Setting Sherri Lightner's Record Straight

There has been a lot of mail coming from Sherri Lightner’s opponent lately—firing plenty of attacks, but offering little, if any, substance. It seems that he is more interested in tearing down Lightner’s image than building up his own.

Since he does not seem to want to address any real issues, I thought I might take the time to compare Sherri Lightner with her opponent.

Neighborhoods

Lightner is actively involved with planning and community groups to understand the concerns of residents and stand up for important issues even while running her campaign [more]…
Where is Thalheimer?

Accountability/Openness

Lightner provides detailed answers to questionnaires, shares her political values and positions on major issues on her website, attends many public forums and debates, and has a plan for active public outreach…
Thalheimer ignores or refuses opportunities to answer questions from the public and often replies (when he responds at all) to questionnaires with one-word answers and no explanation.

Outsourcing

Lightner believes in a cautious approach to outsourcing to ensure proper oversight, no loss of service levels, and real savings to taxpayers [more]…
Thalheimer wants to outsource as many services as possible now.

Pension

Lightner realizes that there are no easy answers, that the grim reality may be that the City of San Diego is legally responsible for already-promised benefits, and that much of the funding for these benefits is dangerously invested in the stock market [more]…
Thalheimer thinks that halting the DROP program (which has already been eliminated for new city employees and may not be legally possible to end for older employees) is the silver bullet to solve the problem (GOP mailer, September, 2008).

Budget

Lightner believes that a line-by-line review of the budget will reveal costly and unnecessary expenses and programs that will not impact crucial city and neighborhood services [more]…
Thalheimer prefers to fund things he can “touch” (LJVCA Candidate Caucus, 4/23/08).

Economic Development

Lightner wants to partner with local universities and businesses to bring green industry and green collar jobs to San Diego in order to strengthen our economy by creating good paying jobs and create a new tax base [more]…
Thalheimer has not proposed any ideas.

Overdevelopment

Lightner believes we must ensure that roads, water, open space, parks and available transit be in place before runaway density overtakes us [more]…
Thalheimer says, “We must go up” (La Jolla District 1 Primary debate, 4/22/08).

Paid Parking

Lightner led the effort to prevent paid parking at the beach and on our streets [more]…
Thalheimer was first in favor of paid parking (11/23/07), then against it (4/22/08), and now…?

Regents Road Bridge

Lightner knows that we need results for fire and traffic safety now—many of which can be gained through building a fire station in south University City and improving traffic flow along the Genesee corridor [more]…
Thalheimer was first against it (2004), and then in favor of it (4/22/08), and then against it (La Jolla Village Community Association Forum, 4/23/08), then in favor of it again (5/7/08), and wants to spend millions of dollars and waste several years on designs and planning while ignoring residents’ current needs.

I-5/S-56 Connector

Lightner has signed on to Stop5Noise movement and opposes the removal or destruction of any residential property [more]…
Thalheimer refuses to rule out the destruction of private homes; has not signed onto Stop5Noise.

Code of Fair Campaign Practices

Lightner signed the pledge in March 2008 and has focused her campaign “on issues rather then untruths or distortions," as promised [more]…
Thalheimer signed in March 2008 as well, but has he really kept his word?

It is clear that we have a stark choice in this election. Sherri Lightner is the obvious choice if you would like a say in government, want to know where your councilmember stands (and why), believe that infrastructure should lead development rather than follow it, and is willing to roll up her sleeves and get her hands dirty with the details instead of glossing over big problems.

Come November 4th; let’s make the choice for Sherri Lightner!

Four of five S.D. Congress members vote against bailout

By George E. Condon Jr. and Finlay Lewis
U-T WASHINGTON BUREAU
September 29, 2008


WASHINGTON – Undeterred by heavy lobbying and threats of reprisals, four out of five members of San Diego County's congressional delegation voted against the Wall Street bailout hammered out by the Bush administration and the bipartisan leadership of the Congress.

Only Rep. Susan Davis, D-San Diego, voted for the $700 billion plan. Voting against was Democrat Bob Filner of San Diego and Republicans Duncan Hunter of Alpine, Darrell Issa of Vista and Brian Bilbray of Carlsbad.

For Hunter, who is retiring, the measure presented perhaps the last big vote of his 28 years in Congress. And the administration trained one of its big guns on him to pressure him for his vote.

Vice President Dick Cheney personally appealed for Hunter's support. But Hunter said he told Cheney he could not because the measure amounted to a “massive exposure for the American taxpayer for what's at best a very limited return.”

“He said he appreciated my rationale and that he disagreed with it,” Hunter said. “Over the years we've had a lot of conversations on important issues. A lot of the time we agree; a lot of the time we don't.”

