Congratulations to Lorie Zapf

The results this morning from the San Diego Country Registrar of Voters showed Lorie Zapf winning with 52.45% of the vote and all precincts reporting. I am sure there are more absentee and provisional ballots to be counted, but her current lead of about 1,500 should hold up. Although I endorsed her, I had been critical of her campaign. I have to give her credit for the last minute blitz of mailers, calls and advertising, including internet advertising, that painted her opponent as a tool of the government labor unions. I was very concerned at the end as I saw many more Howard Wayne lawn signs and the negative coverage that she received in the City Beat and other local news outlets.

Hopefully, she can join Carl DeMaio and Kevin Faulconer as voices of reason on the City Council and start by outsourcing jobs under managed competition.

Howard Wayne's Campaign Called

This evening a campaign worker for Howard Wayne called. Here is the transcript:

Caller: Good evening, I'm calling on behalf of "Prosecutor" Howard Wayne.

B-Daddy: Hello, how are you.

[unintelligible due to background noise, I have teens in the House] ...Caller: supported by the firefighters.

B-Daddy: Sorry, what were you saying?

Caller: Did you know that Howard is supported by the firefighters.

B-Daddy: Yes.

Caller: Are you supporting Howard Wayne?

B-Daddy: No, he is supported by the firefighters.

Caller: Can I ask why?

B-Daddy: He is supported by the firefighters, I am not voting for any candidate in this election supported by the the public employees unions.

Caller: Thank you, goodbye.

I posted earlier, where I thought that Howard Wayne's campaign understood the problems with support from public employees unions, but I guess this caller didn't get the memo. Also wondering why I got called again, apparently they aren't keeping good track of who they call. Also, notice how they refer to him as "prosecutor," not former Assemblyman, Howard Wayne.

City Beat Doesn't Get It - District 6

On Wednesday, the San Diego City Beat endorsed Howard Wayne for San Diego City Council, District 6. They claim he is more knowledgeable than Lorie Zapf and point to questions about her past business dealings and alleged homophobia. My reaction, so what? Who is going to lower my taxes? Their editorial board refuses to think through the tough questions like: "What is the source of our budget woes?" and "Who is best suited to tackle those issues?" Have two years of demonstrations by the Tea Party on the size and voraciousness of government passed them by?

If they had made an argument that it only Wayne, on the "only Nixon could go to China" theory, could tackle the pension problem, I might have had some respect. Instead they stick their heads in the sand, as if pensions and budgets are not serious issues. I agree that Howard Wayne is very knowledgeable, and I reported that earlier. It's not the point, how can he be trusted when he seeks out public employee endorsements and donations and has been inconsistent on outsourcing city services?

The U-T seems to get it, at least on this race. Here is a part of their endorsement:

Zapf, meanwhile, has faced deserved criticism over her personal finances and for some past remarks about gays for which she has apologized. But she displays an increasingly strong command of fiscal issues and far more of a willingness to demand the changes San Diego must make to end its budget nightmare.

Exactly.

The Meaning of our Choice in November

On this coming election day, there is a choice between an inexperienced new comer to politics who has had some explaining to do about her past, including personal debt against a more experienced Democrat. (I'm not talking about the Delaware Senate campaign either.) The new comer, a Republican, has come out for reducing union pension costs and for competitive bidding on city services. The Democrat has shown a detailed understanding of the pension problem and the inner workings of city government, and has promised to also tackle the pension problem. However, he is backed by the very unions that are at the root of the problems and his votes in the state assembly supported legislation that was part of creating the pension problem in California.

Of course, I am talking the San Diego District 6 Council race between Lorie Zapf and Howard Wayne. We have to decide if we are willing to accept Howard Wayne's word that he opposes Proposition D and will work to force the city employees to increase their pension contribution share, despite his record and endorsements. Or will we go with Lorie Zapf, who has been consistent in her statements on competitive bidding and union clout, but has been slow to respond to allegations.

B-Daddy's position is that this is the year that we toss out the old politicians who have gotten us into this mess and bring in new people to reform the process. I welcome your comments on the matter.

Lorie Zapf Stopped By This Evening

I was starting to wonder what was happening with the Zapf campaign, but who should ring my doorbell but the candidate herself. Unlike when I saw her in the debates she was much more relaxed and personable in person. She had a young man in tow who I thought might be her son, but couldn't tell for sure. He had visited before, so this was a return visit.

