San Diego's Budget - Impact of Prop D Defeat

Last November's defeat of the half-cent sales tax measure, Proposition D, was supposed to be the warning shot across the bow that galvanized city leaders into drastic action to cut budget deficits. From the Citizen’s Fiscal Sustainability Task Force Analysis of FY2012 Budget Deficit:

In all frankness, the seeming absence of a sense of urgency demonstrated by the City leadership since the public’s November 2, 2010 rejection of Proposition D’s additional revenues as a deficit solution is disturbing. On November 3rd, the citizens of San Diego anticipated swift and aggressive actions from the City leadership to resolve what was advertised as a dire fiscal situation. With the prospect of $500 Million in new tax revenues coming from the passage of Proposition D, there was a commitment by the City to quickly implement the reforms articulated in our last report. Instead from November to December, little or no significant actions were taken by the elected officials to eliminate the Structural Deficit in 2012. When the 18 month budget was passed in December 2009, Councilman Young added an amendment requesting the Mayor present a plan by June 30, 2010 that would permanently eliminate the Structural Deficit. If Proposition D was that plan, then once Proposition D failed, it was anticipated that a new plan would be forthcoming. Instead, during the November Budget Committee meeting, when asked if the City would be developing a new mid-year budget to get a head start on new savings and reforms, City Management went on record indicating there were new positive economic results coming and a mid-year cut was not necessary (City Council Meeting November 11, 2010). In light of pre-election assurances by elected officials that Propositions D’s failure would result in drastic service and cost reductions, the decision to not address mid- year budget cuts given that Proposition D did in fact fail stands in stark contrast with these promised actions.

Almost a year later we get the following news report.

The San Diego city budget deficit for next year is shrinking and the future is a bit brighter with a projected surplus in 2017, according to the latest financial prognostications from Mayor Jerry Sanders Wednesday.

Maybe that's why the politicians didn't do much after the defeat of Prop D, they knew the situation wasn't as dire as they had claimed. But here is what Mayor Sanders had to say in 2010 about public safety if Proposition D was rejected.

Sanders says there will be significant cuts to public safety if Proposition D is rejected. “To date, we’ve spared them, by and large, but we don’t have a lot left to cut,” he said. “And there’s going to be some public safety implications, implications in terms of services throughout the neighborhoods.”

However, no such cuts materialized. Indeed, so the called fire station brown outs ended in July of this year. Clearly better not to listen to politicians asking for tax hikes to close budget gaps. Better to force them to reduce spending, it seems to work.

Cutting a Deal on Proposition D

Jerry, Let's Make a Deal.

I have come out strongly against Proposition D, the proposed half cent sales tax increase in San Diego. However, it occurred to me that we should cut a deal to see if the politicians who put it on the ballot are serious. I'll vote for the increase if two conditions are met:

1. The city's budget is cut in actual dollars year on year, by at least 5%
2. The city outsources enough jobs to reduce the number of union workers on the city's payroll by 10%.
   

Those two measures would prove they are serious. Absent those achievements I am voting no. Talk is cheap, and the way the proposition is structured, not a single job actually has to be outsourced, giving city council members plenty of wiggle room to take our money and continue to fail. Don't let them play us for fools, vote No on Proposition D.

Good to see W.C. on board with my recommendation; He'd better be, I've got clout. You don't get to be unofficial chief ideologist just by self proclamation.

OK, actually you do, but don't tell anyone.

Mayor Sanders Resign - No on Proposition D

Conniving tax and spender.

I echo Richard Rider's call for Jerry Sanders to resign as Mayor of San Diego for cutting back room deals for the Chargers and lying to the public about the need for full, open and transparent hearings. Best to just read Richard Rider's post.

The relationship to Proposition D?

Earlier this month - while Jerry Sanders was urging voters to approve Prop D's massive sales tax hike – and to trust him to dutifully work with a labor-backed City Council to reduce government spending after he gets a half-billion dollars in new taxes – our Mayor was working behind the scenes to funnel a half-billion dollars toward a new Chargers stadium.

Coincidence? Maybe. But the fact is that these tax dollars are going to public funding of a stadium if the mayor gets his way, not "protecting public safety" as advertised. Still need convincing that we should make the politicians demonstrate good faith budget cuts and outsourcing before we pass Proposition D?

