The old *51 number (I first put *56 oops) used for not being charged minutes for calls into the department is gone. I know there are some puzzled looks right now and people reading this asking what the hell "*51" is. Ask an old timer and he or she can explain it to you.

The plan as I understand it is to have "duty" cellular telephones for every division or unit to pass around. The phone will be used for call outs and department business. The times of every detective and supervisor having a telephone provided by the department is in the past. The department's goal of saving half a million dollars is admirable and understandable. The question in my mind is how much will this cost the department in the long run in terms of time and lost productivity? Time will tell.

Today I had a "Twitter Joust" with the little rube. Well, maybe better said; I challenged the little rube on four of his five "Pension Reforms" he is touting around town. The little rube uses Twitter more than all the other politicians in this City put together. He uses every medium he can to deliver his twisted and distorted messages. Left unchecked he will no doubt win over many unknowing voters.

Below is the exchange I had with the little rube today on Twitter. I would urge you all to sign up for Twitter and follow the various politicians and other so called "leaders" in San Diego so you can become educated and involved in what they are doing.

1. carldemaio said; Pension Reform #1: Eliminate "terminal leave" -- did you know city employees earn pension credits on their vacation days after they retire? stevemac1956 said; your last is patently untrue. When on "Terminal Leave" ALL accruals STOP. Check your facts!!
2. carldemaio said; Pension Reform #2: Eliminate Offsets: We pay more than $10M each year of "employee" contributions to pensions. Not vested. stevemac1956 said; Again you spin truth. "Offsets" were INLIEU of pay raises and cost city LESS money. Learn the history Carl
3. carldemaio said; Pension reform #3. SPSP Waiver: Eliminate the city match to the "second" pension plan. We did this with MEA, need to do with others (No comment - not our fight)
4. carldemaio said; Pension Reform #4. DROP Neutrality. City muni code require cost neutrality. Vested benefit has to conform. Let's implement now. stevemac1956 said; It is better than cost neutral. But mayor refuses to do study because he knows this. You should also
5. carldemaio said; Pension Reform #5. Finish the job of reforming pensions for "new" hires. Electeds, public safety still have high pensions. stevemac1956 said; You need to know facts Carl. DC will cost city 35% more than current DB. Safety retirement is not the problem. Again FACT check
6. carldemaio said; These 5 Pension Reforms can all legally be done -- no vesting problems. Only thing missing is candor/leadership. stevemac1956 said; The only thing missing are honest politicians who blame others for problems THEY created. YOU simply compound problems with lies
7. carldemaio said; I'm appearing on KUSI Good Morning San Diego tomorrow at 7:30 am to talk pension reform

This is but a tip of the iceberg as to what this pathetic individual is doing related to your benefits and wages. Stand by for more as he is hell bent on convincing the taxpaying public how grossly overpaid we all are and how generous and outrageous our retirement benefits are. He will not rest until he has eliminated our retirement.

Sanders Love Affair with Goldsmith

I have been lounging around today enjoying the rain catching up on my reading. “Just Wondering” has posted numerous, on-point comments in the past couple of weeks. Predictions I made months back are starting to rear their ugly head. We have not hit bottom and the worst in my opinion is still to come.

The City Attorney is giving a “State of the City” address on Wednesday. The Voice of San Diego carried a piece on January 14, 2010, titled, “Sanders Hearts Goldsmith” that was written by Liam Dillon. In the piece, the mayor is quoted as saying, “I think you'll see that he's producing legal opinions now that are foundational for a lot of the things that are important for the city," citing Goldsmith's role in future pension reform as well. Someone care to enlighten me as to why the City Attorney is giving a “Political” address to the citizens of this city? It just keeps getting better, doesn’t it?

It appears the City Attorney is playing all sides in these debates. His record of legal research and the ability to simply provide legal opinion is not the best. I can’t wait to hear what he has to say Wednesday about pension reform, bankruptcy and outsourcing. I hope for everyone’s sake his research is better than past published material.

The latest revelation the city’s pension payment is at least $20 million more than forecast is going to play in the City Attorney’s address, you can rest assured. This will add fodder for the little rube and his minions as they plot further initiatives. The forecast will no doubt add to the budget shortfall and require additional cuts. So it appears the mayor’s statement during his “State of the City” address, “We are beginning 2010 on strong footing” is another of his smoke screens. If this is firm footing, I sure would not want to hike Everest with the mayor.

During all of this, the mayor is headed off to testify at the hearing for Prop 8. I fail to see how his testimony is relevant or necessary. I do see it as another attempt at inserting himself in issues to bring attention to himself. Regardless of where you stand on this issue, how has this become an issue for San Diego’s mayor?

Wednesday will shed light on the direction the mayor will take us related to pension reform as well as retiree medical insurance.

State of the City - Really?