For Issa, the stakes were particularly high, as he angered the Republican leadership and threatened his hopes to become chairman or ranking minority on a key House committee.

Issa was particularly outspoken in denunciation of his own party's leadership at the White House, the Treasury Department and the House. “Our president and our Treasury secretary are wrong on this issue,” he said.

On the other side of the aisle, Filner showed no reluctance to attack his own party leadership. “There was arrogant leadership on both sides,” he said.

“The leaderships want something that the rank and file doesn't. They did it all amongst themselves. The four principals went in a room and then reported back to the caucuses but they didn't take any input from the caucuses. ... This is a push back from the people who want some input.”

Davis couched her support of the bill with an acknowledgment that its provisions represented a wrenching adjustment to the rapidly weakening economy but she argued that the measure's approval was nonetheless a necessary step.

“No bill is a magic bullet but the cost of doing nothing may be far greater than the painful steps we take today,” she said in a statement prior to the roll call.

Bilbray explained his vote in a statement, contending that the measure would not do anything “to address the systemic problems that created the current financial crisis.” Bilbray, who did not return a call for comment, also complained in the statement that the bill offered “nothing but a promise to ensure that this is just a one-time deal.”

“It is not the responsibility of the American taxpayers to foot a $700 billion bill for the irresponsible actions of Wall Street and borrowers,” Bilbray said.

Bilbray's opponent in the Nov. 4 election, Democrat Nick Leibham, claimed the incumbent's vote helps prolong “the current financial crisis and sent Wall Street into free fall.”

“This man is a disaster. Literally,” Leibham said in a statement. “He has turned his back on the economic well-being of San Diego families and businesses.”

Marty Block Ad

John Burton set to announce candidacy for Democratic Party chairmanship

By Anthony York (published Tuesday, September 23, 2008)


Burton has told those close to him that he is running to succeed outgoing chairman Art Torres, who will leave the post after the party elects a new chairman in April. Burton was not immediately available to comment.

The job of party chairman is particularly important in this era of legislative term limits, and since voters approved Proposition 34, which set campaign contribution limits to candidates, and greatly enhanced the state parties’ rolls as arbiter of millions in political donations during campaign cycles. Burton largely wrote the initiative.

Other candidates in the race include current party vice-chairman Alex Rooker. Los Angeles County Party Chairman Eric Bauman has also been mentioned as a candidate.

Rooker has developed a long endorsement list, which includes incoming Senate Leader Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, and a number of legislators and members of Congress. It was unclear how Burton’s entry into the race would effect those endorsements.

Rooker did not immediately respond to calls seeking comment on Burton’s candidacy.

State Democratic Party delegates will vote to replace Torres on April 25, during their spring convention. The new chairman will take office one day after the vote.

For Burton, taking over as party chairman would be coming full circle, in a way. He was the legislative author of Proposition 34 in 2000. That measure was designed to shift political money, and fundraising power, away from individual candidates and increase the stature of political parties.

Under the rules of Proposition 34, parties can receive unlimited donations, but the measure introduced new contribution limits for legislative and statewide candidates.

Since leaving office in 2006, Burton has headed the John Burton Foundation for Children Without Homes, a non-profit “dedicated to improving the quality of life for California’s homeless children and developing policy solutions to prevent homelessness,” according to the foundation’s Web site.

They Shoot Horses, Don't They?

The slow death of the San Diego Union-Tribune now has progressed into a collapse. Kind of like Lehman Brothers or AIG as the paper has bought out it's most respected columnists and writers in order to reduce overhead and expenses. It has also closed its D.C. bureau after almost 65 years in operation.

So what's next? If the paper is bought out then what will happen to reporting in San Diego? Love it or hate it (I mostly hated it, I mean the front page was just wire service stories and maybe one good story a month) it was a major news organization and all of the electronic media took its lead from the paper. (Which speaks volumes on the quality of local news in San Diego.)

Should this be seen as a good sign that possibly a balanced media could come to San Diego?

Or just more of the same, only this time with more Fry's ads.

Huh?

Last night at a City Attorney debate, the question of the Chargers staying in San Diego came up. Which prompted a curious response from Jan Goldsmith which Scott Lewis from the Voice of San Diego caught on his blog.

Goldsmith, a Superior Court judge challenging Aguirre in the Nov. 4 election, said he would approach it differently. If the team's pursuit of a stadium in Chula Vista doesn't work, he would seek to form a joint powers authority with all cities in the county, and hold talks with the team.

“They don't want to talk now because maybe they think he'll run out and hold a press conference to attack people, or every time something goes wrong there's a lawsuit,” Goldsmith said of Aguirre. “Sometimes businesses don't react well to that type of approach.”