B-Daddy's San Diego Proposition Guide

My ballot came in the mail over the weekend; since I am a resident of the City of San Diego, it included both the city and county propositions. Here's my run down on the initiatives, and I have to admit, it wasn't that tough. Before we start, I have to give a shout out to Richard Rider, who has been submitting arguments against tax increases for as long as I can remember, at least going back to 1985, when I was first stationed here. He worked on the argument against Proposition J and they are great and will be quoted.

One more shout out, to BallotPedia, a wealth of information about initiatives.

On to the props - I am not using the official titles, my shortened and more accurate version. Don't like my characterizations? Tough, get your own blog, free speech rocks.


Prop A - Prohibits Project Labor Agreements - YES

". . .the county shall not require a contractor on a construction project to execute or otherwise become a party to a project labor agreement as a condition of bidding, negotiating, awarding or performing of a contract."

Labor unions use project labor agreements to set wages on government projects at the union rate. This discourages firms that don't employ union members not to bid and DRIVES UP PROJECT COSTS. This is an easy call. San Diego County already has a law like this on the books, but if the Board of Supervisors shifts left, this could be repealed, so the amendment is needed as part of the county charter.



Proposition B - Makes Deputy City Attorneys Like Civil Servants - yes

This basically says that all of the attorneys below the elected City Attorney can only be fired for just cause, to "protect them from politics." Everyone is for this, even Todd Gloria AND Carl DeMaio, so I guess I should be too. It would certainly prevent the loss of attorneys we saw under Mike Aguirre. But I wonder if we will see a City Attorney bemoaning the fact that no one in the office will do what he says. B-Daddy gives this a yes, barely.





Proposition C - Waiting for Godot - Yes

This proposition is to allow the Pacific Highlands Ranch to continue development even though the current ordnance requires them to wait for Caltrans to finish the I-5/SR-56 interchange. This is currently scheduled for 2020. Of course you have to vote for this. Below is a picture of one of the things not to do while waiting for Caltrans to finish anything on time:

By the way, and speaking of Caltrans, if you were stuck in traffic today, you can thank Jerry Brown, who seriously set back our freeway building programs when he was governor previously.


Proposition D - "Temporary" One-Half Cent Sales Tax - NO NO NO

I've blogged about this extensively, do I really need to say more?





Proposition J - More Taxes for Government Schools - NO

The usual suspects are making the argument that the government schools need more funding and they promise to only spend it on classroom learning. This measure reminds me of Proposition D, they make a big deal of how well the school district will manage the extra money, but do nothing up front to address their prior fiscal mismanagement. Basically, they want to find a way to pay for a teacher salary increase of 7% that starts in 2012 along with other increased benefits. As Richard Rider and others also point out, per pupil spending has increased about 34% since 2003.


Make sure you vote, get those ballots in the mail early. There is little going on that should change our mind. If I missed a local proposition in your area, Richard Rider has some recommendations always guaranteed to keep your taxes low.

U-T Endorses Proposition D - But Not Enthusiastically

Today's U-T editorial headline was "Prop D's Advocates Must Step Up Their Game" as if it is lack of game that has the electorate doubting the efficacy of handing over $100 million more in taxes in return for promises from politicians. The editorial makes the case for why these guys can't be trusted:

The mayor worked with Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher, R-San Diego, to get the Legislature to pass with zero scrutiny or public debate a bill lifting the limit on how much property tax revenue the city could divert to downtown redevelopment, possibly clearing the way for a new Chargers stadium.
. . .
The same holds for the City Council’s moves to block Walmart from selling groceries despite warnings from planning commissioners that it was acting hastily and without following normal procedures.

Hmm . . . violating procedures, cutting back room deals, rewarding your labor union supporters. And we're just supposed to hand over our hard earned cash to these jokers on their promise that they'll certify they have met specific conditions? As I quoted earlier:

Sanders acknowledged the financial thresholds in the resolution aren’t binding legally.

Yes, the same mayor urging you to vote yes on D.

Here's the deal with this election. The political class in this country has broken faith with the people. They have rewarded government labor unions with sweetheart salaries and pensions, they have refused to enforce the borders, they have spent your grandkid's and great-grandkid's money. Kick those bums out. Don't give them another cent until they take action on behalf of "we the people." That is why I am voting No on D, why I support Lorie Zapf over Howard Wayne, and even Christine O'Donnell, who lacks a compelling record of achievement. Anyone who has sided with the political class or government employees' unions such as the supporters of Proposition D, Howard Wayne or Chris Coons does not deserve office. It's our country, these people asked for our trust and rewarded it with treachery, throw them out or keep them out of office.