Did you have an opportunity to catch the mayor’s “State of the City Address?” There were no real surprises and few; scratch that, no new revelations. Some of the comments I heard from various observers;

• Did he (mayor) just punt health cost reduction onto city attorney?
• Biggest disappointment with speech; no mention of further pursuit of real pension reform. 
• Elected (mayor) to protect taxpayer and restore fiscal integrity; yet we’re DONE with pension reform? That’s inconsistent!
• Projects (Convention Center expansion, Downtown Library, City Hall and Charger Stadium) must be built without sacrificing present quality of life.
• I guess we are the dog in the pig and pony story?
• Sidestepping the real issues; what did he (mayor) mean when he said before 18 months is over he will come back with a plan to resolve the City’s structural deficit?
• No meat and potato’s tonight; just more rhetoric.

The text of the mayor’s speech takes up eleven pages. After listening to the address and then taking some time to read his words; I am left with guessing about his real plan for addressing the structural issues. The address lacked specifics and more importantly failed to mention any plan for raising revenue of any kind.

There were several sideways comments about further cuts to employee benefits. The mayor said, “Last year, when we adopted new contracts with our employees, we took strong steps to clamp down on costs in our retiree health care benefits, the final piece of the pension puzzle. We are now working with our employees to establish logical funding sources and levels. And with the help of our new city attorney, we will finish the job.”

"We will finish the job" is a telling statement. If there was ever any doubt where you stand as an employee of this city make no mistake; you are simply a debt that must be eliminated. The mayor's words leave little doubt of what can be expected during negotiations related to retiree health care benefits.

This is the mayor's fifth address and by many accounts his worst. He again made the comment, "We are beginning 2010 on a strong footing. Our employees are working harder and doing more with less than at any time in City history." I wanted to jump up out of my seat and yell out some very strong expletives. When people refer to us as "Civil Servants" they mean just that. They expect us to be "Servants" in the literal meaning of the word. The mayor made this even more clear during his address. Work harder and do more with less is the expectation. 

The press and pundits will weigh in on the words and text of the mayor's address. Those who understand will point out the short comings of his address. Michael Stetz in a January 13, 2010, Union Tribune article, "Mayor's speech pattern wears thin" was printed long before the first word was spoken by the mayor and yet his every point. The last two paragraphs of the piece hit a home-run. "But he wasn't drafted to do the job. He campaigned for it. He even probably voted for himself (well, at least the first time)." "It's time for Sanders to stop looking to the past for blame - he does it quite eloquently, so it might be tough to give up - and realize something. He's in his fifth year as mayor. He must be responsible for something by now, right?"   

No comments about public safety were made and no mention of managed competition directly. There is more to come on these and other issues and you can bet the cuts to benefits and jobs were simply the beginning of more to come. 

Predictions for January 13, 2010

There is not an economic indicator today that paints a positive picture. The State continues to bleed; politicians at all levels refuse to develop structural fixes to the budget mess; pundits and politicians chose to blame employees and unions; and no one is willing to do what is needed to seek long term solutions. Reductions and cuts to services, wages, benefits, and jobs continue with no end in sight. There is seldom a day that passes in which some individual; be it a politician, columnist, reporter, advocate or “expert” will promulgate “facts” about municipal employee benefits that contain more lies and spin than reality and truth.


On January 13, 2010, the mayor will give his “State of the City” address. We will no doubt hear him advocate for expansion of the Convention Center; building a new Taj Mahal – City Hall; building a new downtown library; finding a solution for a new Charger Stadium; suggestions for jobs and services to be contracted out; new “sacrifices” or reductions and cuts to employee benefits “to be sought through negotiations” as the mayor again places the solutions upon the shoulders of the City’s employees. There will be a proclamation for new fees and increases to others but no new taxes. The mayor will attempt to sell the public a bill of goods of an improving financial picture for the city and nary a problem with the public’s safety.

The mayor will again fail to acknowledge the sacrifices employees have made and tell the taxpaying public he is looking after their welfare by reducing and eliminating retirement benefits and eliminating retiree medical insurance. During the last state of the city addresses the mayor did not acknowledge a single worker for the city. He simply laid blame at our feet for the deficit and the mounting costs to operate the nation’s 7th largest city. His address on the 13th will be no different.

There are several comments on my last post from “Just Wondering” that offer a hint of what is to come in 2010. Take some time and read this person’s comments and follow the various links offered. Pay special attention to the comment posted 1/12/2010 at 7:16 pm titled, “All of you Public Safety Employees are EVIL” and follow the link “read the story here” which links to “reason.com” The moments and posting on this site will make many of you angry and cause the blood pressure to increase. Keep in mind this is the mindset of the current mayor of this city and the “little rube” as well as Kevin Faulconer. The attacks on public employees (they want us to be servants) is a national campaign that appears to be centered in California and strongest in southern California.

Looking to the future; I think what we have endured over the last several years is nothing compared to what is in our future. The current mayor has three more years to push his agenda of eviscerating employee wages and benefits and taking employees back 30 years. Now is not the time to sit on the sidelines and grumble as you do nothing. We need to make our voices heard and we need to combat the miss-information (outright lies) being provided to the taxpayers.

