So Sanders wants to gut the Mills act....
 How ironic the country commissioners had a ceremony this week recognizing Mission Hills 100th anniversary and its town council and heritage group for their historic preservation in Mission Hills.
 It appears that Sanders is trying to set the bull dozers loose in order to get more campaign contributions from his developers.
 The last thing this city needs is four more years of this smoke and mirrors mayor with his Sainz scripts and a Casey Gwinn Clone replacing Aguirre in the City Attorney's Office.
 The first time I was in California was in 1940 and I naively thought all of the Hollywood sets were in Hollywood. Here in San Diego too many historical architecturally distinctive houses and buildings have been treated like knock 'em down Hollywood sets after the filming is over.—JR

PRESERVATION ALERT: The Mills Act
You need to  be aware that Mayor Jerry Sanders and City staff are proposing significant  changes to the City of San Diego's Mills Act Program.
  If adopted  as written, these changes will make most (if not all) historic homes in La  Jolla, Pacific Beach, Point Loma, Mission Hills, Bankers Hill, Hillcrest,  Talmadge and Kensington ineligible for a new Mills Act contract.
 In  addition, numerous recent comments by City staff indicate that the City is  considering possible "non-renewal" of current Mills Act contracts. This action  would effectively cancel existing contracts and the process of increasing  property taxes to the current year assessments would begin.
 If you are  concerned by the City's current tenor regarding protecting our historic  communities please...
1. ATTEND the Historic  Resource Board Mills Act Workshop! Friday April 18th at 2:00pm in the Council  Committee Room 12th floor of the City Administration Building 202 C Street,  Downtown   
2. CONTACT Mayor  Sanders'! If you can not get Mayor Sanders personally contact Ronald E. Lacey,  Community Outreach 202 C Street, 11th Floor San Diego, CA 92101  rlacey@sandiego.gov     (619) 236-7168  
3.CONTACT your City Council person, neighbors and friends!  

Community’s have the right to organize itself and vote for members who support shared goals. Throughout San Diego record numbers of community members are showing up to vote at Planning Boards Elections.
VICTORY FOR HoK at  the KEN-TAL ELECTIONS!
 On Wednesday, March 12, the Kensington-Talmadge  community voted overwhelmingly to replace seven current board members with  people who support the goals of Heart of Kensington. It was a decisive vote and a strong statement against a planning board that voted unanimously in  October 2007 to approve the Kensington Terrace development.
This is a victory for residents who want to preserve the Kensington village  atmosphere!

Don Bauder BLOG
  Remember when Don Bauder was digging up the dirt at the SD Union? And then he got forced out for digging up too much that Copley didn't like?
 He then started writing for the Reader, but that limited him to once a
week. Good gosh, there's a lot more dirt in San Diego than you can
squeeze into one weekly column. So now Don has a Blog. Great! Check it out: www2.sdreader.com/weblogs/financial-crime-politics/
— Lee, Watchdog

James Waring's Arrogance
    As the egregious James Waring leaves for greener pastures, his sense of right and wrong remains unchanged by his experiences in San Diego.  He departed as he arrived, reft of any notion that his  main goal was to make the city better, not worse.
     Neither the good examples that citizens set for him, especially in the community planning system, nor his flaming failure to effect his em- ployer's ambitious plans for commercial and development supremacy over citizens‚ needs seems to have had any effect on him whatever.  Some of us are not surprised.
     His swan song, "What I want is the best solution for the City", rings hollow as we see in the same article in today's newspaper that,
„..he doesn't think the [Sunroad] building poses a danger to aircraft at Montgomery Field.   Such  sneering arrogance.  Insofar as the Sunroad building is concerned, the best solution for the City was and is compliance with FAA safety recommendations.
     Trying to push a major safety hazard through the permit process, getting  caught at it, and then blaming the Development Services De- partment and the City Attorney, rather than himself, are quintessential James Waring; the James Waring that the Mayor put at the head of real estate, planning, redevelopment, permits, and related matters.  We best under- stand James Waring by first understanding Jerry Sanders.
—Jim Varnadore, City Heights

Internal Investigation for the Sunroad's Debacle
Letter to: Ms. SawyerKnoll,
 As reported in the media you have been appointed to take over Ms. Froman's internal investigation regarding the permitting process for the Sunroad Centrum 12 debacle.
  The Union-Tribune has done most of your investigating on this in reporting Ms. Escobar-Eck as the primary culprit with Mr. Waring as an accomplice. Their actions would not have been tolerated this long in an uncorrupt corporation.
 Any attempt by any person or person's in the city's administration to obscure Escobar-Eck's and Waring's involvement or place fault on a lower echelon employee will be viewed by the public as being as culpable as the original perpetrators of this heinous compromising of public safety. .
 Furthermore it is we taxpayers that will have to suffer further cutbacks in public services should the Sunroad Corporation be successful in their $40 million dollar lawsuit.
 The public/media spotlight is now upon you.
 —Sincerely yours, Jarvis Ross, 7/11/07

Help or spread the word if you can; the single most unrepresentative group in the City of San Diego (the working poor) are having their homes, jobs, and businesses taken away from them by the city owned redevelopment corporations, city redevelopment department and the elected city officials who claim to represent them.
There is no real need for SEDC or CCDC:
1. Citizen redevelopment Boards, elected by the local populations and not appointed or hand-picked by our politicians can direct redevelopment dollars
2. Organic populations can remain in their local areas and gentrification
does not have to take place -- if only socially responsible
development/redevelopment were to be allowed and encouraged.
3. Locally and community developed "owner-participation models" can be used in order for existing populations to profit from development/redevelopment
of privately owned lands and businesses instead of large
developers/redevelopers serving private/political interests.
—Watchdog
Responce Comments to the above commentary:
If you read redevelopment law in the Health & Safety Code you find that Project Area Committees are the only named advisory committees. CCDC and SEDC have usurped their powers. I question the legality of CCDC and SEDC. No other city has this type of entity. —Mel

I agree. I feel that all planning committees should be elected as is done in the unincorporated areas.
 If you want to know the power of the big developers then City Heights is an example to review. The City Manager and council conspired to eliminate the locally controlled  Mid City Development Corporation -our local redevelopment agency, the City Heights Business Improvement Association -our local business owners association, and the Model Schools Agency -our partnership to have community control over school eminent domain. One by one these organizations have been eliminated or replaced by developer puppet bodies.
 The big developers want consolidation of power in individuals that can be controlled by the human weakness needs for incentives outside the community (More money or support for future election etc.)
 Keep up the fight for democracy on the most immediate and direct level. —J

The barrio people need to recall their councilman! —Deb

Mayor and Council's Hypocrisy of cutting the City Attorney's Budget for 14 Attorneys
 The Mayor complained he isn’t getting much legal advise from the City Attorney’s office lately.
  “Then WHY did Sander’s cut staff by 14 lawyers after telling Aguirre he could have them?"
  Peter’s has been fast tracking items on the Council Docket, complaining the City Attorney’s Office isn’t looking at the items fast enough, before they are voted on.
  “WHY then did Stevens vote to cut staff the for the City Attorney’s office by 14 lawyers?
  Akins has complained for years about the large amount of litigation the city has.
  “Then WHY did she vote cut staff for the City Attorney’s office by 14 lawyers?
  ”Hueso and Young say they need representatives in their districts from the City Attorney’s office.
  “So, WHY did they both vote cut the staff for the City Attorney’s office by 14 lawyers?
   ”Maybe this hypocritical Mayor and Council should stop the questionable deals that end up having the City in court and the City Attorney questioning their practices.
  Maybe if the bad behavior that permeates our City would stop we wouldn’t need as many attorneys!

Troubled over Sunroad's Harbor Island plan
Union Tribune, Letter to tyhe Editor, 6/3/07
  Regarding “Faulty towers?/Sunroad's plan to build near Lindbergh Field troubles FAA” (A1, June 1):
  My jaw drops at just the thought of two hotel towers that exceed federal height standards being built on Harbor Island next to Lindbergh Field and the Navy airfield. Does Sunroad, or anybody for that matter, have any idea how many planes miss their landings on a daily basis?
  Do they even care if a plane veers into a building?I live beside the flight path and am aware of at least one or two flights a day that miss their landings, even when weather conditions are good. Planes circle and try again.
  When the weather is bad, misses spike to three or more. A flight I was on missed its landing because of the glare of the sun!
  Allowing Sunroad to exceed the Federal Aviation Administration height limits and to actually create yet another obstacle to safe aviation in San Diego is ludicrous!
  How does Sunroad defy federal regulations? Something's surely amiss here.
 —CAROLYN CURTICE, San Diego

The Sunroad Fiasco
By Ian Trowbridge, Voice of San Diego Letters, May 16, 2007
  The Sunroad fiasco confirms the worst fears of those of us who worried that Mayor Jerry Sanders would conduct business as usual at City Hall. The latest information published in voiceofsandiego.org,
  The San Diego Union-Tribune and the Blog of San Diego, in aggregate, paint a picture of incompetence and cronyism in the Development Services Department dating back to 1997.
  At the center of the storm is Marcella Escobar-Eck currently the director of Development Services who has made nonsensical findings on the Sunroad development since its inception. She seems to believe one twelve story building is in substantial conformance with original plans for two six story buildings in the proximity of an airfield.
  However, Jim Waring, the mayor's land use czar sat on his hands even though the FAA objected to Sunroad. He still has not taken any action to enforce the city's stop work order. He has a lot to answer for.
  Then there is the forgetful mayor himself who took $3,600 in bundled checks from Sunoad chairman Aaron Felman and other executives without even knowing.
  This episode is so similar to the way Corky McMillan conducted business in this city that Don Bauder's assertion that "Sanders is Susan Golding in drag" seems the dismal truth. Not Really a Salary Freeze

Not Really a Salary Freeze
By Mel Shapiro, Voice of San Diego Letters, May 15, 2007
Your story about CCDC and SEDC salaries said there was a salary freeze. Not really.
  Since these two agencies report only salary ranges rather than individual salaries, you can't tell if a person was raised from the bottom to the top of the range. They can do this while freezing the ranges. This seems to be beyond the comprehension of the City Council.
  Moreover, 10 redevelopment project areas are managed by city staffs that are under the same salary guidelines as the rest of the 11,000 city employees. They do the same type of work as CCDC and SEDC but get lower salaries. Why?
  The mayor doesn't really know what he's talking about.