More Reasons to Vote Against Proposition D

City strikes deal with unions to allow outside bids

. . . or so states the newspaper headline. At first, it sounds like the city council is working to keep its promises to get Proposition D, but read the fine print, as pointed out by Carl DeMaio. Although the outside bidders do not have to provide health care benefits, as previously demanded by the city's unions, two other factors make a mockery of this process:

City Councilman Carl DeMaio, who opposes Proposition D, said the managed competition guide is a watered-down version of what Sanders proposed last year and creates several opportunities for the council to avoid outsourcing city jobs, such as not requiring the city to accept the lowest bid. He also noted that, in addition to their 10 percent advantage, city workers don’t include annual pension costs in their bids — one of the most significant expenses in each department’s budget.

The 10 percent advantage is a provision that the winning bidder must be 10% less expensive than the city. Unfortunately, I don't care if they are slightly more expensive, if we could offload pension and health care obligations for city workers.

The deal isn't done either, city union members have to approve the negotiated process for outsourcing. Hard to predict how that vote will go. Taking the pensions out of the calculation gives them a significant advantage, but who knows, their salary structure still might be too high to withstand competition.

Until we see actual outsourcing, we should not be voting for tax increases.

Close Vote on Proposition D

Today's U-T reports that the survey it commissioned shows the vote on Proposition D, the half cent sales tax increase, is a very tight contest. Unlike Proposition J, this only needs a 50% vote to pass. That's actually all of the bad news, because I see quite a bit of good news in the survey.

• The survey shows that the more people know about the proposition the less likely they are to vote for it.


• The survey is of registered voters, not likely voters. My belief is that Tea Party energy makes the No's more likely to vote.


• Some of those interviewed were considered reluctant supporters, who didn't trust politicians to carry out the reforms.

This last bullet reinforces my point that the best way to argue against this proposition is to demand that the politicians first keep their promises to us and pass all of the reforms that are purportedly part of the package before we give them more money. For all the reasons to vote No, please see the No on D website, and get a yard sign or donate.


Graphic courtesy of San Diego Union-Tribune.

No On Prop D in San Diego

Do you think they'll figure out we should just start the reforms before we ask for the money?

The U-T got this one right on the editorial page, with the following headline:

Prop D: Does mayor really have a hammer?

The editorial board argues in essence, that Proposition D doesn't give the mayor the hammer to reform spending that Sanders and Frye argue for in the front of the Dialog section. Because this is getting adequate publicity and the No campaign seems to be adequately funded, for now, I may not spend much time on this issue, core as it is to the Tea Party philosophy. A few points from the editorial:

Given that five City Council members were ready to place the sales tax proposal on the ballot without linking it to reforms and that the council has stalled outsourcing of some city services despite a 2006 voter mandate to do so, Sanders’ comments are highly reassuring. They suggest reform savings would be on the high end of the $700,000 to $85 million-plus range of annual savings cited in ballot language.

But does the mayor really have the hammer he says? City Attorney Jan Goldsmith doesn’t think so.

This goes to my basic argument about Proposition D. Structural budget reform, pension reforms and aggressive outsourcing of city services can be performed right now, without the need for a half cent sales tax increase. If the ruling class was serious about reducing spending they would show good faith by taking those actions now, in advance of any vote. That they want the people to pony up first is prima facie evidence that they cannot be trusted. Kevin Faulconer and Carl DiMaio echo my sentiments:

Opponents, such as Councilmen Kevin Faulconer and Carl DeMaio, rightfully pointed out that many of the reforms listed in the ballot measure are those the council has been working on already for years with no success. Further, they argue, no one knows how much money the city might save by implementing all the reforms. They expressed doubt that the package alone could fix the city's mounting obligations forever. It was another example, they said, of city politicians kicking the can down the road on the backs of taxpayers.

It is analogous to the border situation. We all know that aggressively securing the border is not a sufficient condition to solve our immigration woes; but it is a necessary first step. Every day that the Congress and the President fail to perform this basic function, is another day that deepens our distrust of any "comprehensive plan" that any of them may propose. The only way to win back trust is to secure the border. The only way for our city council to win back trust is to deal with out of control spending on employees salaries and pensions. Do a good job and we might not even need to talk about a tax increase; but if it still looks required, we might be willing to listen. Until you get serious, NO DEAL!