Talk to your SDPOA Board members and ask them what you can do to help. Get involved and become educated about your benefits so you can correct the lies on the spot and not allow someone to walk away believing the lies they were told. When someone tells people city employees are leaving after 30 years and making “as much as 130%” in retirement; yell at the top of your lungs if needed the truth. The truth is 90% is the maximum an employee can receive upon retirement after 30 years and that only applies to safety personnel. Know your benefits and how to explain them factually to taxpayers and friends alike.

Tomorrow I will post my thoughts on the mayor’s speech and see how close I was to predicting his words. Be safe and enjoy the day.

The End of 2009 – NOT the End of the Pain

The final hours of 2009 are ticking down and none too soon as far as I am concerned. Dwelling on the events of this past year will simply cause the removal of even more enamel from my teeth and renewed tension to my mandible. Many contemplate resolutions for a new year. By March, these resolutions will be gone from memory and people will revert to the comfort of the past. Politicians will use this time to pontificate and proselytize their agenda, disguised as "New Year's Resolutions." The first to hit the air waves is none other than the "little rube."

Disguised as an "Opinion" piece in the Union Tribune; "Resolutions for San Diego City Hall" the little rube continues his attempt to sell the taxpayer on his vision for policies, "that help create jobs, a truly balanced budget, reductions in unfunded pension and health obligations, and improvements in the water rate structure." The little rube said, "I'd like to suggest four self-improvement resolutions for my fellow city leaders and I to focus on in 2010."

The first of four resolutions; jobs friendly policies that promote putting San Diegans back to work. The little rube boasted of "holding a 'small-business' summit where he compiled a laundry list of examples where city government has been a hindrance rather than a help to job creation." Does the label "Hypocrite" ring true to anyone else? This carpet bagging, spin master, has gone out of his way to ensure the un-employment lines in San Diego continue to grow. His goal is to eliminate as many positions within the city as possible so he can grease the way for his cronies in the name of "Managed Competition." If you think for one second, his resolution of "jobs friendly policies" is altruistic, I would suggest you wake up and smell the coffee. The little rube continues to rail against raising revenue, demanding City leaders reject tax and fee increases, so he can ensure the city continues to face budget deficits. He can then continue to blame employees and sway the taxpayers to eliminate pension and retiree health benefits earned over the past thirty years.

The second resolution; a real balanced city budget, is the little rube's continued cry for managed competition in the name of "structural change." This is the where the spin machine kicks into high speed. The 15 percent to 25 percent cost savings the little rube says will be achieved through managed competition is simply; NOT REALISTIC. Government was not set up, nor is it in the business of "making" a profit. The only part of the little rube's continued diatribe related to this issue I will agree with is the need to conduct a performance audit and ensure the benchmark for performance meets private sector performances for all city services. This not only makes sense but is something good government does as a routine. Many of these audits have been completed and structural changes have already been implemented. When managed competition is employed, minimal savings is realized in the short term, and then experience has shown the companies providing the services realize the need to turn a profit and begin to make changes to meet this goal. The result of this selling of government services to the lowest bidder will be higher cost to the taxpayer and inadequate service in the long term.

The third of the little rube's New Year's resolutions; pension, health benefits reform, is buoyed by his playing loose and free with reality and facts. The numbers this pathetic politician uses to inflame taxpayers is nothing but short of criminal. His use of numbers, facts and spin have created a hysteria and hatred toward city employees and their wages and benefits that are all part of a larger scheme. The little rube uses facts and figures out of context to fit his argument and bolster his false claims. An example is his statement, "Over the years, city leaders granted employees generous pension packages and free taxpayer-funded health care coverage for life." His omission of how the retiree health care benefits came to be is egregious. He refuses to acknowledge the deal Pete Wilson put together to save the city money in 1981, to have employees withdraw from Social Security/Medicare with the agreement of providing city sponsored retiree health care insurance. The City saved money and in theory used the savings to provide these promised benefits.

2010 should be the year city leaders and employees join together and craft a solution to the pension and retiree health care insurance problem. Creating a tiered plan for retiree health care insurance for pre 1986 employees, honoring the decade's old agreement, is imperative to doing what is right. This should, at a minimum, include fully paid medical care insurance for those employees hired before 1986 who lack sufficient quarters to participate in Medicare. Workers who are eligible for Medicare should be provided retiree health care insurance until such time as eligible for this benefit. Working together to create solutions for long term retiree health care insurance, include implementing a shared retiree medical trust for funding adequate benefits is a must. Developing a sustainable Defined Benefit Retirement for Safety members and General members will require sacrifice. Recognizing the gains earned over the past decades, at this time, are not sustainable, we must roll back the retirement of workers. To do this fairly and with minimal impact on the quality of life for the city's employees; a tiered system need be explored for retirement. Participants with less than ten years of service (Safety and General hired after 2000) should be considered for a reduction to the benefit received at retirement which might include; an increase to the age of retirement (53 years for Safety; 62 years for General); a maximum benefit of 2.5% per year of service for the first 20 years and 2.75% for the remaining years of service, with a maximum benefit of 85 percent of the highest one year for Safety employees; and 2% per year of service for the first 25 years and 2.25% per year for the remaining years of service, with a maximum benefit of 85 percent of the highest three years for General employees. Employees and the City will contribute an additional one percent to retirement until the funding level rises above 90%; elected office holders will not be eligible to participate in the City's Retirement program but can participate in a City Matching 401K program up to a six percent match of contribution. DROP should be made available to ALL Safety Members who provide a minimum of 25 years of actual service upon retirement.