Chief Lansdowne, the Mayor, the DA and the Sheriff were incorrect  
 Having previously sent an email to the  council, the Mayor, et al. informing them to read "To Protect but not to Serve" in today's Voice of San Diego. it has been conclusively confirmed that Chief Lansdowne, the Mayor, the District Attorney and the Sheriff were incorrect in the guidance they provided Lansdowne to not serve an judicially authorized search warrant.  It also proves that the City Attorney was correct in the process.
  It is pathetic that the top law enforcement officials of this City and County have little or no knowledge of the law; such basic law. Even the
Union Tribune did not research the action Lansdowne, et al. took
prior to writing an incorrect, nasty article in re Aguirre.  He deserves an
apology from this "RAG'. and the idiot that wrote the piece..
  These officials are definitely, in their hate for Mike Aguirre,  not
serving the citizens of this City/County.  Rather, they are attempting, as
is the Union Tribune, to destroy Aguirre personally or at least his
reputation AND integrity.
  These people do not belong in office; they should all be recalled or at the very least publicly apologize to Aguirre and then resign. Lansdowne
has embarrassed this City and he should be fired.—Peter

A Common Thread to Marcella Escobar-Eck and Violations of FAA Guidelines
The Old-Take a look at the RPZ (Runway protection Zone) at NTC in the Precise Plan which was put together by Development Services Department with McMillin LLC and their subcontractors. Guess what... the restaurant and retail uses for buildings 1 and 32, which they used to inflate the needs of parking at Shoreline plaza, are in violation of FAA guidelines. Municipalities can override FAA guidelines ...but... the city (taxpayers) then assume the liabilities for health and safety of the building occupants.
 What do both of these projects have in common...Marcella Escobar-Eck...now head of the Development Services Department. Who does she report to....the mayor's increasingly infamous, Waring. (How appropriately named..."be wary" of Waring.)— JR
Another case of profit over safety...
The Grand Jury and Airport Aithority also had concerns over NTC violation of FAA guidelines concerning noise and safety of the schools and residents at NTC. Marcella Escobar-Eck signed off on the response to Grand Jury, another case by-passing the City Attorney’s Office. — KB

The new-Protecting the interest of the public
By Michael Aguirre, Union-Tribune, April 2, 2007
  This is a story about a smbol of corruption that stains our San Diego landscape. It is located in Kearny Mesa just to the east of state Route 163 near Clairemont Mesa Boulevard. It is called Sunroad Centrum I, and it towers 190 feet high in defiance of a Federal Aviation Administration warning to the company that it is an air navigation hazard to pilots flying in and out of Montgomery Field.
 On Jan. 19, the California Department of Transportation sent a harsh letter criticizing the city for its failure to enforce the stop-work notice on the building. In the letter, Caltrans states that, "This issue is not about who has liability for the hazard, but taking action to remove the hazard so that liability is not an issue. When the facts of the situation show a developer failed to comply with a federal notification regulation (FAA Regulation Part 77.17), used that violation of federal regulation to obtain local planning and building approval, knowingly began construction of a building determined by a federal agency to be a hazard, constructed parts of the building in violation of state law (PUC Section 21659), and continue to defy state and local attempts to resolve the situation, the reluctance of the city to take the necessary steps to protect its citizenry is a mystery."
 Who allowed this to happen? In addition to its civil lawsuit against Sunroad to force a reduction in the size of the building, the City Attorney's Office has been conducting a criminal investigation into whether a former chief of staff to Mayor Dick Murphy, who went to work for Sunroad, violated city law that prohibits former officials from lobbying the city for one year after leaving city employment.
 On the afternoon of Wednesday, March 21, at the request of the City Attorney's Office, a San Diego Superior Court judge issued a search warrant directed at evidence related to the alleged illegal lobbying by the former city official.
 However, malfeasance by San Diego Police Chief William Lansdowne prevented the search. The search warrant was given to an assistant chief, and within a few hours, it was leaked to the Mayor's Office. The next morning, news of the search warrant was leaked to the Union-Tribune. Word also somehow reached officials at the company where the search was to take place. It is a misdemeanor under California Penal Code section 168 for a police officer to willfully disclose the fact of the warrant prior to execution for the purpose of preventing the search.
With the fact of the search warrant leaked and the reluctance of Lansdowne to serve the warrant, the City Attorney's Office was forced to enter into an agreement calling for the subject of the search warrant to voluntarily turn over the documents sought by the warrant. However, once company officials became aware of Lansdowne's stance on the matter, they gave little consideration to their agreement to voluntarily produce documents.
 Under our form of government the judge, not law enforcement officials, determine whether a search warrant should be issued. As the Supreme Court ruled in U.S. v. Leon, "it is the magistrate's responsibility to determine whether the officer's allegations establish probable cause and, if so, to issue a warrant."
 What is most disturbing is that this is not the first time that Lansdowne has embarrassed law enforcement. He was party to the plan to arrest Diann Shipione, the lone whistle-blower who exposed the city's massive underfunding of its employee pension system.
Lansdowne also sabotaged U.S. Attorney Carol Lam when he testified for the defense in the federal "strippergate" prosecution of three San Diego City Council members.
 A July 1, 2005, Union-Tribune editorial was very critical of the chief's action: "Thus it was an astonishing act of betrayal of his own officers, some of whom worked undercover for many months to assist the FBI in gathering critical evidence, that Police Chief William Lansdowne made a surprise appearance in court this week to vouch for (former City Council member Michael) Zucchet's good character. Lansdowne's testimony, offered voluntarily on behalf of the defense, amounted to a stinging repudiation of, not only his own department but also U.S. Attorney Carol Lam who brought the charges against Zucchet before a federal grand jury."
 Also commenting at the time on Lansdowne's testimony was Jerry Sanders, then a candidate for mayor, who said: "I see it as a huge conflict of interest. If your department initiated the investigation and has been heavily involved in it, I don't think you go over and testify for the defense voluntarily. . . . It's unfortunate for the Police Department. I think it's going to have a lasting impact."
As San Diegans, we should all be troubled by this turn of events. If we are to restore the rule of law at City Hall those charged with the enforcement of the law must show by personal example their respect and commitment to abide by the law.
I rest my case.
—Aguirre is San Diego city attorney.

This is what Mayor Sanders is calling "illegal activity" in his new ordinance— *Restaurants would no longer be allowed to have live entertainment, if they serve alcohol.

Here is an example of what the future willlooks like under Sander's "Heavy Handed Ordinance"— Last night I observed, "A clown making a child smile and giving her a balloon animal"... in a restaurant that serves beer.
According to "*Sander's Non-Allowable Live Entertaiment Ordinance" we can't have this kind of behavior it could lead to a restaurant becoming a bar!
Entertainers aren’t the problem, so please Mr. Mayor don’t penalize them.
Mayor Sander’s has proposed new restrictive conditions on restaurants when granting a liquor license that would no longer allow restaurants to have live entertainment.
 So there will be no Mariachis as you sip your margaritas. Isn’t it live music that helped create Barzarr Del Mondo’s lovely atmosphere, that brought in 20-million in taxes per year, before the government stupidly took the lease away from Diane Powers? How about Covette Dinner ... "NO live DJ or dancing waiters and waitresses?"
 Shouldn’t we be promoting the arts and helping artists make a living?
  A guitarist, singer or violinist playing while you dine you should not be a crime!
 And isn’t it better to have food with your alcohol than to drink on an empty stomach. You would think a ex-police chief now mayor and the current police chief would know this.
 This isn’t the first assault on live performance artists in San Diego.
 Under Former-Mayor Golding, the city council illegally went behind closed doors, and voted to require restaurants and coffee houses with live performers to have expensive cabaret licenses. The mayor and police said, “This would help pay for vice needed for raiding rave parties.” Instead it caused the local musicians/entertainers to lose work.
 Is it that artists have it so easy when making a living in this town? Maybe they should be asked?
Doesn't it befit us having young people off the streets in coffee houses listening to music in a safe environment. Why aren’tr police and politicians to encourage this? For example, famous musician Jason Maraz, started his career at Newbreak Coffee in OB years back. Thirty or more well behaved teens would be there on the nights he played, NOT drinking alcohol or taking drugs.
  A couple years ago a friend’s wife was ticketed for performing a belly dancing act at a local restaurant. Are singing telegram performers and groups singing happy birthday soon going to be arrested?
 Live entertainment is considered a plus in cities like New York and San Francisco. It draw in both local clientele and promotes tourism. But, as usual, San Diego has another mayor that seems to be clueless.
 San Diego seems to be geared only towards the wealthy who can afford venues like the Old Globe, symphonies, and expensive concerts and plays.
  If Sanders has his way, our only other choice for live entertainment will be to sit in a bar with a bunch of drunks.
 Entertainers aren’t the problem, out of control drinkers are, so don’t penalize the artists and restaurant owners.
—Kathy Blavatt, Watchdog & Artist