Zapf, a slight woman full of energy, said she had been walking the district for about a year. She asked if I had concerns about the election. I introduced myself as the author of this blog and said that I had endorsed her. She asked what concerns I had about the election. I told her that her problems with mortgages had not been sufficiently rebutted, that basically I had not seen an adequate rebuttal. She said that her second mortgage on her home was being renegotiated and that it was a mistake for the bank to have issued the notice of default. She asserted that the bank has since wiped out any back fees owed since she got the new second. She also said that the issue in Las Vegas had to with her husband's real estate transaction on a short sale.

Honestly, she seemed believable, but I am nervous about the situation. Zapf looked at the young man accompanying her and they both agreed that there would be a statement on her web site soon. In my opinion, this very slow response is hurting her campaign. She pointed out that much of the negative press comes from the San Diego City Beat, which she said has been hostile to her candidacy. Candidates probably need to have blog sites, twitter, facebook and youtube accounts so that the can swiftly respond to mud-slinging by their opponents. Regardless, I look forward to reading more of her response.

I told her that my key issue was the pension mess. I pointed out that Howard Wayne seems to be the most knowledgeable candidate on the nuances of the issue, but I didn't trust him because of the union endorsements. She pointed out that Howard Wayne voted for the very pension increases that have gotten the state of California into budget trouble. Read a little about that here.

I am still convinced that I will vote for Lorie Zapf, but I am disappointed in the way her campaign has handled controversy. My make or break issue this year is the issue of pensions and who will be the most aggressive in dealing with the mess prior politicians have left us.

Coincidentally, Kim Tran endorsed Howard Wayne today over the very issue of pension reform among other reasons. You can read the whole article here:

Howard has given me his word that he is committed to revitalizing our communities by creating middle class jobs, restoring fire and police protection and repairing our streets. He is also committed to reforming the pension and reducing the budget deficit.

I interviewed Kim Tran last May and was very sympathetic to her candidacy. I think she is making the classic mistake of going on simple trust when Howard Wayne's endorsements and previous record indicate that he is the worst candidate on the pension issue. A possible motive for her endorsement?

Tran quit the San Diego County Republican Party’s central committee last month, calling the party leaders the committee “ineffective, unethical and tyrannical” and complaining that she was being targeted because she had refused to leave the race after the party endorsed Zapf.

I don't doubt that there are Republican committeeman that are ineffectual, as Kim states, but I am disappointed by her actions. Kim seems like she would feel at home with the Tea Party and we need more people like her on the inside of both Democrat and Republican organizations. I hope to see Kim active in politics in the future; but I hope that Zapf will win this race even more.

Even Howard Wayne is Getting the Message

I got a call today from a volunteer for the Howard Wayne campaign asking me if I was following the District 6 council election here in San Diego, and if I was supporting Howard Wayne. I said no, I was definitely not. He asked why? My response was that Howard Wayne was prominently endorsed by the San Diego Firefighters and Police unions, and there was no way I would vote for the union endorsed candidate. "Most people would consider that a positive, but I understand you are concerned about the pension problem." (emphasis mine) He further argued that the reason the unions were endorsing Wayne was that he would restore the numbers of public safety personnel in the field. The volunteer also said this, "Howard Wayne is the only candidate who will aggressively negotiate with the unions on the pensions." My rejoinder was that unions don't usually endorse the candidate who is going to reduce their pensions.

The conversation got me thinking. If Howard Wayne knows to train his volunteers to take on the pension issue, then the public must really be catching on. In fact, in today's WSJ opinion section, Steve Malanga comes to the same conclusion, that association with public employees' unions are becoming political poison.

Instead, organized labor— increasingly dominated by public-sector workers—is facing a backlash from taxpayers because of widespread publicity about the rich pay and benefits of some government employees. That's made Mr. Christie's blunt campaign talk about reining in government costs a popular approach among candidates. Even old friends of labor in the Democratic Party have made public workers a target, leaving labor with fewer allies and playing defense.

Back to our race in San Diego, I am concerned about Lorie Zapf's electability. She has not really successfully rebutted issues with mortgage defaults and claims that she has filed numerous lawsuits even while leading a group called Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse. I am not saying these charges show wrongdoing, just that she is not actively campaigning in a way to effectively rebut them. Further, she is losing the lawn sign war. Lawn signs aren't an accurate indicator, but the trend of fewer Lorie Zapf signs and more Howard Wayne signs in the district aren't a good trend. My fear is that we are left with a bad situation in District 6, with Wayne being the handpicked candidate of Big Labor and Zapf the hand picked candidate of Big Business. I endorsed Zapf, because labor problems from pensions are crushing the city right now, and she seemed the most willing to take on the unions. If Zapf loses, we will have the same status quo on the city council, a very pro-labor group. This is another reason to vote against Proposition D, we won't be able to trust this council to enact meaningful reform.