The suggestions above will no doubt be met with resistance from both sides. The City will say the changes do not go far enough and employees will say they go too far. I am not advocating these suggestions are the fix all, end all to the City's fiscal problems. I am simply offering suggestions to begin the dialog for obtaining sustainable and realistic retirement benefits for all employees that are acceptable to the taxpayer without throwing the baby out with the bath water.

The forth of the little rube's resolutions; reform water rates, is one that lacks detail or vision. Simply showing resolve to create a new water rate structure to provide "financial incentives" to those who conserve is a shallow approach to a critical problem. Pursuing a secure long term water supply has been a dismal failure, due to a lack of vision and action by our elected officials. Suggesting the city expands hookups to recycled water for irrigation without the implementation of the "toilet to tap" program will not provide sufficient increases to meet the needs of our children. Working aggressively to move desalination forward and seeking federal support for this endeavor is paramount.

The little rube actually closes his piece with some truth; "As with any effort to keep faithful to a new year's resolution, city leaders will need someone to act as a constant coach and conscience – and that's where the public comes in." The taxpayer needs to become involved and hold city leaders accountable for their actions or lack thereof. To sit idly by while the city and its employees are decimated is not an option. With the New Year upon us, we need to make a resolution of our own to get involved and make a difference. We must educate the taxpayer to the realities of what we can safely provide and inform them of our true benefits. We can no longer allow the little rube and others to spin reality without providing context and honest, true facts disputing their lies.

I wish to thank all those who offered support to me and my family during 2009. Your prayers and words carried us through the days when we felt so helpless. To those who retired in 2009, after sacrificing countless years of your lives, to protect the citizens of San Diego, I want to thank you for all you gave. My hope is for a better year, filled with good health, joy and love. As we enter 2010, I will leave you with a quote I read this evening on Charles Kindred's Facebook;"We find no real satisfaction or happiness in life without obstacles to conquer and goals to achieve" Maxwell Maltz.

We have many obstacles to conquer and goals to achieve in 2010. The real satisfaction and happiness in our lives are our responsibility and cannot be left to others to provide.

Happy New Year Everyone!!!

The Myth; The Legend, Reality

I laugh every time "Anonymous" posts a belief or information they want people to believe to be factual and accurate. I cringe at times when these posts are directed at people who have little if any opportunity to defend themselves. I have not edited, deleted or in any other way censored comments to my BLOG (two exceptions related to a known person making a comment meant to hurt someone). Rumors in law enforcement circles can take on a life of their own. The myths that grow from these rumors grow to folk lore status. Legends are made as well as demons.

In my 30+ years with the San Diego Police Department I have heard my share of rumors. I have heard the stories that produced these many legends and created as many demons. Many of the actions that elevated these people to "Legend" status generally had some kernel of truth, but over the years the story had morphed into something that vaguely resembles the actual event. Rumors generally start these stories, as the story is passed from one set of lips to an open ear; jumbled in a brain half soaked in alcohol; then repeated with a harmless detail being either added or deleted to make the story more entertaining or important.

There were the people who wanted to create their own "Legend Status" and would embellish upon an incident to make it bigger than reality. There was a Lieutenant who retired and moved to Washington who comes to mind. His was a storied career if you listened to him tell the story. He became a legend, even if only in his own mind. This person was slipping in status and stature and sought to increase his "Legendary Status." He became the center of attention in the mid-eighties when he alleged officers from the SDPD kidnapped him from his home in Washington, shot him in the ear, leaving him for dead, in an attempt to assassinate him for reasons that today are still not clear. Reality is, it never happened as described, but he achieved his "Legend" status and was the focus of attention for quite some time.

In 2006, I retired from the Poway Unified School District's Board of Education (PUSD). I served for twelve years (3 terms) and always held the belief members of the Board of Education should have a vested interest by having children in the schools, to serve on the board. My children had both graduated and I had served my time. I announced my retirement from PUSD and made plans to focus on my responsibility at the time of representing officers as a Director for the SDPOA. When I announced my retirement from the PUSD, I was interviewed by a news reporter who asked if I had any other plans for politics. I said I had considered running for the City Council and would explore that possibility in the future. These comments were seized upon by a couple of POA members who found this to be some sort of conflict (serving as a board member for the POA and exploring a run for City Council). I found myself defending a statement of future aspirations and what effect if any this would have on my ability to represent the members.