City to change conditions for obtaining liquor license
By ELIZABETH MALLOY, The Daily Transcript, March 22, 2007
 The city of San Diego plans to ask the state Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control to approve new conditions on restaurants when granting a liquor license in an attempt to keep local eateries from turning into bars and nightclubs, Mayor Jerry Sanders announced Thursday.Under the new process, all restaurant applicants will continue to request a license directly from the state ABC, which has the sole authority for issuing alcohol licenses. The San Diego Police Department would then review all applications and determine whether to protest on a case-by-case basis.
  *Restaurants would no longer be allowed to have live entertainment or sell alcohol for off-premise consumption, and food must constitute at least 50 percent of total revenue.In the Gaslamp Quarter downtown, Sanders proposed additional conditions of adequate on-site security personnel and no alcohol service on patios adjacent to public sidewalks after midnight.
  “These conditions attempt to strike a balance between the city‚s economic development needs and public safety concerns,‰ Sanders said in a press release”  In addition, the guidelines seek to ensure that restaurants which apply for an alcohol license remain a restaurant and do not morph into a bar or nightclub.
  The adoption of the proposed conditions would clear 40 licenses citywide that have been pending approval and will also make the process more predictable going forward for restaurant owners seeking a liquor license, according to the mayor.‘Restaurants are a driving force in San Diego‚s economy," Sanders said in a written notice. "They create jobs, produce tax revenues for the region, and contribute immensely to the quality of life in our neighborhoods and the vibrancy of our city. The economic reality of the restaurant business is that the ability to serve beer, wine and liquor with meals is a major component of their ability to attract customers and stay economically viable.
  “I want to recognize Police Chief William Lansdowne for his willingness to listen to all sides on this issue and to work with my office and state ABC representatives to propose a solution that strikes the right balance between public safety concerns and the city‚s need to expand its economic base by fostering new establishments like restaurants that help continue the revitalization of neighborhoods,Æ Sanders added.Patrick Shipley, director of local government for the California Restaurant Associations‚ San Diego office, said his organization worked with the mayor and police department on the issue and they are satisfied with the agreement. Shipley said he does not believe the ban on selling alcohol for consumption outside the restaurant applies to breweries and vineyards with restaurants attached.
  Send your thoughts and comments to Elizabeth.Malloy@sddt.comIn
Response to:
City to change conditions for obtaining liquor license 
The problem I have with this is that the police are making decissions outside of Civil elected control.
  Laws are for the legislature not police officers.
  This is the second time the police chief has done this the other is the warrants on Sunroad and tom story. the police are just the comboys in the justice system.
  They round up the cattle but they are not the rancher / owner.—JS

City Planners vs. the people
03/28/07 , by Pat Flannery   "The problem with the City's Development Services Department and the City's Planning Department is that if development in the city were to slow down, many of them would lose their jobs. Development fees pay their salaries. They have a vested interest in growth and could care less whether infrastructure comes first or never at all."
 Therefore the planners are in conflict with property owners in established neighborhoods, who want stability not more density
  Pat Flannery nailed this one...The other part of this equation is the money the developers pump into the mayorial and city council elections, thereby distorting the results.
 One has only to go up against a major developer in the appeal process to witness how corrupted the system is in city hall.
 And when the city gets sued on a permitted development and loses...who loses... not Development Services Director Escobar-Eck (Sunroad/Montgomery Field)...*we the taxpayers end up footing the bill.—JR
*WORST than footing the bill, if the developer wins in court, is a development most communities don't want.. many times substidied or or a giveawy public land deal... another loss to the tax payers!
In the case of "Sunroads" we get a dangerous building that is a BIG liablity to the City and taxpayers. The City Attorney is right to stop this! ..and investigate DSD. Something the DA and others should have done years ago. It is time to get rid of DSD gravy train.—Watchdog

Redevelopment stats:
1)Redevelopment owes City over $200 million
-CCDC share about $100 million
2) CCDC tax increment annual income-$100 million -$900,000 goes to city general fund
3)CCDC average salary-over $80,000
  compare to City employees-$60,000
4) Nancy Graham has authority to sign contracts up to $250,000. No higher approval needed.
—SD Watch

Port Commissioner Choices were Cushman a Longtime Insider & Black a Lobbyist/Insider! Cushman ended up winning after Akins changed her vote in a second motion.
After all the past Port controversies can't they can't do better? When do the corrupt deals STOP! Great insight from Voice of San Diego Writer..
Embarking on a Bad Course
Excerpt: Now the port is preparing to act on the desire to abolish the South Bay power plant as part of yet another grand development that may include the construction of a football stadium for the San Diego Chargers. Along with the developments of Lane Field, the Navy Broadway Complex and the continued cultivation of industrial opportunities, the Port Commission's decisions over the next year may very well be some of the most consequential in the region.
  It is because of these momentous decisions on the agenda that the nomination to represent the city of San Diego on the Port Commission has become so intriguing and tense.
  The port must go through these upcoming plans with the utmost of integrity -- avoiding conflicts of interest and even the perceptions of collusion every step of the way.
  The Port Commission does not have to choose the consultant recommended to it by staff when it meets March 13. Regardless of the merits of the group that staff feels should be the one to manage the convention center project, the firm's association with the developer is intolerable.
  In order for the San Diego region to do great things, local leaders with big ideas must first prove to residents that they will go through the sometimes tedious process of proving they are doing the best job they can in the best interest of taxpayers. To do this, officials must be willing to empanel independent overseers of their pet projects and to engage in examinations of whether certain arrangements can be considered objectionable.
  Only then can they legitimately reassure us that an ambitious project can be completed without the provisional brand of impropriety that has come to define other major local undertakings.
"The Port Commission's decisions over the next year may very well be some of the most consequential in the region."voiceofsandiego.org Full Article <mailto:evan.mclaughlin@voiceofsandiego.org>
SAN DIEGO COUNCIL MEETING OF TUES., MARCH 6, 2007
ADOPTION AGENDA, DISCUSSION, OTHER LEGISLATIVE ITEMS RESOLUTIONS:
Item-349:  Consideration of Nominees for Appointment to the San Diego Unified Port District Board of Commissioners.
 (See memorandums from Mayor Sanders dated 1/4/2007 and 10/23/2006; Council President Peters and Councilmember Madaffer dated 1/4/2007; Councilmember Brian Maienschein dated 12/5/2006; and City Attorney dated 1/26/2007.)
 COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERS’ RECOMMENDATION:
 Consider the following list of nominees and select one (1) to fill vacancies on the San Diego Unified Port District Board of Commissioners:
NOMINEE-Stephen P. Cushman    
NOMINATED BY Councilmember Brian Maienschein
(reappointment requires a waiver of the two-
consecutive term limit provision of Council Policy 000-13)
 Laurie J. Black                                               
NOMINATED BY  Council President Scott Peters &  Councilmember Jim Madaffer

Council Members: It is my opinion that you have made a very bad, possibly dangerouse decision in re the Navy Broadway Complex
In your haste to please Sanders, you voted against a new EIR; and yea for the construction of buildings (on a fault area) that could possibly cause many deaths.
 Listen to me, please. Water can not hold the weight required for large buildings, and I understand that there is potential for water to seep from the bay into that area.
 I have been informed that the underground parking on the third and fourth levels of the Convention center are currently under water.
 With the NBC vote, certain of you have placed the lives of numerous people at potential risk.
 Because you voted to please certain people, if a calamity or work of nature occurs and there is loss of life, you will be responsible, along with everyone connected with the NBC project. Keep that in mind.
— Peter J. DiRenza, MS,MA

NBC or is it NTC... Same Gameplan
McMillin Company's Greg Block attacks Ian Trowbridge with admittedly not even studying the facts of the Navy Broadway Complex and Manchester deal. Manchester donated $50,000 to Mayor Sander's campaign and it really paid off. It brings back recollections of McMillin Company employees donating over $14,000 to Council member Madaffer who made the unwarranted motion to give Corky McMillin $8.5 million for infrastructure that was mandated by the state not the city.  McMillin Co. is notorious for influence peddling via invitations to play golf, free tickets to civic events and other avenues. Greg Block needs to do his homework before he shoots his mouth off about public spirited citizens like Ian Trowbridge. —Watchdog