Programming Note - Interview With Lorie Zapf

In all the hubbub running up to last week's primaries, I lost an email from Lorie Zapf agreeing to be interviewed. I will attempt to make contact for a weekend interview. Other than her mortgage issues, which I promise to cover, any other suggestions for questions are welcome.

I have a pretty full plate with work, school and home obligations this week, so blogging might be light.

San Diego City Council District 6 Final Results - Primary

Now that the final result are in, I went back and looked at the final numbers in the race:

LORIE ZAPF-------------6870-----36.19 %
HOWARD WAYNE-----4694-----24.72 %
STEVE HADLEY--------3299-----17.38 %
KIM TRAN---------------2525-----13.30 %
RYAN HUCKABONE---1597-------8.41 %

Lorie Zapf's lead was slightly more substantial than I first thought. Also, the three Republicans in the race had about 58% of the vote. I have no experience analyzing local races like this, but it seems that is an interesting result.

I wonder to what extent these results are because there was some excitement for the senate and gubernatorial primary at the top of the ticket, resulting in a higher than normal Republican turn out.

Even More On Zapf

My previous article on Lorie Zapf's difficulties was quoted in the San Diego CityBeat, an alternative newspaper. My comments were taken as a withdrawal of my endorsement of Lorie Zapf. I want to make clear that they were not. Lorie Zapf is walking a fine line and I am concerned that she doesn't understand that serving the people in elected office is a privilege that requires not only actual propriety but the appearance of propriety. There is no shortage of candidates for public office, she should understand that she is on a job interview and the public is the panel.

I was hoping my comments would get Zapf to clean up her act. I have serious issues with every candidate in the District 6 race; but electing someone with the fortitude to scale back pensions and outsource services is my number one issue, and Zapf appears to be the best positioned to do so. In more normal times, I might be endorsing Kim Tran, but I think that Kim is, by nature, just a little too nice of a human being, and someone with a little anger and edge is going to be needed to take on the unions. The budget crises faced by the city, state and nation are unprecedented because they are all happening simultaneously, not due to some catastrophic misfortune, but due to the lack of courage to take on the clamor for ever increasing spending. I am looking for candidates willing to make cuts in city government, even on firefighting and police, and willing to use every legal means available to scale back the costs of services, including outsourcing, raising employee pension contributions, and re-negotiating contracts and benefits.

Interview with Kim Tran - City Council Candidate District 6

I interviewed Kim Tran today at a local Starbucks, at her son's request. My endorsement of Lorie Zapf generated a little heat due to Ms. Zapf's issues with a delinquent second mortgage and Kim Tran supporters feel that she is not getting the "love" from the Republican establishment she deserves. I got some comments and a request to interview Kim Tran, I think in part because of my criticism for her not debating that I said that I did not understand Kim's positions, because she had not made them clear publicly. She brought her campaign manager Robert Sutton and her son AJ Sutton.*

Before starting the discussion, she re-iterated her reasons for not debating, referencing the way Sarah Palin was made to look bad by the way her interviews were edited during the 2008 campaign. She said that she was not invited to the very first candidate forum and felt that she was being deliberately frozen out. She discussed that she was elected to the Republican Central Committee, with about 11,000 votes, even though she was not on any slate of candidates. She also mentioned that she was still involved in charitable work this week, including cooking ethnic foods for nursing home patients.

We then got into the questions:


B-D: What do you intend to do about the pension issues for city workers? Do you think bankruptcy is an option?

Tran: This is the big huge issue. Chapter 9 bankruptcy won't allow us to discharge pension obligations in bankruptcy. To qualify, we would have to spend spend $100 million in lawyers fees, this is a very costly option. I don't promise people a rose garden.

The employees expect to be vested in their pension, but it is a fund where the both government and employee are contributing and the money invested. In good times, the excess in the pension fund was used to pay for other projects. Now that the stocks are down, there is a deficit in the funding. We should make it so that city employees are fully funding their contributions. There is not any one solution, we can't just say, this is it. The labor unions are very powerful, so we have to be diligent and analyze our options and talk to everyone involved, and bring in the city attorney. We must negotiate a solution with all cards on the table.

People are concerned over the $75 million deficit. I will become your voice, I know your concerns. I am not owned by any group, I am independent, I have no string on my nose. My strengths are my ethics and my honesty. [ed. note, Ms. Tran was really animated by this point.]