Let's fast forward to comments made in my last BLOG post. Someone (Anonymous) asked if I would consider running for Mayor in 2012. Flattered someone would think I could be a candidate in 2012. Reality is that person was most likely just home from the bars and was sporting a nice buzz at 0207 hours and not thinking clearly. But I appreciate the support all the same. Then "Fed Up City Employee" posted they heard somewhere I had considered a run for city council and would I still consider doing so. I can't use the same argument; Fed Up posted at 0921 hours. Maybe this poster is an old timer still working patrol and just got home from working graveyard and stopping off to have a couple of stress reducing beverages and just got home feeling the same buzz. Then an Anonymous poster writes, "Can anyone say skeletons?" I am not sure, but I believe this person was making a comment about my skeletons, in some way insinuating this would be a deterrent for such an action.

I am fortunate to live in a house large enough to have multiple walk in closets to house all of those skeletons. But as I move from closet to closet and change the Fabreeze odor reducers, I take stock of these "Skeletons" and their importance in who I was, who I have become and who cares. I laugh at many of these "skeletons" and how some became legend and reality from myth. I am not going to deny I have done and said some stupid things over my 30 years around this organization. I am not going to hide from the mistakes I have made in my life and place blame with others or shirk my culpability for these transgressions. The difficult task is addressing those skeletons created through myth and becoming legend. I laugh often at comments and actions attributed to me. If R.D. Brown did half of what has been attributed to him, he would first be over 100 years old and second he would either be in jail or dead. I feel like R.D. at times.

Make no mistake about my skeletons; I have them like all of us do. I do not have any that would cause me to shy from making a run for City Council. I am pretty much an open book and have accepted responsibility for my shortcomings and while I may not be perfect (OK, not even close) I would challenge anyone who is, to step forward and make a difference. Speaking to the issue of seeking a seat on the City Council, I am flattered when people ask me if I would consider doing so. I have spoken at length about the possibility of making a run at District One's seat on the City Council. I have explored options and discussed with various individuals that possibility.

Today, December 20, 2009, I have no plans and very little desire to take on that challenge. The "Anonymous" posters who cast stones and aspersions while slinking behind a computer screen, have such little credibility, their words and veiled threats are meaningless. My reasons for declining to thrust myself into that arena are many. The least of which are my skeletons or the anonymous posters. The ability for one person to affect the change necessary to rite this sinking ship is far more than my abilities and temperament would allow. I also refuse to adhere to the play book of either the Republicans or Democrats. I am a registered Republican and would not prostitute myself or my beliefs to garner their endorsement. I refuse to change my affiliation to Democrat and am left with moving to Independent or "refuse to state" to garner support. The seat is currently held by a Democrat and the Republicans are working to find a stalwart supporter of Sanders and the agenda of the downtown power brokers. That person is NOT me.

I am growing more concerned each day with the tone of those elected to represent our interests. The continued bashing of city employees and our wages and benefits by the press and politicians has grown tiresome. The lack of honest dialogue and refusal to make structural changes, have created a hostile work environment. The press and politicians have all found fault with promises made over years of negotiations and rather than offer solutions and reasonable modifications, have simply taken the politically expedient road by eliminating years of earned benefits and wages. The continued call for reductions and elimination of wages and benefits resonates with those taxpayers who have found themselves struggling to survive. Lacking solutions, we are left to defend the status quo which is a no win situation. We must move past that and offer reasoned changes to our benefits. To do otherwise is giving in and giving up.

The Board of Directors with the SDPOA is working hard to address issues of importance to its members. What is important? To me, the issue of "Retiree Medical Insurance" is the most pressing issue needing a solid answer. Being one of those hired before 1986, the retiree medical issue needs to be addressed before any other. To an officer who has twelve to fifteen years of service, this may not be the issue of most importance to them. Preservation of benefits should be the number one priority of all of us. To do this, we must be willing to find ways to sacrifice in areas less important so the future can be preserved. If the City moves to eliminate retiree medical in this year's contract, you can be assured there will be another exodus of officers from an already decimated department. The mayor knows this and does not care. If anything, in his eyes, it is a plus to eliminate those in the DROP or at retirement age from the city's payroll. The need to seek a solution to this pressing issue could not be greater.

Politically Expedient

What will be the real outcomes of the City Council's actions when they eliminated twelve canine officers; all Investigative Aides; all but eight of the Police Service Officers; twelve Police Code Compliance Officers and the Harbor Patrol Officers from the police department's budget? The mayor and others have told you these cuts will only cause "minimal" delays in response times to calls for service. Let's check back in with Earth and have a reality check here.

I have been a police officer for the City of San Diego for 30+ years and am a resident and native of this city. It is irresponsible and disingenuous to say simply response times to calls for service will be the only effect of these cuts. Reality is people are going to be injured and even killed as a result of these cuts. Some will say I am simply an alarmist and pandering to a fearful group of citizens. Let me take some time and lead you through my thought process for coming to these realizations.

The loss of twelve canine officers will have a profound effect on the ability of patrol officers to apprehend and arrest suspects; defuse hostile and aggressive individuals and prevent the use of lethal force. Suspects often challenge an officer who is pointing a firearm at him, but when the suspect sees the canine he or she will immediately comply with commands and submit to arrest. Eliminating twelve of the thirty six canines will immediately place citizens and officers in harm's way as officers revert to physical measures to apprehend and arrest suspects. Not to mention the numbers of suspects who will elude capture by hiding and fleeing from officers where once a canine would find the hiding or fleeing suspect in short order. There will seldom if ever be more than two canine officers per watch for the entire City of San Diego; from San Ysidro to the Wild Animal Park. Feel free to do the math on how many miles each must cover.