Isn't That Cute?

Headline in the San Diego U-T:

Council commits to achieve savings if Proposition D passes

Well isn't that cute, coming from the political class that got us into this mess. They pass a resolution in which they promise to enact reform. Aren't they adorable? Don't they look so sweet when they pretend they're passing real legislation:

Sanders acknowledged the financial thresholds in the resolution aren’t binding legally.

Well they looked good doing it.


Meanwhile from KUSI:

The pension expert who revealed the outrageous payout's in the city of Bell, has analyzed San Diego's pension payout's.

Marcia Fritz compiled a report from information gathered from San Diego's pension system.
Fritz's analysis projected what the top 10 pensioners would receive over their lifetimes, using their age and life expectancy.

According to Fritz the top 10 pensioners will receive 61-million dollars over 25 years.

Here is the money quote though:

Tuesday, the council will consider one of the 10-reforms tied to the tax increase. This is to increase what elected officials pay toward their pensions. Currently they pay 8%, the reform would boost that to 23%, but the charter says they should pay 50-percent.

The council's unwillingness to enact real reform now is the reason we should vote No on Proposition D. It's really very simple, enact meaningful reform, then see where we stand. No tax increases until that happens.

Join the No on D campaign by clicking below.




More reasons to vote No are at this web site. Oppose the half cent sales tax increase.

Programming Alert: Debate on Proposition D On September 30

Attention San Diegans against new taxes. There will be a debate on Proposition D, the proposed half-cent sales tax increase, on Thursday, September 30th at the Westin Gaslamp Quarter from 5:00 to 6:00 p.m. The debate will be moderated by Liam Dillon of the Voice of San Diego. Tea Partyers who want to influence the debate can e-mail questions to Liam ahead of time. We should also show up to the debate and ask tough questions, like why the city council won't just enact reforms without the proposed increase. Liam has a pretty good take on the reforms in a companion article on the increase:

The 10 reforms listed in the ballot measure provide the start of major structural changes, not the end. The actual savings depend not only on negotiations before the tax could be increased, but also on the implementation of reforms anticipated but not required by the measure. In the end, it will come down to how hard the city's elected officials decide to push for many reforms' execution.

This is why I am opposing the measure. I want the politicians to show good faith and do some hard work for us, before we hand them more money. Eventually the economy will recover, sooner if there are significant Tea Party types in the House and Senate. The money will start rolling into the city's coffers, taking the pressure off executing these reforms. We will be stuck with the increase but without the fix. Better to force the reforms now, and see how much of an increase is really needed.

Another Small Step - 401(k) for San Diego City Employees

Apparently the defeat of Proposition D has concentrated the minds of local politicians. Mayor Sanders announced a plan to put new workers into defined contribution plans yesterday. Labor leaders were of course skeptical, but made one comment with which I can agree.

Lorena Gonzalez, head of the San Diego-Imperial Counties Labor Council, said ending pensions for new hires does nothing to solve the city’s current budget crisis. . .

But you have to start reforms somewhere. Further, by changing to a defined contribution plan, the city will stabilize its future costs for pensions. Changes in market conditions won't cause changes to the city's required funding profile. Defined contribution shifts the risks to the employees, which is why the labor unions oppose. However, I am very happy to be in a defined contribution plan at my work. I think it will actually provide far better returns than the defined benefits portion of my plan, so I don't understand why labor leaders oppose it.

Carl DeMaio also pointed out that the plan does not really solve the current pension crisis.

Another Proposition D critic, Councilman Carl DeMaio, said the mayor’s plan is a good first step but doesn’t go far enough. He has proposed ballot measures that would cap the city’s labor costs and freeze salaries to control pension expenses.

“The bandwidth in the public will gravitate toward the plan that actually solves the problem,” DeMaio said. “I’m supportive of the 401(k) for new hires. It’s just that it’s not complete. It falls short of what the city needs ... You have to do a lot more.”

But the momentum is shifting in the debate over pensions and budget woes. It is becoming widely accepted that most of the problems we face with government deficits must be solved through spending cuts, however they are achieved.

The mission of the Tea Party is to hold our politicians' feet to the fire and push for real reform and budget cuts.

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.

California tea party Conundrum

As a tea partyer in deep blue California, it may seem that we have limited ability to influence elections. Gerrymandering keeps almost all House, Assembly and State Senate races non-competitive. However, ballot measures and local races still provide an opportunity to make our voices heard and to beat the entrenched labor/big-government establishment. Temple of Mut has provided a public service by previewing the November ballot issues; but I wanted to add a few thoughts on issues and races that matter in San Diego in particular.