People ask about contracts bringing in private entities [to perform city services.] This must be done openly. I supported the initiative that allowed outsourcing, but it has been stopped by this city council. I will bring it out, to allow it go forward. People have to list everything and negotiate, all parties involved including the city employees.


B-D: Your website says that police and firefighters are your priorities, however, their pensions are as much of a problem as other city workers. What will you do to reduce the cost of police and fire protection?

Tran: Safety of people are my priority. There are a lot of prisoners out of prisons, we must protect public safety. I do not want to cut firefighting and police. However, their pensions are part of the same problem as the all the city, they are not separate. I would deal with their pensions as part of the overall city pension problem. But the budget priority is public safety and firefighting. We could see about citizen patrols and other volunteer activities to reduce the costs. But people are telling me that other priorities are potholes and trash collection.


B-D: What are your priorities for city government?

Balancing our budget is number 1, it is a big and huge problem. The current city council is working hard already, but more work needs to be done. I would use the Independent Budget Analysts program to look in depth at all city programs. I will analyze where we can save work with all parties to review the budget. Right now, we have plans to build a huge new city hall, but can we afford it. We have to consider balancing the budget first.


B-D: If you could ask Lorie Zapf one question in a debate, what would it be?

Does she think she can proclaim herself as someone with fiscal responsibility, with a city budget so big, how could she be responsible, but cannot balance her own personal check book? Even though she was a leader of CALA, she has sued or been sued several (seven?) times, why? [Robert chimed in that the definition of a serious lawsuit is one you file, a frivolous lawsuit is when someone sues you.] Also, is she suggesting that some people shouldn't sue, for example over an issue like handicap access?

I have very ethical behavior. I knew about her [Zapf's] default in Nevada a long time ago, but I did not bring it out. I thought, a lot of people in San Diego are in the same situation, I didn't want to inflict a wound. [In the context of the discussion, I thought she was also saying not inflicting a wound in the Republican party.]
Now she has another default and continues her mismanagement. It might be a scam action to take a loan with intention to default, if the intent is not to pay it back. Strategic default is a scam. In Nevada, there is an allegation of rent skimming, collecting rent, but not paying a mortgage. Maybe or maybe not if this is a crime in Nevada. The people of San Diego need to make a judgment.



At the end of the interview, she talked about how proud she is of her family, including AJ who was with us. She has a daughter flying F-18s and thinks about her this Memorial Day weekend. She tells her family the same thing that she tells people she meets campaigning, to always fight and never give up. If she can just get people to open their eyes, we can solve our problems.

At the end of the interview, Ms. Tran asked me what I thought the priorities should be. I was a little surprised but had a ready answer.

1. Solve the pension issue by reducing the numbers of city employees. Keep a very close watch on the actual count of employees and keep that down.
2. Initiate the outsourcing that the voters approved. I know from personal experience as a federal manager that outsourcing can lower costs.
3. Don't spend any money on big projects we can't afford, no new library, no new city hall, no spending for a stadium.


My overall impression, is that Ms. Tran's heart is in the right place. She brings incredible energy to San Diego politics and due regard for fair process. I have to admit that I found her accent to be difficult to understand at times and this is a real issue for any political leader, because communications are such a big part of the job.

Given the controversy surrounding Lorie Zapf, am I changing my endorsement? I find this challenging. Clearly the Republican establishment has put their money behind Zapf (maybe that should be a warning), and it takes money to win the election. Also Zapf seems to have the right personality to take on the key issues. But the ethics issues look serious, and she and her husband have yet to take action that would clear them up.


I asked Mr. Sutton to take a picture at the end, my official photographer was unavailable. If he was, it wouldn't have looked like this.

AJ Sutton, B-Daddy, Kim Tran after the interview.

*That is how Robert Sutton and Kim Tran were introduced to me, Google search seems to indicate that Sutton and Tran are husband and wife.

Programming Alert - Kim Tran Interview (District 6)

I was able to speak to Kim Tran on the phone this afternoon to discuss getting an interview. She asked that I send her questions in advance and said that we will talk some more. However, I was able to ask why she did not participate in the Clairemont debate. My question was "I covered the debate at Clairemont High and found the questions to be relevant and straightforward, why didn't you participate?" Kim Tran responded that she felt that she felt it much more worthwhile to listen directly to the people and didn't want intermediaries, like a reporter getting her message to the people.

She said, "I want to listen to voters directly, there are not enough people at one debate. It's more important to walk the precinct. I find out many things from the people and find that their concerns are my concerns." She mentioned that potholes were a big concern and that the city has a deficit of $75 million and people worry about retirement. She emphasized a number of times that "I take it very seriously," referring to listening to the voters in the district. Other news reports I have read indicate that she really does spend some serious time campaigning by walking through the district.