The elimination of the Investigative Aides will require the transfer of thousands of the criminal cases investigated and processed by these Investigators to sworn detectives who struggle daily to keep up with the serious felony cases arriving on their desks. Included in these positions are two Investigative Aides who handle investigations related to seized, recovered and impounded firearms. These two Gun Desk Investigators are responsible for ensuring firearms are not returned to persons legally not allowed to posses them. They also process firearms for possible links to other crimes and work with Investigators in Homicide, Gangs and other investigative units linking crimes and suspects through the guns flowing across their desk. These duties will now fall upon sworn detectives; again removing him or her from their primary duties to complete these administrate and time consuming tasks. The elimination of these Investigative Aides will require additional detectives which will result in patrol officers being removed from their patrol duties to fill these positions.

The elimination of the Police Code Compliance Officers in Vice will have a tremendous negative effect upon the ability of the police department to monitor, regulate and control the many police regulated business in the City of San Diego. The Massage Parlors, Strip Clubs, Bars, Peep Shows and Adult Book Stores, Pawn Shops, Junk Yards, Second Hand Shops, Recycle Centers, Tow Companies, and Alarm Companies to name just a few; are inspected, regulated and licensed by these PCCO'S. Each of these industries has the potential for criminal activity and organized crime and requires close scrutiny of not just their practices but the employees working in them. The revenue generated from the licenses, permits and fines total roughly $7.2 million on an annual basis. The civilian officers who currently do these tasks have developed experience and expertise that have contributed to their outstanding record of performance. The duties and responsibilities for processing the thousands of permits, licenses and applications will now fall on the desk of sworn detectives who will be required to meet legal time requirements for issuing or denying licenses and permits as well as ensure critical criteria for licensing are met. These detectives will be required to become familiar with the nuances of each industry and the many regulatory rules, laws and costs of each. The owners of these industries demand proper, fair and comprehensive oversight. Sworn police detectives will now assume these duties and responsibilities and must learn each industry and the requirements for permitting, licensing and inspecting. Detectives will tire quickly of the administrative monotony and seek to transfer or promote to new challenges and a new detective will be transferred in to begin the learning processes anew. These constant changes will soon result in loss of oversight and allow for more criminal activity to take hold. The quality of life issues surrounding these many industries are to vast to discuss here but you can imagine the degradation to our communities that will soon follow. Lest we forget the loss of revenue from the unintentional lag in processing and lack of adequate oversight and inspection resulting in fines being levied.

The city of San Diego is a world class destination for vacationers and the waterways are a popular play spot for locals. The elimination of the Harbor Patrol Unit of the San Diego Police Department is short sighted, penny wise and pound foolish. The cost of this unit is miniscule (less than $70,000) and their immeasurable experiences and qualifications are hard to quantify and cannot be replaced easily. The lives saved and the accidents prevented by these experienced sworn officers demand a solution be found to fund these positions. To believe the coast guard or life guards will step in and provide the preventive presence and enforcement currently provided is laughable.

The loss of the Police Service Officers (PSO) will have a profound effect on patrol officers. These dedicated civilian police service officers investigate burglaries, traffic accidents, thefts, recover property, assist with traffic direction at scenes and handle the many responsibilities surrounding community watch groups and crime prevention. These duties will now fall to the patrol officer.

Many will say we all have to suck it up. Some will say we are not doing enough. The mayor has boasted the streets are safe and there will be little to no effect on the public's safety. I would suggest the public and police officers are not safe and the pages of San Diego public safety have been turned back twenty plus years and our ability to do our job reduced to 1970 levels. In 1988, Gerald Sanders, Captain, ID# 1840, was the Commanding Officer at Southeast Division. On a normal day in Southeastern Division, Captain Sanders put nineteen (19) police officers, two sergeants, two police service officers and three reserve officers into the field to protect the citizens of Southeast Division. We had begun a program called "Contact and Cover" as a result of ten (10) on-duty officer deaths in the prior 12 years.

Then Captain Sanders was vocal about his desire to increase the staffing in his command and believed at the time he did not have enough officers too safely and properly police this area of the city. Yet today he has eviscerated the civilian support personnel whose primary duties allowed officers to concentrate on maintaining order and providing safe communities. The sworn officer's ability to do their job is made possible by these dedicated persons. The loss of those whose duties will now fall to sworn officers will require detectives to be re-assigned to these vacant positions and patrol officers to take on additional duties. The reality is there are going to be many functions we once provided as a routine that will fall by the way side. The ability of officers on patrol to answer radio calls, conduct investigations, provide traffic enforcement, arrest criminal violators, and provide crime prevention assistance will result in officers cutting corners and taking unnecessary risk.