Letter sent to: Jim Waring and Bill Anderson:
Regarding the appointment of Steve Laub to the Planning Commission:
 I have repeatedly urged both of you to work towards a more balanced Planning Commission.  I do not think that the public is well-served by having 100% of the commissioners from the development industry. Additionally, there is little balance geographically, based on residence, and also lack of gender balance.    
  I don't have a complaint about Steve Laub or his qualifications, but with the overall makeup of the commission.
 I can't imagine how it serves your purposes or Mayor Sanders' goals to have commissions and boards which are unbalanced, heavily biased, and don't have the respect or trust of residents and community leaders.  There seems to be an effort by the Sanders management team to "grease the skids" for development applicants, and ignore the potential for a citizen backlash.
 — Tom Mullaney, Friends of San Diego

Water reforms needed to curb inefficiency
San Diego Daily Transcript letter,  December 12, 2006
  Iam an engineer. I designed and built commercial water-pump stations from  1975 until the early 1990s. The stations served the same purpose as those  used by the city of San Diego -- maintain a constant pipeline pressure at wide ranges of flow.
  The companies I worked for bid competitively against similar companies. The  company that offered cost-effective and efficient equipment stood a better  chance of success in the market.In the early 1990s, I contracted directly with the city of San Diego to check its pump efficiency by using professional portable data-logging  equipment, which I still have.
  Most pump stations that I collected data on were horribly inefficient.  At  one city-pump station, I remember seeing three 125hp pumps running. I  turned off two, and the remaining pump easily satisfied flow requirements. In the private sector where I had worked, such inefficiency never would  have been allowed to continue.
  Many of the city's pump stations were so inefficient that I would have been willing to replace equipment and make improvements at no cost to the city, if I could just have received a percentage of the energy savings.
  Even some of the newer city-pump stations that I saw plans for were overly  complicated, expensive and certainly inefficient. On one new system being installed, I was astounded at the cost the city was paying for it. Moreover, the brand-new pump station was not any more efficient than the older equipment it was replacing.
  In the private sector, we would have built a station that was simpler, less costly to maintain, more efficient and priced at a small fraction of what the city was paying.
  Many of the city's technical people who worked on the equipment were sharp enough, but were not working in an efficient manner. Once I had to meet someone on site. Three city employees showed up, each driving a two-ton truck. Unfortunately, this incident was not unusual.
  One thing I could count on: There would be far more workers at the site than were needed. No private firm would pay these excess workers to just stand around.I've heard government employees imply their organizations are just as efficient as the private sector. From that, I can tell they have never run a business and probably spent little or no time working in the private sector.
  Before the city passes the proposed massive boost in water and sewer "fees," it needs to implement some serious reforms on how these services  are performed and how the equipment is maintained.
— Bob Whalen, Vista

Is the San Diego Chamber of Commerce Running Our City Government? 
  During the City Council District 2 race, after Zucchett stepped down, the San Diego Chamber of Commerce hosted a candidates forum. The Chamber’s website announcement for the forum prominently displayed the City of San Diego’s LOGO at the top, even though only a few Chamber selected candidates were allowed to participate in the forum.
 I also found it interesting that the Chamber’s candidate questionnaire didn’t ask many questions about general business, but focused on development.
  As more information has become available I find it very disturbing that the San Diego Chamber of Commerce has been writing major portions of our Cities Housing Element for the citywide general plan that is now going through the approval process.
  In my opinion, the San Diego Chamber Housing Action Plan runs contradictory to most of the checks and balances that keep us a democratic system of governant. It limits the public’s role in having a say in their own community planning process and their future growth.  We are a city in massive debt, full of corruption, overbuilt with housing prices and sales dropping, and yet the Chamber along with the Building Industry Association wants:

• more entitlements
• to expedite projects (meaning fast-tracking)
• to take our public lands and canyons
• eliminate public participation and transparency
• remove environmental protections

We do not need the San Diego Chamber development insiders furthering the destruction of our city. Please take an active role in protecting San Diego.
— Kathleen Blavatt,, Watchgdog

STRONG DEVELOPER Form of Government
  Back on November 18, 2002 Diann Shipione prophetically stated before the city council…“What concerns me is that the benefit enhancements were conditioned upon the retirement board approving this agreement, and that is, in my opinion, ethically troubling.... I’ll be quite frank with you, it almost appears to be corrupt.
  ”There is another area of great and growing concern to the citizens of every part of the city. This past election the public was led to believe that they were getting a strong mayor form of government.
 Apparently what they really bought into was a STRONGER DEVELOPER form of government. The recent re-hiring of the notorious Escobar-Eck as head of Development Services at a six figure salary heightens the anger of those who want that department remerged back under the Planning Department. This would free up that salary to hire sorely needed police and by placing DSD’s salaries back in the general fund it would help avoid the public impression of public servants prostituting their work in return for large developer’s permit fees.
There are several other facits of Development Services that need correction. The City of San Diego's Hearing Officer continues under the new Strong whatever form of government. The Hearing Officer presides at public hearings and acts on items such as permits, maps, variances and other matters in accordance with the Land Development Code <http://www.sandiego.gov/development-services/industry/codes.shtml#ldcode>  (Process 3). The current hearing officer is employed by the Development Services Department. He acts as the judge and jury. This past Weds. the hearing officer ignored the deputy city attorneys advice and found against the local residents and the local planning board in favor of the large developer. Is anyone surprised?
 Then there is the Technical Advisory Committee; Whose Primary reps are from LU& H, ASLA, EDC, SBAB, CELSOC, SEAB, BID, AIA, San Diego Chamber, a Contractor, 4 developers, 2 titled Accessability. If TAC were a boat all of its ballast is on the developers side.
 Sadly laughable is the last wording in their mission statement, “to advocate for quality development to meet the needs of all citizens of San Diego.”
Their real endeavor is in the first part of their mission statement…”To advise the Mayor …on Development Services Review …to reduce processing time.
In other words to methodically shortcut public review and bypass citizen concerns by pushing project reviews down to their lowest level.
— Jarvis Ross, Watchdog

A Taxing Solution to Police Force Woes
San Diego Business Journal, December 11, 2006, Opinion Letter
Editor:
In San Diego, we know that our police force is understaffed. We are short 200 officers. Not enough money in the budget, we are told. But there is a possible solution, albeit not a 100 percent solution.
 Downtown redevelopment collects about $74 million in property taxes, of which none goes to finance the Police Department.
 State law does not allow these taxes for operations -- only for capital expenses.
 The solution was proposed in two 2004 memos to the City Council, one by then-City Attorney Casey Gwinn and the other by then-Community Development Director Hank Cunningham.
 Both proposed that an effort be made to amend the state law.
There was spirited opposition from Centre City Development Corp.
 Result: The issue never made it to the council agenda. So, there was no effort to amend state law. But the potential still exists.
Prediction: This council will continue to bury the proposal.
—Melvin Shapiro San Diego
-------------------
Many WATCHDOGSs believe a better solution is to get rid of CCDC/Downtown Redevelopment and many of the other Redevelopment Projects Areas.
This would solve a large part of our general fund/city services shortages.
It would also help halt the eminent domain abuses, blotted Redevelopment Agency salaries, developer giveaways and bring more transparency back into City politics