She was very gracious, asking me if I had children in the military. I don't. She thanked me for my service as a veteran over this Memorial Day weekend. She asked what I thought of the debate. I told her I found the debate very informative and talked briefly about Hadley"s performance and that I was able to learn things about the candidates I wouldn't have otherwise known. She said "My campaign manager informed that the questions weren't necessarily the concerns of the people."

Her accent may have something to do with her desire not to debate. While it's true that some people have prejudices, and that might hurt her chances, she really needs to let people see her speaking publicly, because it is such a big part of elected office. I will publish results of the follow on interview when it happens, hopefully before the end of the weekend.

Wouldn't You Know It - More on Zapf

I went out on a limb a bit and endorsed a candidate for City Council, and as luck would have it, just as I do so, I find she is involved in a mini-scandal. I am not withdrawing my endorsement, as yet, but this is the kind of thing I worried about, with a novice candidate who had already shown a little inexperience. (I'm thinking about Rand Paul as I write this.) So what's the scandal? From the local fishwrap:

Council candidate Zapf defaults on loan

The latest revelation, which could prove devastating to Zapf’s campaign, is that her family is in default on a second mortgage for its Clairemont home.
...
In an interview with All in Favor, Zapf acknowledged that she and her husband, Eric, are in default by about $7,000 on their $230,000 mortgage but dismissed its significance. She said it is simply a strategy to lower the loan’s interest rate.

“We’ve been working with the bank for many months but because there is such a huge volume of people doing loan modifications and reductions, I think it’s well known that banks are just overwhelmed so it’s just taken longer than expected,” she said.

From the comments in my previous post, there were some choice words for Zapf.

From Zapfers:

Clearly you missed the stories about Lorie Zapf defaulting on her mortgage in order to negotiate a better deal.

AJ said:

Zapf is playing the victim card. I don't vote for victims. She will go down in flames if she makes the runoff. Read the below link which clearly shows she lied in her interview with channel 10. I don't vote for liars.

Reading the link provided by AJ reveals some troubling information. I get the impression that her husband, who is in the real estate business may have ethical challenges. Unfortunately, they may taint the candidate as well, since her name is on the legal documents involved in a prior Las Vegas default. However, I believe that if Zapf just pays off the Home Equity Line of Credit that they are in default on, then all of this will blow over. There are two issues here. First, are the Zapfs guilty of ethical lapses of which Lorie should have known? Second, doesn't she get that running for office means that her own house must be in order? That she doesn't seem to, is pretty serious in itself. Also, her explanations have been contradictory.

But I am still looking for the candidate that will assertively take on the unions, including police and firefighters, who have the city in a stranglehold. Zapf seems the best candidate to do so. Kim Tran may be a nice person, but her web site and public statements say squat about her plans to deal with the unions and pensions. She talks about police and firefighters being her priority. Huckabone is unwilling to undo some of the worst pension excesses and supports cutting a deal to keep the Chargers at the Q. Howard Wayne has also the union endorsements and Steve Hadley is temperamentally unfit.

Stay tuned.

BTW, I took down my poll in light of these revelations and my poor wording of it. Please take a look and vote at right.

B-Daddy Endorses Lorie Zapf

After lengthy consideration, I have decided to endorse Lorie Zapf for City Council in District 6 in San Diego. The B-Daddy endorsement has been shown to be worth as many as five votes under carefully biased research conditions.

Little new information informs this decision since the debates; you can read my previous coverage of the District 6 council race here. This came down to a process of elimination. First, Steve Hadley showed himself not ready for the dignity of the office with his cheap shots and lack of knowledge despite lengthy time in City Hall. Kim Tran, despite some great community backing never showed up at the debates and hasn't put out enough specific material to make up for the lack of knowledge about her positions. Her web site talks about police and firefighters being a priority, but their pensions are part of the problem. Ryan Huckabone is a likeable enough guy, and we hope to see him in some future forum. But he is too gung-ho about keeping the Chargers at the Q and unwilling to take drastic action to deal with pension issues. I appreciate his position that we have cut a deal, but even Howard Wayne has pointed out that that is to simplistic a position. We can ask the employees for a greater contribution to their own pension fund and still be within the bargaining agreement.

