San Diego Watchdogging

Dave Maass, at City Beat, gets in on the local watchdog action with his report of how County Supervisor Ron Roberts and Carlsbad City Councilwoman Ann Kulchin treat the San Diego Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE) like their own personal slush fund. (My words, not Dave's). The fund was established in the 1990s to build out and maintain the system of freeway call boxes through a $1 vehicle tax. Of course, since the call box system is fully built and maintenance is low, the excess monies should be returned to the taxpayers. Sure it is, not. Here are the money paragraphs, literally.

Kulchin and Roberts control the purse strings as a two-vote majority on a three-person budget committee—a group treated to homemade lasagna at each meeting by Eddie Castoria [pictured above], SD SAFE’s privately contracted executive director.

Castoria used to manage the call-box program as a county employee until SD SAFE privatized the system. Castoria formed his own company, TeleTran Tek, and won the contract. SD SAFE paid his company $405,000 in 2010 and plans to increase his rate 2 percent each year until it reaches $478,000 in 2017. In addition, Castoria also picks up hundreds of thousands of dollars in consulting contracts from other county SAFEs.

The lasagna is really my favorite part of the whole article.

To her credit, District 6 Council member, Lorie Zapf has gone public with her objections to the waste of your car tax dollars.






Meanwhile, in an update from Sunday's U-T Watchdog recap, the county pension system was embarrassed into reviewing its investment in Mississippi timber venture.

The county pension system will revisit a $50 million investment in a Mississippi timber venture because board members were not told about two business partnerships their own fund adviser has with the wood-harvesting company.

Brian White (pictured below) had initially stated that no review was needed, but reversed field shortly after the U-T Watchdog published their initial article.

Cross posted to sdrostra.com.

San Diego City Hall - Reading the Tea Leaves

Two articles in today's U-T point to the growing realization by the City Council that the issues of fiscal responsibility raised by the Tea Party are the new reality.

Item 1. The council appears poised to rescind the big box economic analysis law in the face of Walmart's successful petition drive. Key swing vote, Tony Young, council President is quoted as saying:

“With the city facing significant unemployment challenges and historic budget deficits, it is difficult to see the sense of spending over $2.5 million for a special election,” he said in a statement. Young said the money could be better spent elsewhere as the city faces a $53 million budget deficit.

The key issue is the cost of the election. Nice to see the council member thinking about cost. The U-T reports that DeMaio, Zapf, Faulconer and Lightner are solid votes to repeal, so this is looking good for a repeal. To give credit where it is due, Richard Rider has been predicting this outcome.

Item 2. City Trims Its Pension Shortfall Craig Gustafson is also reporting that the City Council has decided against paying $100 million in illegally obtained benefits to current and former city employees. The background:

The benefit at issue is called the “purchase of service credit” program, enacted in 1997 under then-Mayor Susan Golding. It’s still in effect, although not for new hires.

Employees can buy as many as five years of service that they didn’t work. For example, a 15-year worker could retire with 20 years of credit. The move increases future pension payments and, in some cases, allows workers to retire earlier.

The pension system wasn’t charging workers enough for the credits between 1997 and 2003 to cover its costs.

The San Diego City Employees’ Retirement System board voted on Aug. 15, 2003, to increase the rates and delayed implementation for more than two months. Word spread quickly and nearly as many people bought credits in that brief window as in the previous six years combined.

However, the state constitution forbids gifts to employees which is what the award of the pension credit without adequate pay in amounts to. Good to see the city council shaving $8.8 million off its annual bill. By the way, how is this different from the case of Judie Italiano getting $700,000 in unearned pension benefits? Also, what is wrong with the pension board? They had asked the council last November to approve the illegal pensions. Can't we fire these jokers?

But over all, I pretty happy. The way I see it, that's a nice deficit reduction of $11.3 million. Plus, I might get to shop at a Walmart SuperCenter in my home town some day. The one I visited in North Charleston was pretty sweet.

Image of Tony Young at top right courtesy of San Diego CityBeat.

Cross-posted to sdrostra.com.

Fire the San Diego City Pension Board

Former union boss get $700,000 for lost pension

So says the headline in today's U-T. In another example of handing out illegal benefits to senior union officials, the IRS ruled that the city of San Diego's award of a pension to Judie Italiano, former head of the city's white collar labor union was illegal since she wasn't actually an employee of the City. (She also previously was involved in a scandal involving union credit cards at casinos.) She argued that since the pension was promised, she should get it anyway, illegality be damned. Judge Joel Pressman also agreed that the city owed her nothing, but

The pension board unanimously approved the deal in closed session Oct. 1 — 45 days before the judge ruled against Italiano.

Notice the familiar pattern, closed door deals that favor senior union leaders. Here's what the judge had to say about the settlement:

“This court does not see this as a good faith settlement,” he wrote in a tentative ruling. “It is a settlement crafted to give judicial cover to an agreement based on prior illegal acts. This court is not inclined to grant that cover. If the parties choose, the settlement can go forward but without this court’s good faith determination.”

Even the City Attorney disagrees with the settlement. Take a look at the members of the board, 6 of 12 members are former government employees. The others have financial industry backgrounds. Who speaks for the taxpayer? I don't even know to whom to complain, it seems that the City Council doesn't have any control over this either.

Lorie Zapf, what are you going to do?