Unlike Captain Sanders staffing numbers in 1988, divisions throughout the San Diego Police Department fail to meet even watered down minimum staffing on a daily, shift by shift basis. Minimum staffing in 1988 in Southeastern Division was almost two times what it is today. Calls for service were a fraction of what they are today. PSO'S, Investigative Aides, and Reserves were available and staffing was greater in 1988 than it is today and sufficient officers to provide at minimum "contact and cover" for each other. Yet in Captain Sanders own words this staffing was not enough in 1988.

The 10,000 pound elephant in the room is the political grandstanding elected officials and others are doing in the name of no layoffs of sworn police officers. The mayor and others are pounding their chest and proclaiming "No Sworn Police Officers" were laid off and we are all suppose to be grateful. The reality is the layoffs proposed by the mayor and approved by the City Council will have a much more profound effect on the public's safety and our ability to do anything about it. The politicians continue to force the blame for the budget deficit on the city's employees. The politically expedient and politically popular move is to layoff civilian, non-sworn members of the police department and boast of preserving the public's safety.

The proper course of action, as distasteful and painful as it may have been, would have been to layoff the 38 or so academy recruits and 30 police trainees. The budget correction sought would have been accomplished with less effect on the public and officer's safety. This course of action would have required truthful dialogue with the taxpayer and an additional step of offering up real solutions. The current politicians in the City of San Diego do not have the will or ability to do this. Until that time comes, we will continue to face cuts to services, personnel, wages and benefits.

Who will accept responsibility for those injured and killed as a result of the degradation to the public's safety in San Diego?

A “Little Rube” Pull Toy

Today I was chatting with several others when someone described the little rube as nothing more than one of those dolls kids play with that have a pull string that when pulled plays one of several recorded messages; "We need to reduce inefficiencies" "We need to cut out the waste in government" "We need to start with labor costs" "We need to focus on pension reform and retiree medical reforms" "We need to reform fringe benefits and hold the line on wages" "Efficiency for the lowest cost should be governments obligation." I started to laugh and then it hit me; he's right!

I have always felt the little rube is nothing more than a "one trick pony" that uses simple, short catch phrases that draw people's attention. The phrases he uses in every conversation he engages in are the same and always follow the same theme; "Pension Reform" "Retiree Medical Reform" "Government Efficiency" "Reduce Labor Costs" are the lead phrase of every conversation. Sneak up behind him; find the string; give it a yank; and hear it for yourself.

I was doing my usual search for stories about the goings on at city hall when I came across a Twitter post from the little rube, "carldemaio Drink champagne (or just want reform at City Hall)? Join me for a fundraiser this Saturday at my house." (You will need a facebook account to access the link to his party) The little rube is inviting people to his home, "Help Carl DeMaio reform city government by attending this important fundraiser at his personal home in Rancho Bernardo. Proceeds benefit Carl's 2010 campaign to pass two key ballot initiatives." The little rube is plotting, planning and pushing his own agenda and will stop at nothing to ensure success. Watch for a pension reform initiative in the very near future.

Yesterday was an example of why politics are wrecking San Diego. The outcome of yesterday's action by the city council in eliminating the 80+ civilian positions from the police department will have a profound effect on our ability to provide public safety services to the taxpayer. The cuts were made by the mayor to the civilian support members of the department so he could stand up and proclaim no "Sworn Officers" were laid off. The general public was then lead to believe the positions being eliminated would allow the budget deficit to be eliminated and they would not notice an impact. What the mayor and others failed to tell the public was the duties carried out by these civilian support personnel will now be carried out by sworn police officers at a much greater cost. The cost to accomplish these duties just drastically increased and the efficiency the little rube so passionately advocates for has been destroyed.

While no one wants to be responsible for laying off sworn police officers, I would submit to you the pain of laying off 50 police officers would have had less of an impact on services and our ability to do the job than the elimination of the 80+ civilian support personnel. No, I do not want to lay off 50 police officers, but if the goal is to cut costs with the least impact on services and safety; laying off those in the academy would have accomplished this goal more efficiently. The cuts to civilians were simply the politically expedient way to temporarily solve a long term problem. The sad part of this is it was an opportunity for the department to gain the attention of the ignorant taxpayer who is clueless of the state of public safety in San Diego.

The January 2010 academy is not going to have any San Diego Police Recruits and the April 2010 academy is still up in the air as to whether we will have any at that time. The exodus of officers has for the time being slowed. This will not last for much longer as other agencies begin to hire and chose lateral hires over recruits. Officers with three to ten years on the department are poised to flee this city and the incompetence of its leadership. Early next year officers will begin to leave for other agencies as it becomes clear additional cuts will be taken from their paychecks. Those officers who have been here five years have had three reductions to their paychecks. How long would you stick around?

The elimination of twelve canine officers is a clear indication of what management and this city's leaders think of the safety of officers and citizens. The priorities of the mayor and council were clear yesterday when they voted to keep an urban forester over an investigative aide working the gun desk. The council's priorities further shone when they sought to find a legal way to use water funds to restore $369,000 for the San Dieguito River Park agency rather than explore the recommendation by the IBA to eliminate further vacant positions held in the police department budget to preserve the six PCCO'S. This action would have provided an additional $2.9 million which would have covered the cost of the six Police Code Compliance Officers that were eliminated. Talking about "Government Efficiency" the department and mayor get an "F" for this action. To ensure the duties and responsibilities are handled, four detectives and a detective sergeant will be added to the Vice Unit in hopes these sworn officers can fill the void. I say "Good Luck" it ain't going to happen.