That brings me to Howard Wayne, former assemblyman and deputy attorney general for the state of California. He is knowledgeable but carries the very, very heavy baggage of employee union endorsements, including local firefighters, the local "labor council," the San Diego Police officers association and assorted progressive groups. Sorry, but endorsements by any employee unions are going to earn the enmity of B-Daddy and other Tea Party members. As chronicled in these pages unions have been fleecing state and local taxpayers for decades. Despite Wayne's good impression in the debate, I can't trust him to take on the unions. Further, Wayne seems to change his tune depending on his audience.

Which brings me, finally, to Lorie Zapf. She is a bit more combative than I might normally like in a local office holder, but these are tough times and she has done the hard work of starting her own business. Her heart is clearly in the right place, from her prior work with Californians against lawsuit abuse. I predict a run off between Zapf and Wayne, which is the CW. She needs to step up her debate game if she is going to win in November.

Clairemont Debate - Part 2: The Good News is the Bad News

In my previous post, I set up the start of the District 6 San Diego City Council debate held at Clairmont High. I wanted to summarize the remainder of the debate without a verbatim transcript. The whole event was filmed, if it gets posted I will provide you a link. Incredibly, no media attended, so that makes me the de facto reporter.

The Pre-staged Questions

I don't know if the candidates had access to these questions ahead of time; but based on their answers, they all must have reasonably anticipated them.

1. Do you support water reclamation?

Everyone favored this project, except Howard Wayne added that he wanted to see cost effectiveness. Wayne said that this was twice as expensive a way to produce water in the last study he saw. Lori Zapf talked about getting gray water in purple pipes to projects that are ready in Mission Valley. Ryan Huckabone was also in favor of cisterns to capture storm water run off.

2. Do you support the Strong Mayor system and Proposition D?

Steve Hadley was the only one not in favor, because he said it made city managers unaccountable to the council members. Zapf wanted cost containment on cost of 9th district. Wayne said that city manager form of government is for small cities and added that he would add a companion measure to ensure city council subpoena power over city managers.

3. What is your top priority?

Here is where the good news = the bad news. All the candidates acknowledged the woeful state of the city's finances. Apparently, it is so bad that no candidate felt they could ignore them and every candidate ruled out tax increases, knowing that "dog wouldn't hunt" in this economy. When Democrats with city union endorsements are ruling out tax increases, you know the Tea Party and the outrage that fuels its success are having an impact. Huckabone and Zapf favored aggressive implementation of the managed competition proposition that was passed in 2008 but never implemented. Later in the debate, Hadley detailed his opposition to the measure (this was the deal killer for me with Hadley, he seems so eager not to offend the unions, regardless of other pronouncements, that he is disqualified.) Wayne talked about bringing in jobs but offered no specifics. Hadley also talked about waste and inefficiency, but this guy has been at city hall for 10 years. Zapf discussed meaningful pension reform and kept hammering managed competition, as did Huckabone. Huckabone emphasized getting new employees on 401k style pension plans.

4. What are your specific ideas to deal with the pensions issue?

This was largely a continuation of the prior question. Zapf had some very specific ideas after pointing out that the 401k idea doesn't do much in the short term. She also proposed reverting to high 3 instead of high 1 and raising the retirement age to 60 from 51 or 55 depending on the job. Huckabone kept emphasizing the need to keep our promises to current employees, which I found troubling since some of those promises were made contrary to law. Wayne later pointed out that employees are required by law to contribute to the pension system in approximately the same amount as the city, and this is not happening. Wayne pointed out that the courts have struck down some attempted changes. He called out higher retirement age and more employee contributions. Throughout the debate Wayne seemed to have the firmest grasp on the pension issues and was the only candidate to specifically address that bankruptcy is not viable and would not discharge pension obligations. Hadley made a statement that only 58% of retiree benefits are vested, but never explained the specifics of why that gives the city leeway on the pension problem.

Candidate to Candidate

This got a little interesting, it was more interesting to see what the candidates asked their opponent than the actual reply. They drew names from a hat to set this up.

Hadley asked Huckabone, "You make mention in your web site that a new stadium is a goal, how do you propose paying for that?" Huckabone talked about the Chargers being an asset to the community and the national air time from Aztec and Charger games helping tourism. He proposed a mix of negotiation with the county and redeveloping the Qualcomm property as well as getting the Chargers to kick in. I really didn't like his answer, and felt Hadley tagged him.

Huckabone to Wayne, "Your thoughts on declaring bankruptcy?" For the life of me I can't understand why Huckabone asked this question. Wayne totally schooled him on the question and demonstrated a deep command of this issue. (Pops once asked me about this issue and after some research, I came to the same conclusions as Howard Wayne.)