Concerned over safety
The General Plan Focuses, Public Facility Service & Safety:
 "Average Emergency Response Time for Peninsula." (Priority E-imminent threat to health ie. serious injury collisions; ambulance needed;attempted suicide) is OVER EIGHT MINUTES! (Closer to 8 1/2! and we have No hospitals within 1/2 an hour after hours). The closest Emergency facilities are across from Domino's on Midway-with a housing Density that will be increasing substantially with several projects of over 40 units each). Of the 5 subareas of Peninsula, Pt. Loma Heights has the quickest response time at 7.48 minutes, the longest is Roseville/Fleetridge at 9.55 minutes!!
  For Priority One-(ie. felony crimes; lost children; child abuse; prowlers;minor injury collisions; disturbances involving weapons or violence; hazardous materials spills;
bomb threats). Average Emergency Response Time: 15 MINUTES! From a 'quick?''of 12.55 minutes in Pt. Loma Heights to the Longest Response time in the Wooded Area of: 16.97 Minutes!
  This is the Time to o say something, concerning the Safety of your Children, your Parents, Relatives, .
  Specific Areas of the General Plan that may be Critical to Peruse with recent Supreme Court Decisions:
 Land Use:
  When your neighbor, or a developer, decides to turn your property into Condominiums under "Eminent Domain" because it makes the City more Taxes, you might wonder 'how did that can happen?'
  Should we be concerned if more use "Eminent Domain" is put into the General Plan,
  An 'expert' real estate attorney admitted that "Redevelopment and Eminent Domain protections for new buyers or sellers of Real Estate would take a whole Two Hour Seminar." Zoning can change quickly, without a vote of the people or notice to property owners under 'Redevelopment' already.
  The City's 'Joint Powers Authority' , whose Eminent Domain Powers can be expanded to include residences and other private properties around schools, has been granted one site by the State with San Diego Unified School District.14-16 others were originally 'applied for'.
Urban Design:
 Following Existing Laws such as the Coastal Act and the Existing Local Land Use Plan (ie. concerning Public View Corridors from Streets, Bluffs or Street Endings on both sides of the Peninsula) appear to be Ignored already by the 'streamlined' DSD. Do these 'amendments' illegally Contradict them? 'Preserving, Protecting and Enhancing Public Views from Public View Corridors" have already been attacked & ignored by those intent on making Maximum Profits for personal Gain at the Community's Maximum Loss for future generations. Is the City of San Diego, under Murphy's last directions through the Planning Dept. and Develop(er)ment Services Dept. 'input' changing the rules to make it now 'legal?' Will Peninsula have any regulations, as this week, the City of Coronado voted, to protect the overbuilding and 'mansionizing' of lots in our Local Land Use Plan? Or will neighbor respect neighbor, to at least some degree to keep our 'community' one where neighbors are 'not eternal enemies?'
Public Facilities and Infrastructure:
 Only Feeble attempts are mentioned in the General Plan to require funding for impacted facilities/ or increased impact and needs for public services. Only when the 'need' is discovered as great and the 'Development Impact Fees' have already been paid, will there even be any 'assessment' or 'determination' of impact, too late for funding, unless the entire area's homes are taxed additionally. Development Impact Fees are obviously way out of date and mismanaged with a department that does not have to contribute to or determine cumulative impacts to the local Public Facilities Impact on Existing Streets, Recreation Facilities, Parks, Lighting, Police, Paramedic or Fire Needs, no matter what the Increased or Cumulative Impacts!! (ie. since 2001 when construction began, these increased response times have been consistent and growing. What will happen when the 'jobs' at NTC go from apprx. 200 now to '8,000 projected?)
Recreation:
  The Peninsula is drastically 'short' on Parks and Recreation for its 62,000+ Residents (& visitors on top of that), having only 26 acres of Dedicated Parks (2) where it should have a minimum of 93 acres! Under the 'housing emergency' status, any 'undedicated lands' can be converted to 'housing!'
  Are the 46 'additional acres' at NTC 'dedicated?' We were, 'in '89's Local Land Use Plan, the Peninsula Community Plan, supposed to have over "10,000 sq. ft." of a "Recreational Facility." Are we any closer to two decades later?
Conservaton:
We have loss many of Coastal Public View Corridors and have very little 'additional' land left to put into 'parks' on Peninsula. Now, State Historic Route' Rosecrans St., the local access from Loma Portal, due to poor design fluxes between gridlocked to a speedway due to the elimination of the emergency side lane. What is left to 'conserve?'
Noise:
FYI, the Noise from Lindbergh Field, after many meetings with the AA, their expected projections, even for the short term, place "100,000 more flights coming out of Lindbergh Field's one runway by the Year 2030"-a 25-year projection.
 In one year, we have already reached Year EIGHT in numbers of Increased Flights. Because of this, the numbers of increased housing units impacted is projected to grow by 17,000 in year 2030. Already, within just months, the average "missed approach", "Go Around" or "Separation," causing the '250 heading, the emergency heading for takeoffs,' have gone from "30 per month," to "90 per month," with the latest numbers at "120 per month!" If the noise bothers you now, what will it be in another year? Is 'enhancing Safety?'
  Mobility: Does it include anything like an Alternative Transit System for not only the City, but the entire county? No. A new airport that will cause "the Federal Government to Pay for any kind of transportation to and from the New International Airport," as quoted twice by former Senator Brian Bilbray? Maybe this 'city' better start thinking of the entire region before it becomes as gridlocked as Los Angeles or New York, before it's too late. Otherwise will San Diego be a 'dead end' or a 'cesspool,' with no inexpensive, efficient and effective way to circulate citizens or members of our military from one end of our county (or base), or country (not to mention 'international trade' of goods, services or people) to another?
Housing:
 As if anyone wasn't aware, why, if we have an 'affordable housing crisis' aren't 'affordable' or 'smaller houses on smaller lots' being the only ones 'permitted?'
 There are 'options' to allowing all 'developable' lands being mismanaged into large mansions on acre+ lots! It sure makes the developers lots of profits..sort of like NTC.
Economic Prosperity?:
 Since when did the City become beholden to funnel $12 million+/year into a fund that should be funded by the very businesses making all the profits from the increased population? The Chambers of Commerce? Wasn't that their 'purpose?' Or is San Diego 'promoting' its own demise of the Quality of Life (along with rights lost by vote of the U.S. Supreme Court?) that is quickly disappearing?
  Why is The City's "proposal" to Prioritize New Development AHEAD of Existing Neighborhoods? "This is Absurd," as noted by another Planning Board Chair. "Does the Entire City Government Serve to Facilitate Growth?" What happened to 'Stability'?
  In the General Plan, there is little attempt to preserve the Integrity of 'Single Family Neighborhoods" For example, large sections of Uptown are marked "Single Family Conversion to MULTI-FAMIILY." Is this what 'residents' of Peninsula are ready to give up?
  Please, take a few minutes, or 1/2 an hour to quickly review some of these 'proposed policies' for the "General Plan Update" at: www.sandiego.gov/planning
 It may make the difference between what Peninsulans love about their neighborhood or becoming like Pacific or Mission Beach....
—Cynthia Conger, Peninsula Community

Manchester Broadway Complex Project Seen as Another Corrupt Insider Deal
By Kathleen Blavatt, San Diego Coastal Alliance
Lori Saldaña held a public forum August 18, 2006, on the development proposed for the Broadway Complex.
  RADM Len Hering, USN Commander/Navy Region Southwest, delivered a canned speech that sounded like it was written by master developer Manchester. Directly after speaking he bugged out, leaving a lower ranked officer, only on the job for four weeks, to answer questions.
  The only question he officercould answer was when he was asked, “Why does the Military need their building there?” “ His weak answer was that a family recently stopped by the Navy Broadway Complex to ask, “How do we send our mail to an overseas soldier.” The offer said they needed to be at that location so they would be available to people.
  Asked “Why not Point Loma or inland at East Village? Wouldn’t that be still centrally located and safer from terrorism? “Terrorism is not to be a big concern, they need to be central.”
  Unlike the young officer, Michael Warburton, Executive Director of the Public Trust Alliance, presented an in-depth presentation on the “History of the Public Trusts Doctrine” and the importance of protecting our coastal public lands.
  Debra Lee of the California Coastal Commission, stated, and outlined, the reasoning of why the site will require a new consistency determination and a new coastal development permit.           
 What we found at this meeting was that after years of living in a culture of corruption, wise San Diegans have learned to ask questions, see the mistakes of the past, and filter lies, The community members and organizations who all came out in force to oppose the project went for the jugular.
  Just a sampling of public comments included:

•  Thank Lori Saldaña for this PUBLIC forum to voice the publics opinions. San Diegans are sick of the public land giveaways to wealthy connected developers and want it to STOP!

  The week following this meeting, in typical “Enron by the Sea” fashion, the San Diego Downtown Partnership voted to support the Navy Broadway Project,... The next week the San Diego Chamber of Commerce!

Kroll Presentation on June 8
 I was not  very impressed by Kroll. l  found the report to be redundant, and a worthless piece of crap.  It looked as if it was just thrown together to satisfy a deadline requested  by Sanders.
 The report had no substance to speak of and it seemed to me, It was a bunch of words laid out simply to protect certain council members, in hopes of mitigating their illlegal actions. I find it very difficult to believe that Peters, Atkins, Maienshein, ("let them sue us") Madaffer, had no knowledge of the City Charter, the City and State Constitutions, and the Municipal Codes.
 It was so obvious that  these four  me a culpa'd  the Kroll  representatives to death;  they acted guilty and presented  themselves  as a pack of wimpy children  who had  been caught with their  dirty,  little fingers in the cookie jar.
 As usual,  Peters was  his obnoxious self;  he and the rest of that clique were so afraid  Aguirre was going to catch  Kroll  in error,  PETERS tried on two occasions to silence him.  Unsuccessfully,  of  course.  Good for Aguirre. The guilty  were thinking  only of  themselves not of the citizens of  this City who have been deprived of millions of  dollars by their illegal actions and malfeasance in office.
They should all  resign,  not only for their actions but also for the ommissions of  legal acts.
 Benito Romano was tripped up by you and his own ignorance of the facts in the report. 
  Do you think he had anything to do with  writing it?  Or perhaps he and the others just brainstormed what to put in the report to protect the dirty four?
 Arthur Levitt showed himself for just what he is; an irrascible obnoxious, uncouth old man who realized you were pulling the truth out of Romano, et al.
 He did not know just how to get you to cease and desist.  As a result, he embarrassed and made an ass of himself.
 He accused  Aguirre  of "outburst" which certainly indicated he knew not what he was doing or saying.
 Levitt is an old, old man. He should get out of the business and leave the "driving to us."
 Anyhow Aguirre, did a great  job talking for the people, and that
was good; if we had to depend on the ignorant council nothing would get done.—Peter