Proposition 30. Jerry Brown's "temporary" tax hikes initiative. This is an easy No recommendation from the tea party. But I doubt that the final vote will even be close. Billed as another "for the children" initiative, I think that scam is up. (As satirized in a recent Hitler parody, the voters are wise to the whole "They'll put free hookers and cocaine on our health plan as long as we say it's for the children" line.) The cram down on the high speed rail while the state is going broke isn't going to help this effort. Neither will the report that reveals that the top paid legislative staffers in Sacramento are getting big pay raises. Of course, the bulk of the pay raises are going to the top 1% of the staff, just kidding, I think it is the top 5%. If I were in charge of advertising, I would lead with particular tidbit about legislative staff pay raises in a campaign against the tax hikes. It also helps that another tax measure to increase almost everyone's taxes, Proposition 38 is also on the ballot. Even those making as little as $7,300 will get hit by Prop 38. To be fair about who gets a tax increase, Brown's Proposition 30 also raises everyone's taxes through a sales tax increase.

San Diego Mayor - Carl DeMaio. The SCTRC does not endorse candidates, so this my personal recommendation. With the public employees unions and the California PERBerts challenging Proposition B in court and its attendant the cost savings in court, the city will need a vigorous advocate in the Mayor's office. Even opponents of the measure admit that it will save the taxpayers money. I have no doubt that Bob Filner would seek to gut the legal defense of the measure as well as any implementation. Reforming pensions is vitally important to the long term financial health of the city. Carl DeMaio strongly supported the measure and has been an advocate for the taxpayers in general. He first won my support for his vigorous opposition to Proposition D, in contrast to most other San Diego establishment politicians.

Brian Bilbray for Congress. This stance is also controversial with some of my fellow tea partyers. Despite his appearance at a Repeal Obamacare rally, Bilbray doesn't really light the fires for us tea party types. But I have never before been a single issue voter, but the so called Affordable Care Act has made me one. The ACA is actually an unaffordable sop to lobbyists and special interests that true liberals ought to be opposing, not just those on the right. The 52nd Congressional race is one of the few that matter in California. It is a competitive race. Brian Bilbray has promised to vote for repeal and Scott Peters has endorsed the ACA. How much clearer could our choice be? I am asking tea partyers and libertarians who aren't enthused to get behind Bilbray anyway. I will be donating to him and to Romney and Bilbray on the theory that the ACA will do decades worth of damage to the country if not repealed soon.

San Diego Elections - Blog and News Round Up

Dave Maass at Last Blog on Earth asks whether Howard Wayne's pension will be five digits or six when he retires from state government. He also asks the question of whether the city council members and others offering to not take salaries or pensions aren't really offering us a bribe? Is it a gimmick. Check out Dave's blog and you decide. (My position is that the personal salaries are usually chump change compared to the total budget, so I just ignore this stuff.) Dave is an occasional commenter and a great news source for local politics.

Temple of Mut's compares city governance to flatulence and describes a taxpayer funded public employee union rally in support of Proposition J. I haven't devoted much space to Prop J, other than recommend a vote against, because I don't think it stands a snowball's chance of passing. So why are the unions pushing this? Temple of Mut's husband Horemheb had this observation:

To make the evening even more special, Horemheb even overheard a comment from one of the panelists that the Teacher Union Elite Leaders were itching to strike should we rubes not roll over in support of this golden contract. It seems that the Elite Union Leaders anticipate more press, power, and influence in the wake of a strike.

Even if Prop J loses, the unions get a propaganda tool if it gets more than 50%, so make sure you vote against this flatulence.

I saw both Lorie Zapf and Howard Wayne in front of the Clairemont Library today with cameras rolling. I will update this post when I find out where you can watch.

Proposition D opponents have pointed out that under a 2008 contract negotiation, firefighters receive more pay for sitting at a desk. Much of the argument in favor of high firefighter pay and pensions accrues to the purported dangers and shorter life spans of their occupation. This is just one of many areas the city politicians need to reform before they ask us for more of our money.