Wayne asked Zapf, "What local problem have you solved?"
This put her off balance for a moment, she talked first about her work as a business owner then here charity work with underprivileged and USO. Wayne's years of public (government) service were meant to be highlighted by this question.

Zapf asked Hadley, "How do you square your opposition to managed competition with the fact that the voters approved the measure?" Hadley responded with a very cheap shot at Zapf, which I won't repeat. He received the only boos of the entire evening. He recounted some anecdotal horror story from an outsourcing in Phoenix. At this exact point in the debate, I knew for sure that I could eliminate one candidate.

Then there were questions from the audience that were randomly drawn out of a hat. My question about what will you do to save the taxpayer dollars that will be opposed by the public employee unions didn't cover much new ground. Although I thought Hadley side stepped the issue by talking about not opposing Wal Mart and big box stores, which a. had nothing to do with my question and b. was delivered in a deliberately obfuscating manner. There were some questions about the homeless, thank God no one proposed some big program that would "solve the problem" most acknowledged that it wasn't solvable. There was a question about the landfill, but who cares really?

The summations at the end did not add much to the debate either:

Hadley: Continue Donna Frye's push for open government.

Huckabone: Some rambling story about horse racing and some praise for Donna Frye.

Wayne: Pretty canned speech about the greatness of our neighborhoods and his years of experience.

Zapf: Potholes representing unfulfilled promises of the past. She will do the heavy lifting and we need new people with fresh ideas.

At the end, I noted that Howard Wayne was first out of his seat to shake everyone's hand.

B-Daddy's Assessment:

Only Steve Hadley fully disqualified himself. Howard Wayne had a deep command of the issues, but has those stinking union endorsements. Ryan Huckabone is a very likable guy, but got schooled on the stadium and bankruptcy. If you read all my commentary, you might be asking, then why aren't you endorsing Lori Zapf? It's hard for me to put my finger on it, but she was just a little touchy and angry at times, and it makes you wonder. As a small business owner, which I greatly admire, and probably could not do myself, she is used to a certain style of interaction with employees and vendors. For better or worse, that style doesn't always work in the political arena and she seemed clearly unused to being challenged. As a result, I am not taking a position just yet. For what its worth, Kim Tran should have shown up. The playing field was level, it didn't matter if you were Republican, Democrat or Independent, there was reasonable debate about tough problems facing the city.

The only down side? Sitting in high school cafeteria chairs for two hours left my back in bad shape. But hey, democracy is hard.

Steve Hadley

Ryan Huckabone

Howard Wayne

Lori Zapf

Clairemont Debate - Part 1 Clairemont Town Council

Tonight's debate was actually part of a regularly scheduled meeting of the Clairemont Town Council. To be honest, I have heard of these town councils before, and am not really sure what their raison d'être is. However, they performed a good service by getting candidates together for a well-moderated and useful debate. Before I get into the debate, I wanted to report on the Council meeting itself, because it had both uplifting and jaw dropping moments.

We started the evening with Boy Scout Pack 277 color guard presenting the colors and the pledge of allegiance. It was good to hear everyone say "under God" without hesitation.

Some other pre-debate business:
From Assemblywoman Kehoe's office, her rep, Andrew Kemmerly told us a few things. She is introducing legislation to create a Del Mar greenway to preserve a buffer zone between the fairgrounds and the river as well as self defense training in high schools, still in draft. The self defense training is in response to the murder of Chelsea King in Poway. Information on where to view the district's stimulus spending breakdown was provided. Christine Kehoe is claiming that about $631 million was spent in our little state senate district. Jobs saved? 684. When I quizzed Andrew about this, he helpfully explained that this also includes infrastructure, so the million dollars per job was not really accurate. Glad to see the state senator's aide can do math. And the finale was the announcement of a California cash for appliances program; good grief, I thought we were broke.

Becoming A Champion getting cut off was unintentionally ironic.

From the City Attorney's office was a reminder of something entirely forgettable.

Donna Frye was the only pre-debate speaker greeted with applause. She passed out handouts of Fryelights. She recently filed a lawsuit against the city of San Diego over the financial analysis of the "strong mayor" city proposition D. The mayor's financial analysis required for the proposition said the cost was any where from zero to a million. Donna made the entirely reasonable point that zero was probably not happening when part of the deal was creating a new city council district. The city settled the next day and I presume the language will be changed. I have often disagreed with her positions, but I must say that Donna Frye was amazingly short and sweet; I can see why she is so popular.

Fire Capt. Praizner brought handouts to explain fire safety and the brown out issue. More on that some other post, perhaps.