Nothing good is going to come from yesterday's actions by the mayor and council. The so called 18 month budget passed yesterday will be out of kilter and facing another deficit by August. The structural changes that need be done have not even been discussed by ANY of our elected politicians. The cuts to services and elimination of employees will require higher paid employees to pick up the duties and responsibilities of those being laid off. The amount of overtime necessary to get the job done will drastically increase and the learning curve will continue to be an elusive arc. Where we had stable, experienced and hard working civilian support; we are now going to have sworn officers attempting to learn new tasks and looking to transfer about the time they begin to fully function in the job. Duties and responsibilities that require stability and consistency have been replaced with officers who will soon tire of the administrative function and seek new challenges and responsibilities in hopes of promoting or getting back into the game.

Say what you will; we would have been better served for our management and political leaders to do the right thing and lay off sworn officers rather than the 80+ civilian support staff they chose for political expediency and the ability to say, "We did not lay off any sworn officers." We are currently down 300 police officers and this number is going to continue to increase. The fifty to ninety recruits in the academy are years away from helping in any real way. We are in trouble folks and it will get worse when our civilian support staff handle their last cases.

Need a “Happy Ending?”

At the end of a massage in one of your less than professional establishments a technician will often provide a "Happy Ending" to her client. If I have to explain this to you maybe you are reading a BLOG not really suited for you. If you want to get one of these "Happy Endings" you can pocket your money and just attend a San Diego City Council Meeting prepared to offer testimony and think your words will be considered before a decision is made.

Today's exercise before City Council was yet another example of how truly screwed up and out of touch the politicians are in this city. The impact to public safety that will result from today's action will be lasting and traumatic. The blood that will be shed by citizens and officers alike will be on the hands of those who orchestrated the political cuts in the name of balancing a budget. The mayor is beaming with delight in his latest victory at the expense of the ignorant taxpayer. He boasts for all to hear he was able to close a $200 million budget deficit and not lay off any police officers or firefighters. Then there is the proclamation of more officers on the street to fight crime and everything will continue functioning as before even though the mayor and council just eliminated the Police Code Compliance Officers; Investigative Aides, twelve canine officers, the horses and harbor unit.

Before the council began taking public testimony, I posted a Twitter message at 0926 hours that said; "Sitting in Council waiting to give testimony wondering why. Faulconer just indicated decisions have been made." As the mayor gave his presentation and the questions that followed from council, it became evident they had all been snowed and bought into the rhetoric and lies they were being sold.

I have followed city councils in this city for more years than I care to count. I have sat through my share of meetings and spent countless hours watching the meetings on TV when I could not make the meeting in person. I have seen some characters sitting on that dais. I cannot remember a collective group whose ability to reason and ask appropriate and reasoned questions to get to the heart of an issue, so lacking. They have allowed the mayor to pierce their noses and attach a ring through the greater alar cartilage so he can lead them around at will. Today's display was clearly an example of what is wrong with "Strong Mayor" and this city's government and the so called elected leaders.

The "Strong Mayor" as it is currently being practiced is contributing to the dysfunction in San Diego. Government is designed to have safe guards against one person making all of the decisions. A "Dictatorship" is a more appropriate descriptor of how things are in San Diego; one person making the decision for everyone and eviscerating anyone with the gall to offer a differing opinion or speak out against the "Dictator." The council minions, who were actually elected by the voters, have yet to understand their role and position in this government as it is constructed.

I was disappointed in the actions of the council today. They had an opportunity to challenge the mayor and offer more reasonable solutions and put the interests of the taxpayers first. Today's actions were wholly and completely political and clearly showed the extent of control the mayor holds over the council and departments in this city. The approval of the cuts to the support staff of the police department left me questioning; what are the real priorities of those running this city. To eliminate six Police Code Compliance Officers assigned to the Vice Unit, whose jobs involve a positive revenue increase to the general fund of over $7 million annually and replace them four Police Detectives and a Detective Sergeant all in the name of balancing a budget makes no sense.

The case was clearly made before council today there would have been a lesser impact on public safety had the city laid off 45 police officers. The lay-offs that were approved today will have a lasting and profound effect on the ability of the department to provide adequate police services. To say the cuts will have little effect on service or revenue is short sighted and patently false. But remember; the mayor did not have to lay-off any sworn officers. Political expediency over doing what is right won out today.

My only request is next time I appear before the council and they are going to provide me a "Happy Ending" and perpetrate the charade that took place today, they allow me to make the choice of participating. The council and mayor have nothing to worry about; they eliminated those responsible for regulating the massage busniesses and "Happy Endings" will become the norm again as well as the many other crimes that are bread when regulation takes a back seat to politics.

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?