Please no more bureaucracy we can't even afford the existing one
 The mayor ran on a platform of reducing our overhead. Unfortunately he seems to focus on eliminating the people that do the physical labor rather than the ones that hire consultants and collect the big pensions upon retirement.
 With the events of this past few days it would seem like we should move away from investing in the tourist and convention industry and focus more on the pharmaceutical and tech industries. The rising price of fuel and the new liquid terror threat will continue to impact the former.
 It is also time that we move away from the redevelopment ponzi scheme of business. The whole thing is based upon stealing private property by threat of condemnation under the ruse of some hacks definition of blight.  The supreme court left the door open for state and local governments to protect the publics property rights. What has this city done? ZIP!
 It is time to move Development Services back under the Planning Department where it was before McCrory corrupted that operation. The big developers buy their way in that department with worthless flim-flam E.I.Rs, expediting fees that the small businesses can't afford and the big ones just pass along. Then the city could cut loose the employees that are loaned to the redevelopment agency. The same ones that were caught running a crooked election in the North bay area (I witnessed that one.)
 By the way did you listen to the Kroll report on T.V.? If you listened carefully they did exactly what they were hired to do. Present strongly worded slaps on the wrists with white wash and backpeddling on anything more than that.  The other thing is when you or I hire someone we have to pay the bill not someone else like your or my neighbors (taxpayers). Seems like KROLL  also recommended hiring more "independent" accountants. Did they mean ones that worked for Enron, Worldcom, Tyco, Perigrine, Adelphia and the like?
 —Jarvis Ross, Point  Loma

Pat Flannery May City Council Update
5/16/06, Yesterday, a well-known hit man for the Municipal Employee's Association, attorney Dan Coffee acting under the sickening protection of Council President Scott Peters (who himself owes his Council Presidency position to MEA sponsorship) demeaned the decorum of City Hall by engaging in a lengthy and disgusting personal rant against our elected City Attorney Mike Aguirre.
  Why? Because Peters and his MEA friends are in mortal dread of the growing wrath of the people over the rape of the city's pension fund. Peters even allowed Howard Guess, well known to him as an MEA member and fierce opponent of Aguirre, to masquerade as an Aguirre supporter so that Peters could allocate 15 more minutes to those opposing Aguirre. Now that's dirty pool and Aguirre called him on it.Yesterdays' rants coordinated by Peters clearly indicates how desperately some Council Members fear the growing success of Aguirre's pursuit of pension illegalities.
  The election of Mike Aguirre deprived the MEA and their Council friends (a devil's brew if ever there was one) of a compliant City Attorney. Previous holders of that Office such as Casey Gwinn not only facilitated the MEA in raping the City by ignoring the illegal pension benefits but by signing off on the billion dollar giveaway to developer Corky McMillan and "negotiating" the notorious Chargers' ticket guarantee.
  So rather than being offended by yesterday's coordinated rants I am encouraged that Mike Aguirre's fight against greed is starting to bite.It seems to me that Peters for one is feeling the heat. If an American icon like Congressman "Duke" Cunningham can go to the pokey, mere City Council Members are clearly vulnerable. If Scott Peters has no consciousness of guilt why is he resisting Aguirre's request for a deposition regarding his involvement in the pension problem? Why will Peters not sit down with our City Attorney and help him in his enquiries? To me such behavior has all the hallmarks of consciousness of guilt.
For more Blog insight: patflannery.com/SanDiegoToday.htm

Watchdog to Watchdog: Erica Mendelson and Carl deMaio:
I enjoyed our discussion when we met a year ago. Certainly our local gov't needs many watchdogs, and I had hopes that your group could perform a positive role.
 I am disturbed by your recent press release praising Acle and Faulconer. In my opinion, all four council candidates have voiced generalities about making gov't more efficient, cutting waste, etc. Their written and verbal statements offer fews clues about their fiscal policies. What I find more meaningful is to look at their civic and employment backgrounds and who's backing them.
 The Performance Institute's endorsement of Sanders and now Faulconer and Acle make it appear that you are a promotion arm for Republicans. I am registered as a Republican, but do not give much weight to party affiliation at election time. I can't say that I've found Republicans to be more financially responsible or conservative. Compare Clinton's surpluses to the Reagan or George W. Bush deficits. Or Maureen O'Connor's record to the giveaway years under Susan Golding.
  This leads to a crucial question: Who bears more responsibility for the city's financial crisis: Union employees at the city who negotiated higher wages and benefits? Or the mega-project promoters who encouraged large expenditures of public money for the Ballpark, Republican convention, Convention Center, stadium expansion, Chargers ticket guarantee, NTC, etc., thus diverting money from infrastructure and the pension fund?
  Since infrastructure deficits are a huge and growing problem, †which candidate is more likely to demand fully-funded infrastructure before new development is approved? (the street & freeway improvements, mass transit, parks, libraries and schools needed to serve the new projects)
  Kevin Faulconer is inextricably tied to the downtown business and development communities. If elected for four or eight years, he would likely go back to his PR firm after his term expires.
  How can he make objective decisions, when his actions on the council might make him a hero or pariah to developers and downtown growth promoters?  What if he took a firm stance against continued growth subsidies, and insisted that new development could not continue downtown without all the needed infrastructure? Should he ignore the impact on his associates at his PR company, and his later job prospects? It seems a lot to ask of a public relations executive to jeopardize his financial future.
  Ideally, the development and business communities would be grateful to a councilmember who insisted on responsible financial policies, including:
* full cost accounting
* infrastructure concurrent with new development
* maintaining or improving levels of service, and making new development pay its own way
 I haven't seen that level of civic spirit and maturity with our local business leaders-- certainly not from CCDC, the developers, or the downtown business leaders.
 I think that the managers at the Performance Institute have to ask themselves:  Do you champion good government, including complete and honest financial planning, or do you support the continuation of San Diego's system of deteriorating quality of life, based on enrichment of the few at the expense of the many?
  Downtown fiasco: A practical application of this question would be the proposed Downtown Community Plan. This plan seeks to DOUBLE housing units and commercial space with an appalling lack of infrastructure. The Planning Commission will hear this issue on Jan 12, and the Council soon after. I'd be interested to hear the Performance Institute's opinion about the "unacceptable levels of service" predicted in the EIR, and CCDC's insistence on ignoring the needed infrastructure. —Tom Mullaney, Friends of San Diego

Union-Tribune, Letters to the editor, January 8, 2006
'Smooth operator' put city on rough road Regarding "
  The smooth operator / Jack McGrory led City Hall before the storm hit. Did he lead it into trouble?" (News, Dec. 18): This Watchdog report on former City Manager Jack McGrory's responsibility for the pension scandal leaves the impression that it was someone else's screw-up, not his.
  The city's real watchdog, City Attorney Mike Aguirre, has it right that McGrory's role in the pension scandal is "outside the statute of limitations." Old genial, smooth, affable Jack becomes less so, and downright intimidating when he pulls Aguirre aside and whispers, "That's not funny, Mike!"
  No, it's not funny. To deliberately underfund the pension system, old magical, clever Jack had to blatantly violate the city charter, the city pension ordinance and fundamental fiduciary principles. (He had an official position on the Retirement Board that he delegated to an underling.)
  Did he intimidate Retirement Board members (who were also his at-will employees)? He sure did. Did he front-load the benefits to the city's general fund ($10 million a year) and back-load a possible balloon payment ($500 million) to the Retirement Fund? He sure did. Did he promise to increase pension benefits generously for council members, city employees including himself, Retirement Board members and staff? He sure did.
  Well, whose money did he take to do this? Much of it belonged to older retirees whose benefits were fully paid for, and he placed a huge burden on future taxpayers. His proposed solution if he were still city manager: a $500 million, 40-year bond issue to be paid by current taxpayers, their children and grandchildren.
 McGrory took money from old people (many of whom are of the "Greatest Generation") and gave it to himself and his cronies, the council, and employees so they could have much better pensions and balance the budget. Of course, none of this was done openly. And his methods were copied by those who followed him. Between him and them, the city is virtually ruined financially.
  None of this is funny, Jack! — DAVID W. WOOD, San Diego
"Smooth operator" indeed!
  How many people could parlay a six-year employment into a retirement package that will pay former City Manager McGrory a minimum of $7,195 per month for the rest of his life? Please don't tell me that the package will also include health care insurance and automatic annual increases based on the rate of inflation.
  Even without these perks, if we assume he lives to age 80 (my age), he will have received, from his reported retirement age of 48, a total of $2,762,880, or $460,480 per year ($38,373 per month) of employment.Like the peasants at the time of the French Revolution, it seems as if it is time for us to man the barricades and demand that our bureaucratic government be overthrown and the government be returned to the democratic principles that made our nation great. We can no longer continue to put the pigs in charge of the cabbage patch.
— RICHARD ALBRECHT, San Diego

Kehoe uses "Blight" and "JPA" to take Our Homes for Her Developer Buddies
I was insensed when. Kehoe read her statement on City Heights.... burned out buildings INDEED!!!!!
Ms. Kehoe apparently has a different memory than the rest ofus... and it was her push that created the San Diego Model School Development Agency, a joint powersagency, which proposes to take somewhere between 125-180 mostly single-family homes and businesess to replace housing for 4 schools, the Albertsons centerat Fairmount and University, Price Charitites Building (one of the abusers of ED law) and the townhomes across from the Albertsons Center...approximately 700 homes.. to put in 500 CONDOS,  for sale at market rate. There are many ways to abuse the power of ED, and I agree that "Blight" is a big word with many meanings. —City Heights Wathdog

San Diego Lincoln Club's Annual Dinner Honors Corruption and Thievery. Maybe our District Attorney needs to find some new friends. —Wathdog
ANDREW DONOHUE, Voice of San Diego, 12/1/05
 Mayor-elect Jerry Sanders is the headliner for the San Diego Lincoln Club's annual dinner scheduled for Dec. 15. The black-tie-optional event will honor recently deceased developer Corky McMillin.
 The first name on the Honorary Host Committee for the event: Randy "Duke" Cunningham, who was a congressman until stepping down yesterday and pleading guilty to taking $2.4 million in bribes tied to defense contracts.
 Other sponsors include Kourosh Hangafarin, the Republican donor whose brief stay on the Port Commission earlier this year ended in controversy over unauthorized business done in Cuba, and Manchester Financial Group.
  District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis is also listed as an honorary host.