If you live in San Diego, you may not have taken note of the school district elections. The U-T has a decent run down on the two races, including the positions of the candidates on Proposition J, which I oppose. In my district, I am having a tough time deciding. The incumbent, Katherine Nakamura has to conduct a write-in campaign because she came in third, partly due to loss of teacher's union backing. I like her already. However, as Temple of Mut, points out, she has been speaking out in favor of Proposition J as has "Teacher of the Year" Kevin Beiser. I don't know much about Steve Rosen, but I will probably vote for him as the only candidate opposing Prop J.

More Proof That This City Council Can't Be Trusted

One of the successful arguments against Proposition D was that we couldn't trust this city council and mayor to deliver on their promises to reform city government. The day after Prop D went down to defeat, Todd Gloria introduced legislation to ban Walmart Supercenters in San Diego. And the Democrats on the City Council mimic the underhanded methods used by their fellow partisans in Congress in passing Obamacare. From the U-T (the whole editorial is worth a read):

But if it is so benign, why did Gloria and his City Council allies put the measure on a fast track with few if any precedents? Why did they ignore complaints from members of the Planning Commission that the rushed process didn’t allow for a proper vetting of the proposal? And why did Council President Ben Hueso already schedule a vote early next month to override Mayor Jerry Sanders’ expected veto of the ordinance just before Hueso and another council Democrat, Donna Frye, depart office?

So what's the damage from Walmart Supercenters? The real answer is that they threaten the one area where private sector unions still hold sway, grocery stores. The alleged reason is that they destroy small businesses. And how do they do that? By offering lower prices than their competitors. So let me get this straight, when the federal government negotiates lower prices on drugs for medicare patients, buying from the low cost provider, that's good. When you want lower prices on groceries and go to WalMart, that's bad? Why? Because you are a selfish racist, but the federal government is only filled with noble purpose, dedicated to helping others. Get it? This is the narrative the left always uses. If the government is helping people, its all good. But people helping themselves? Clearly evil.

If this passes, who is up for a proposition to overturn this law?

More on that U-T Poll

The U-T poll on Proposition D, reported on October 23rd, has come under heavy criticism for its methodology. At the time, I thought we had a good chance based on the flawed methodology:

• The survey is of registered voters, not likely voters. My belief is that Tea Party energy makes the No's more likely to vote.


• Some of those interviewed were considered reluctant supporters, who didn't trust politicians to carry out the reforms.

The polling company's president and the U-T editor disingenuously stated that the poll wasn't meant to be predictive. My rear! Why would one go to the bother. Anyway, when you look at polls, you have to consider if the pollsters are asking likely voters and what their turnout model is.

Exit question, was the U-T shilling for the proposition, releasing a poll whose method was knowingly flawed, to generate momentum for Prop D?

San Diego Mayoral Race - Why Would It Be Close?

The U-T is reporting that the issue of workers pensions is roiling the mayoral race.  Read this quote about Filner:

Filner, 70, has long been a champion for public employee unions which have been major donors to his campaigns over the past two decades. He opposed Proposition B ahead of the public vote, calling it a fraud that unjustly threw employees under the bus for the sins of past administrations.

As a taxpayer, I don't understand why Filner's candidacy isn't dead on arrival.  Ultimately, as a taxpayer, I am one of the employers who pay the city workers wages.  I want the best deal for my money.  It's as if a candidate for CEO of Ralph's touted his credentials for getting big pay raises for the unionized work force.  What board of directors in their right mind would hire such a person.  Yet here is Filner, supposedly in a tight race, telling voters that his support for unions should make us vote for him.  Sorry, but I want a tough negotiator who will cut the best deal for me.  This is why I am supporting Carl DeMaio for mayor.

DeMaio fought hard against the half cent sales tax increase, Proposition D.  He fought hard to bring pensions under control with Proposition B.  Despite what he says, I guarantee that Filner will undermine the city attorney's legal case on Prop B in order to get it off the books.  We can't trust Filner to fully support a law he so adamantly opposed.  I expect him to pull a stunt like Obama on the DOMA, where the executive abdicates his duty to argue the law to the Supreme Court.

DeMaio vs Fletcher/Filner or Something Else?

Polling in the San Diego mayor's race has been scant; but Nathan Fletcher's (picture left) decision to leave the Republican party appears to have been shrewd. From the U-T:

A U-T San Diego poll showed DeMaio with 22 percent of the vote, followed by Filner at 18 percent, Fletcher at 17 percent and Dumanis at 8 percent. The survey of 404 registered city voters was taken May 1-2 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.9 points.