The Debate:

Questions were collected from the audience members at the start of the debate. I had no way of knowing if my question would be asked. Candidates were allowed short opening statements.

Introductions by the moderator, Gina Lew, were straight out of the candidates' web sites. Each candidate was then allowed to make their own opening statement.

Steve Hadley: Really emphasized his years as Donna Frye's chief of staff, ten years? He has been endorsed by Frye, but didn't over play that card. Claimed to be a fiscal conservative and socialyl progressive. Talked about serving as a former pastor and really emphasized all the constituent service he has performed. Initial impression: Consummate insider.

Ryan Huckabone: Talked about his background growing up in San Diego, going to Chico State, serving as an army linguist in Mandarin Chines in Hawaii. He said specifics about the issues are important. How will that contractor fix your fence? It's important to make sure candidates know specifics. Initial impression: Regular guy.

Howard Wayne: Talked about the importance of neighborhoods. He served many years as a Deputy Atty General, some years in the Assembly. Big contributions are monitoring of beach water cleanliness and funding for curbside recycling in San Diego. He emphasized his local roots: Hoover high, SDSU, Clairemont Town Council member. Initial impression: Regular politician.

Lori Zapf: Starting talking about raising school age daughters. Talked about Clairemont being a great community, but is in decline the past few years. Library hours, roads and potholes, fewer police and firefighters. Talked about running her own natural foods company, and restoring fiscal sanity. Initial impression: Tough cookie, publicly inexperienced.

My debate notes need to get typed, and I'm not sure if I should just summarize or go into each question chronologically. I'll post more tomorrow. I'd like your input on how to summarize the rest of the 90 minute debate.

Programming Alert - District 6 Debate

Quick reminder that I will be covering the San Diego City Council District 6 debate tonight at 7:00 p.m. at Clairemont High. No guarantees on when I will get a post put together, but I will monitor this space for new questions. Also, I see no need for breathless Twitter updates, it's just a city council race for cryin' out loud.

San Diego District 6 City Council Elections

I am taking a time out from national politics, to explore the San Diego City Council race in District 6. I am just getting started looking at the candidates and will report from the debate on April 8 at Clairemont High School. Right now, the Clairemontonline.com flyer shows four candidates, although I could swear there were five only a week ago. When I saw the flyer, I had little knowledge about the candidates, so here is my preliminary round up:

Howard Wayne

Former Assemblyman (78th district East Countyish, Lemon Grove, Spring Valley, Bonita) and Democrat. His experience and fundraising probably make him the favorite. On his web site he touts the endorsement of the firefighters and police unions, so right away, I am highly prejudiced against him. This means he won't take on firefighter work practices or the pension problems crippling the city budget, or so it would seem.






Lori Zapf

Her website has some pretty decent proposals; reform pensions, balance the budget (but that's the law). But she also cow-tows to the firefighters and police. She also touts making "quality of life" and neighborhoods her first priority. San Diego City Beat is trying to paint her as some kind of anti-gay bigot, so she is making the right enemies. She was also involved in an organization called Californians Against Lawsuit Abuse, another plus. She is also, horrors, the only Republican in the officially non-partisan race.






Steve Hadley

Steve Hadley is Donna Frye's chief of staff. Frye is the current District 6 council member. He will come with her mixed baggage, she was occasionally the voice of sanity on the council but I always felt that she was too close to the unions. Hadley's issues page on his web site
takes on a number of issues regarding pension that show his knowledge of the real problem. I was pleasantly surprised. Unfortunately he also seems anti-development with his emphasis on mitigation plans and other minutia of urban planning.






Ryan Huckabone

The last candidate also seems the least likely to win. The platform page of his web site calls for shifting to a defined contributions pension system for new employees; I wholeheartedly agree. (But dude, get some professional help for your web page.) He also calls for limiting spending, but offers very little concrete, other than capping expenses at 2% below projected revenue. Maybe not a bad idea, but more needs to be done. He also takes on water reclamation as a key initiative. He may be very far sighted, but I don't think this will generate excitement, unless water rationing gets way worse. Finally, he states that he will work very hard to keep the Chargers in San Diego; I couldn't disagree more. I would like to see some other city deal with the financial subsidies that come with supporting an NFL team, so I am not thrilled.






My options aren't looking so great, but I will be attending the debate on April 8.For any readers residing in San Diego or absentee voting in San Diego (CZ?), I invite you to comment on what questions I should ask. My proposed question is, "What action will you take that will anger the public employees union but save the taxpayers significant money?"

Look forward to your comments.