SD Insiders Keep on Pushing Another Bersin/Murphy Style Regime
11.7.05, Please read letter below about the plan to sell off & redevelop school land. Notice the Chamber of Commerce is involved.
 I find it interesting that the night of the election is the night the School Board  will vote to approve its inventory of 33 surplus properties.
 Another point for those that don't know is Admiral Froman (Sanders choice of Chief of Staff) and Adm. Smith, both signed off on NTC, and then got million dollar contracts with the School District.
 Please read the following letter by Fran Zimmerman in response to the UT article.
 Matt --
1)  On Tuesday the School Board will vote on a proposed appointment
of Jose Luis Betancourt, recently retired Navy admiral and former
Navy "mayor" of San Diego, to be the Chief Administrative Officer of the district, in charge of facilities, property, transportation (buses), business operations  and finance. This guy follows in the footsteps of Ronne Froman and  presently sits on the Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors.
2)  Also on Tuesday, the School Board will vote to approve its inventory of 33 surplus properties.
3)  Do you see any possible pattern here or opportunity for collaboration/collusion on land-use matters between the financially-strapped City under Sanders/Froman and the financially-strapped school district with Betancourt as CAO?  Would that be good or bad for the community should such collaboration/collusion come to pass?
4)  The only thing you're not responsible for in  that terrible puff-piece on Ronne Froman is the absolutely misleading headline "Resume does the talking...."  I hope you are embarrassed to have your name on that story and no wonder there is no e-mail contact for you at the end of it.
  Surely you saw my letter to the Voice the other day questioning Froman's silence. (The Union-Tribune will not run my letter on this topic.) Surely the Voice letter is why youcalled me in the first place. I hope somebody  else nixed your actually following up with me and prohibited you from including a single negative fact about Froman.
5) I am incredulous that you ask Lou Smith for his opinion of a fellow admiral, both of whom had corporate-style huge salaries with bonuses when they were at the school district. You never mention they were both Bersin hires?
  You choose not to know that while they were on the school district payroll, the confidential Navy records of  2002 anti-Bersin school board candidate Jeff Lee were leaked to the press, to Lee's detriment and narrow defeat?  
  You ask Phil Blair, Mr. Joined-at-the-Hip temp agency business partner of Chamber of Commerce  Business Roundtable operative Mel Katz, his
"opinion" about Froman, whom he had hired for the Red Cross sinecure?  
  You bury the fact that Froman has been campaigning for Sanders all along,  and  you lead with talk of "accolades?" You never talk to Sanders/Froman campaign consultant Tom Shepard about her being kept under wraps or even  say whether or not he will talk to you?
6) As for other matters from the time Froman was at the school district,  you never mention Rick Knott, a national expert on school finance and a longtime school district finance person with impeccable credentials who was driven off by Froman and took retirement, only to go to  work for Los Angeles public schools?
  After Froman left, he was  re-hired one day a week by San Diego schools to help with our massive budget issues. You mention Froman's Office Depot plan: it cost the school district more per item than its previous purchasing plan and was shortly thereafter replaced by a system of  bulk purchasing among many collaborating California school districts.  
  You mention that revenue was raised "through contracts with Pepsi and Coke."  Well, it was an exclusive contract with Coke mandating only Coke products to be sold on  our high school campuses -- and in all school district vending machines -- at a time when the  state's other large urban school districts of Los Angeles and San Francisco had banned all soft drinks from their premises.
7)  You mention that John deBeck likely will vote for Frye, but offer no equivalent information about anyone else's mayoral choices?  Your story was a disgrace, Matt.
—Fran Zimmerman

 

Lack of representation communities/citizen planning boards continues
 Particularly at this time of shaken public faith in City Hall, actions of the Council should be beyond reproach and consistent with city laws and policies.
 The reappointment of Barry Schultz and nomination of Robert S. Griswold to the San Diego Planning Instead of appointing two members to the Planning Commission that continue the consolidation of membership in narrow geographical areas and within the developer community, the issue of representation should be addressed.
The lack of representation from ethnic communities and the citizen planning boards stands out. The city would be far better served to see appointments by at-large citizens to fill these gaps. Without it, the us-versus-them polarization threatening to explode this city will only continue to grow.— John McNab

Government for the people.
We want it, we deserve it, but we don't have it.
 The Planning Commission is made up nearly 100% of real estate professionals. This leads to frequent conflicts of interest. Commissioners often have to recuse themselves because they have a business relationship with the developer/ applicant.
Even worse, the lack of balance gives the impression that the Planning Commission is an insiders' club formed to approve development projects for their clients and future clients.
WHAT'S NEEDED is a Planning Commission that has a balance of interests, including people with a background in urban planning.
Thus, only four Council Districts are represented.
 With Griswold appointed there are two Planning Commissioners from Sabre Springs (population of only 9,971 as of 1/1/04).
 The appointment of Griswold was contrary to City Charter Section 42 (Membership Selection) which states the following:"The appointing authority in selecting appointees to commissions, boards, committees or panels shall take into consideration sex, race and geographical area so the membership of such commissions, boards, committees or panels shall reflect the entire community." The current composition certainly does not reflect the entire community, and the appointment of Griswold further compounded this disparity with the City Charter.
The public deserves a well-balanced Planning Commission, free from bias and conflict of interest, this is current board is unacceptable.
—Tom Mullaney, Friends of San Diego

Jerry Sanders, Retired Police Chief
(by his own admission he retired due to stress)
Statements by Sanders Thursday, June 16, 2005
  “CITY HALL MUST CHANGE – OUR FUTURE DEPENDS ON IT”
“A pension shortfall over $1.3 billion, bloated bureaucracy, criminal investigations and a culture of secrecy are all the result of failed leadership.
 The city’s financial meltdown threatens our future: Pot holes, library cutbacks, aging safety equipment, park maintenance and other basic services.”
 So what is Sander’s answer as to how to solve the pension crisis?
  Well obviously he isn’t going to do anything that would have a negative impact on his pension.
 Obviously neither he nor his opponent will cut back on fire or police personnel. Nor will Sanders cut back on Development Services personnel because that department is the one that services the developer special interests that are backing Sander’s campaign.
 Yet he claims he will cut back city personnel. That leaves only those departments that serve the public and have already suffered severe cutbacks… Parks & Recreation staff and hours, Infrastructure replacement and repair (potholes, sewer lines ,water lines), Library staff and hours and other basic service personnel.
 So Sander’s plan is really a smoke screen full of sound bites of promise but lacking in practical substance.

Not just an ear...but the head and heart!
  The fate of 32nd Street Canyon and other valued undeveloped community parcels may rest on the results of the coming election. Therefore, we ask you to take advantage of one or both coming opportunities (see opportunities below the next 2 paragraphs) to get to know the candidates and put questions to them directly.
  Mayoral candidate Jerry Sanders has said he supports selling "non-essential" city assets to help raise revenues. Bear in mind that many so-called "remnant parcels" are the open spaces that give our communities their character.  It is imperative that these remnant parcels should not be sold to developers but should instead by retained as parkland. They are public land. Our taxes paid for them and we should have a say in their fate. Unless citizens and communities immediately lay claim to these parcels and specifically ask the City to retain them, they may be sold. Housing and commercial property will replace whatever is there now. Even if the open spaces are in poor shape, they represent potential pocket parks. Think how few of these San Diego has compared to more enlightened cities. Think how difficult it is to acquire parkland. Demand that the City and mayoral candidates stand behind every undeveloped parcel for what it is, a park or a potential park. These are not "non-essential." They are critical for providing clean air, clean water, energy conservation and high quality neighborhoods. — Watchdog

The San Diego Union-Tribune - Aug. 4, 2005, LETTERS
  The editorial July 29 editorial "Campaign funds / Public financing cannot buy integrity" shows a complete disregard for the purpose of supporting a clean-elections bill. If the City Council members had to collect $5 from numerous city residents and accept the clean election provisions, the people of San Diego would be more likely to avoid things like the Cheetahs scandal or collusion between the council members and the labor groups that benefit from the pension fiasco.
  Yes, the city would be taking on some costs, but won't the costs for the city and the public be lower in the long run? How much do we owe for the pension funding? What other deals have been made that haven't become public?
—CYNTHIA DEVEREUX, San Diego