Conventional wisdom from that article is that Filner, being the lone competitive Democrat in the race is likely to benefit from the line up of two Republicans and one former Republican in the race. My view of Fletcher is that he is closely tied to the Republican downtown establishment, but left the party because DeMaio earned the county GOP endorsement. My fear is that he will knock DeMaio from first place and we will end up with a Filner vs Fletcher match up in November. For this reason, I have donated to the DeMaio campaign early, rather than waiting for November. The barrage of negative advertising against Fletcher may not be working, because it focuses on ancillary issues like missing votes in Sacramento. I don't think the voters in San Diego much care at this point. What would be more effective would be to highlight Fletcher's lukewarm response to protecting taxpayers, bringing up his tepid response to Proposition D, for example.

However, polling from SurveyUSA/KGTV from May 14 had these results:

DeMaio 31%
B Filner 21%
Fletcher 21%
Dumanis 13%
Other 6%
Undecided 8%.

This is a poll of likely voters, which is good, I'm not sure if the U-T article quoted is of registered voters. Proposition B, pension reform, is likely to energize a base of voters friendly to DeMaio. If you analyze the month on month results from the SurveyUSA poll, you might conclude that the negative advertising is having some effect, as Fletcher is down 5% from last month.

We are going to need a mayor committed to implementing Proposition B, which holds a commanding 54% to 22% lead in the same poll. I consider the election of Carl DeMaio (lower right) one of the most important races in the country. If San Diego, know historically for its inept handling of employee pensions, earning it the nickname Enron by the Bay, can get its fiscal house in order; then maybe the whole state isn't beyond saving. My fear is that it will take a monumental crisis to create a climate for change given the union's stranglehold on state politics.

San Diego Mayorial Race

As we close in on the June 5 primary that will most likely determine the two candidates to compete in November for mayor of San Diego, media interest is heating up. My complaint? Lack of focus on the key issues for the campaign; how will we reform pensions and in general control spending in the city. Over at sdrostra.com, a mainly Republican local blog site (to which I am occasional contributor), most of the recent posts have been about the race, but in my view only peripherally. Instead the discussion has been dominated by "insider" discussion about who is working for whom, the role of SD GOP chair Tony Krvaric and the education plans of the would-be mayors. A reminder to San Diego residents: The mayor has no voice over the school system. All the polling I have seen, leads one to conclude that we are headed for a run off in November between Republican Carl DeMaio and Democrat Bob Filner, in the officially non-partisan race.

DeMaio was an early and vocal opponent of Proposition D, the half cent sales tax increase that lost last year. His issues web page features the budget and pension and jobs as his top two priorities, matching my own. With regards to jobs, he correctly makes the connection between tax and fee increases and job losses. He has been a consistent supporter of streamlined processes to allow businesses to get started.

Bob Filner's website calls out his first three priorities as Jobs, Education and Neighborhoods. Of course he trots out the "green jobs" agenda that is already a failed joke nationally. Also, Filner is against any pension reform, calling it fraudulent. Richard Rider commented that Filner will release his plan as soon as the union's tell him what it is. Electing Filner will give us more of the same on pensions and the budget. Filner, as the only Democrat in the race, will get the enthusiastic support of the workers' unions, but as I have previously discussed, I think the interests of the workers and their unions diverge.

Fletcher and Dumanis have yet to provide me with compelling reasons to consider their candidacy. Their past views on Prop D form my litmus test for today. Those who supported the initiative have been proven spectacularly wrong. Dumanis' and Fletcher's failure to vigorously oppose the initiative should be considered disqualifying by conservatives and libertarians and even moderates.

Dumanis Disqualifies Herself

Bonnie Dumanis was interviewed by the U-T editorial board today. Ricky Young, @sdutYoung on Twitter, has a couple of key quotes.

Dumanis to U-T edit board, asked about Prop D, says she voted but ''My vote is personal''

Dumanis says she doesn't remember Prop 23, last fall's effort to undo AB32, so doesn't know how she might have voted.

Gustafson asks for Dumanis' ideas... She starts, ''First of all, there are no new ideas."

By contrast, Carl DeMaio's efforts were key to Proposition D's (1/2 cent sales tax increase) defeat. In fairness, Nathan Fletcher was also on record against the measure, but didn't seem to actively campaign against it. Filner is so in the tank for the unions that I will never endorse him.

My tea party endorsement is never going to go to anyone who won't oppose tax increases until we have done all we can to reduce the size and cost of government.