Dear Professor Luna, Mesa College, Poly Sci Department
 Regarding your remarks in your subject Union-Tribune piece. Your "three marks against " Donna Frye are badly flawed.
First: Donna does not present herself as an "outsider." If you attended Tuesday council meetings on a regular basis, as I do, she is quite the opposite. She is in the trenches fighting for the people and the small business owners against the corrupting developers like Corky McMillin and the eminent domain theft of small businesses as practiced by San Diego's redevelopment agencies.
Second: Donna is not in the pocket of big labor and contrary to your inferences she is neither supported by the MEA nor would she find it any more difficult to renegotiate with them than any other candidate. Actually, Sanders is more than likely to cave into them because of his conflicted interest.
 Third: Have you also forgotten it was Sanders that retired from he police force due to "stress." As for Francis he lost his last bid for office in Las Vegas and high-tailed it for San Diego. Has anyone probed to see who is the real brains behind his business. Most people believe it was his wife who is a nurse that really thought up the idea.
 I will say you are in line with the Union-Tribune bias though. They have consistantly used unflatering old photos of her and have supported Sanders just as they did, Golding, and Murphy before him. Thanks but no thanks to any more of their mayorial recommendations.
 —Jarvis Ross, Point Loma

NO E.I.R., No Charger Deal
 The problem is anyone familiar with how the city operates knows that if an E.I.R. were required typically the city has the developer hire the E.I.R preparer. Then if there are any negatives Development Services Department counters them with cute little phrases like...
"Unmittigatable", "Project Unfeasible (i.e.we can't ram this project through with this impediment therefore its the criticism that is unacceptable.) 
  The basic idea of Development Services Department is to shield the project from any negative impacts from the M.I.T. or citizen critics. Why? because the city's DSD lives off of the developer fees and critics of any project just get in the way of them collecting those fees. Sea World's more recent E.I.R. is a classic example.
 —J. Ross

MELVIN SHAPIRO 6/7/05: Memo to City Council:
CCDC BUDGET JUNE 14 Hearing.........My comments
1) Payback the debt to the City general fund-it's not all CDBG, million s are from sales tax, which is not restricted.
2) CCDC budget allocates $1.3 million for "city services". Does this seem adequate to you ? What is the true cost of police, firefightiers, storm drains, utilities, street maintenance,etc. etc.
3) CCDC staff tells the council that tax increment can only be spent downtown, Not true,
I have a letter on this subject from Alex Greenwood of the Community Development Dept citing Health & Safety Code 33445-a "it is irrelevant where the improvements are located as long as the legislatvie body determines that they will benefit the Project Area." 
 CCDC allocates Zero for payback of the City loan. Supposedly, their projects are more important, than the rest of the city's parks, rec centers, swimming pools, libraries, athletic fileds,potholes, police dept, fire dept. Here's an example of a vital project.
 CCDC , with council approval , defers paying back its loan, so it can spend $12 million to remodel the Balboa Theatre. Do we have a theater shortage ?
How about the Civic Theatre, the Spreckels, 4th & B, Old Globe, Stardust, Old Town, Lyceum, La Jolla Playhouse and the new North Park theatre.
In fact, all of us are paying the $12 million, because of increased fees. and reduced city services. If CCDC paid us back we wouldn't need a "wish list."
Councilman Young asked why the city owns golfcourses and airports. I hope he asks why we own theaters when the private sector is perfectly capbale of being in this business. Staff reports show that the City or one of its corporations, will subsidize the Balboa as it now subsidizes the Old Globe.

"Dan Knew" A Response to Ron Carrico's piece "WHO KNEW"
Bruce, Scott, and Richard, people whom I all have had associations with, might not of known, but I DID!, and I DID something about it in suing the City of San Diego and City Council (Golding & Clan), -where many of these new councilmember came up from. Ron Carrico should of known because my attorney, Kent Wilson spelled it out in a SDDT article. As did the UT. But no one CARED!
My suit started in 1999, way before Shipone.
 Sad thing to say is that citizens, and evenmore, councilmembers and their staffs don't listen.
 Okay! Are you now listening???!!!! HERE IS THE NEXT BIG SCOOP! John Moores, and Malin Burnham is going to get the taxpayers to pay for their workers housing by have the government assist them with a EAH (Employer Assisted Housing) program. This will be involved in the new DT Ballpark development you've seen listed in the U/T lately. Just watch! They will say that we need to help the low income workers, the one's which they choose not to pay enough to afford housing- eventhough we gave them 16 blocks downtown free and clear to develop. Moores is a thief, he is no Jimmy Carter, and is looking to get more of a free ride.
 Now, can anyone tell me where the Redevelopment Agency (City Council) annual reports are for 2003, 2004, 2005? Why are they not on the City Web Site? Why won't anyone in the Agency give them to me, even when I asked before City Council? If you think the pension debt is a problem, then where did all the money go that was supposed to go to the pension fund??? And the sewer/water fund? Has the City been paying back the Redevelopment Bonds (more than just interest)?
Okay, If anyone knows any answers please forward to Daniel at:
http://www.danielbeeman.com or info@FreedomPlease.org

Force out of working families to give the properties over to Condo Developers
Mr. Flannery, (Editor Munoz, Pls see below, P-3)  I got to your site via SD Coastal Alliance. Your totally right about what Kehoe, and buddies didduring the DT Ball Park planning. Bersin,SD UnifedSchool Dist., and his father inlaw, have a lot of interest in land/property development, (ONE MAINREASON HE IS GOING TO THE STATE HOUSE!) as are most ofthe rest of the list to gain either more wealth orpower.  Recently the Moores & Burnham Real Estate Institute"Burnham Real Estate and John Moores Give $5 MillionEndowment To University of San Diego Real EstateInstitute Monday, June 14,"-USD Web Page, held a EAH-Employer Assisted Housing, seminar ($85 a head) todiscuss and "educate" on how employers can help to gethousing for their workers. Rather than pay a wage that will pay a worker enough for housing, they are lookingto get tax credits, and gov'tl assistance to housetheir under paid workers. Remember Burnham andJMI (john Moores Investments) is the largest player inthe development (16 FREE BLOCKS of land, viaredevelopment) of the DT Ballpark. Now, that theydon't want to provide workers with a "livable" incomethey are looking to see what they can do to get thegov't (YES ME & YOU) to pay for housing due to the strong negitive reaction the Redevelopment Agency CCDC has gotten over DT affordable housing by housingadovocates.  So Johnny & friends first stole the property, now they want us to pay for the housing tobe developed on it. "It's the responsible thing todo!"-have gov't help develop affordable housing. Watchout San Diego!  Also, watch out for Inzunza 'N Company (Family &friends) as they are looking to redevelop, much via Eminent Domain, the So. SD, Nat'l City and Chula Vistanear coast inland. They will force out longtime working families to give the properties over to Condo developer friends and associates.  They can't touch the coast (West of hwy 5) due to Coastal Comm.restrictions. But you only need to build over 3stories to have ocean views, lower levels(non-view)will be retail and "affordable" housing. Can you say Cha-Ching!? See 5/13/05 addition of La PrensaSD
—Daniel Beeman

The District Attorney needs to prosecute those higher in the food chain
May 20, 2005, If there was a quid pro quo pursuant to which members of the City's pension board voted to underfund the pension system in return for their personal pension benefits being increased by the City, then it would seem that only one set of actors in such a conspiracy has so far been charged by the District Attorney.
 Charging only one set of participants is like going after prostitutes without also arresting their pimps or their johns.
 Or, it's like arresting drug users, but never drug dealers.If that is what the District Attorney is doing, her prosecutions may well send the signal that the nothing has actually changed in San Diego and thereby have the perverse effect of encouraging, rather than discouraging, civic corruption.
—Bruce Henderson

Is the City of San Diego Bankrupt?
 May 6,One would have thought that Dick Murphy would have used his retirement to address at least one issue with absolute candor, namely, the issue of pension funding. Obviously, he hasn't. By contrast, Mike Aguirre has.
 The fundamental problem with actuarial projections is well documents in classic books such as How To Lie With Statistics or other similar books such as Damned Lies and Statistics: Untangling Numbers from the Media, Politicians, and Activists.As they say in the computer world, "Garbage In, Garbage Out."I don't mean to say that I know that the pension plan actuary has given us garbage statistics. Rather, the question is more fundamental. Is the City of San Diego bankrupt in that it is unable to meet current legal obligations?
 That is, what is the minimum payment that the City must make in FY06 in order to meet its legal obligation to the pension system?The answer to that question requires a careful examination of the
assumptions on which the City Manager's pension funding proposal is based.
 If these assumptions lead to an actuarial funding requirement that as a
matter of law understates the actual minimum funding requirement, then the funding must be increased. If the legally required funding exceeds the City's financial capacity, then the City may be bankrupt.What we still don't know and would expect to soon hear from the City Attorney is whether or not any past conflicts of financial interest provide a proper legal basis to seek a determination from the courts that affected
pension commitments are void as a consequence of the conflicts of interest.Surely, the City Council will fully support the City Attorney in undertaking at least four issues in their logical order: (1) What are the City's legal obligations to fund the pension plan, given the possibility that some prior commitments are void due to conflicts of interest?; (2) What is the minimum funding required by law for FY06?; (3) Does the City have the revenue to meet the funding requirement, and if not is a declaration of bankruptcy required?Among our elected officials, only two to date are willing to ask these questions, Mike Aguirre and Donna Frye. It is time that every other elected official join them.
—Bruce Henderson