So as Scott Lewis asks in his commentary. Does this mean that Goldsmith's promise to keep the office of City Attorney apolitical has now been rescinded? Goldsmith says he can't recall he talked about joint powers authority as he stated to Mr. Lewis.

Goldsmith said he doesn't remember what he said at the forum. He said he always says that he would only "seek" the formation of a joint powers authority with other cities if the City Council approved of it.

"I did check with some folks who were taking notes and the notes were unclear about what I said. If I didn't say that last night, I need to clarify it," Goldsmith said.

Huh?

Trying to tackle(pun intended) the Charger issue on your own does seem to be a political ploy to me. Maybe snatch some bolt fan votes by saying I'll make sure this team doesn't leave San Diego County for Stockton or wherever.

What say you, good citizen?

Progressive San Diego: Official Reasons for Dual Endorsement in D3

The post below requires a response from Progressive San Diego. Progressive San Diego aims to put into practice the openness and transparency we advocate. ALL OF OUR REASONS for the dual endorsement were stated in our letter AND there were no other reasons. The blog commentary below is absolutely false speculation. I encourage all readers to take a look at PSD's endorsement letter.

Tommie Watson
operations director, PSD

Uptown Throwdown Continued

So now an update on the D3 race pitting Todd Gloria vs Steve Whitburn race.

On the 28th of last month the San Diego-Imperial Counties Labor Council decided to scrap the triple endorsement since John Hartley came in third and throw their full weight behind Gloria.

Rumors are flying that Steve did very badly during the COPE interview and didn't do so well answering some questions and did not do a great job explaining his answers. His responses softened his support within some of the membership. Unfortunately, I couldn't get clarification from my source what were those questions and how did he answer them. All my source said was that it was wasn't good.

On top of this Progressive San Diego, an organization that has been strong supporters of Donna Frye. Has decided to dual endorse both candidates this past week as opposed to fully Support Donna's protege Steven Whitburn. This is surprising since many members of the board are strong Donna supporters who were very active in her runs for Mayor and the organization strongly supports many of her issues.

Could this be fallout from Donna's new found friendship with Carl DeMaio? If so, Is Steve's close association with Donna becoming a liability? After all it's been said that recent actions by Donna in terms of her support of the Mayor's veto on Big Box and her position against the amicus brief on marriage equality have been causing rifts within groups that you could rely on supporting her. Are these rifts the cause of this seeming shift toward Todd's favor?

What do you think?

The Devil You Know and The Devil You Don't

Here in San Diego we have a choice this November. It's not an easy choice like for President. (I mean c'mon the DNC was awesome and Obama's speech was even better.) It is the choice for San Diego City Attorney. Now, normally this would be a no brainer. However being we've got some what many would see as questionable candidates on both sides would make some see a difficult choice.

On one side we have the incumbent Mike Aguirre. Mike styles himself as a selfless crusader that is willing to expose corruption and hypocrisy regardless of who it is. I think he sees himself as RFK and is bringing back the mandate of a City Attorney that works for all San Diegans.

Yet, he has alienated key members of the traditional Democratic constituencies with his rhetoric on public sector unions, his perceived boorish behavior toward staff and people he believes as his opponents in his quest. Not to mention his questionable statements to the press like suggesting a citywide evacuation during the `07 firestorm. These issues have led some high profile Democrats to support his opponent, Jan Goldsmith.

However Jan Goldsmith isn't a great alternative. A former leader of Assembly Republicans in Sacramento. He has spent his entire political career fighting against progressive causes. I mean other then the bill to legalize ferrets. (I mean of all the issues to champion in this state, you choose ferrets? Really?) What did he do in Sacramento that would be seen as a major accomplishment?

Yet because he promises to return stability and normalcy to the City Attorney's office he has been able to peel off support that would have traditionally gone to Mike.

Now I'm not saying that Mike is down for the count, but you have to wonder what the game plan is to win in November. And ultimately the question for San Diego voters is do we vote for the devil we know or the devil we don't?

Your thoughts?

Update: Here's Aguirre's thoughts on those high profile Dems supporting Jan.

DeMaio Fined by Ethics Commission

The UT has reported that City Councilman-elect Carl DeMaio has been fined $1,500 by the Ethics Commission for deliberately soliciting campaign contributions from city employees.

The fine comes exactly one month after the FPPC declared that DeMaio violated the Political Reform Act in his bid to win the District 5 council seat.

My favorite part of the story comes when DeMaio tries to blame his violation on the Ethics Commission, the same defense he used with the FPPC violation. While he says that the commission provided him with a letter supporting his decision to intentionally add city employees to his e-mail solicitation lists, Stacey Fulhorst, the commission's executive director, disagrees (emphasis added):

'Our investigation showed that Mr. DeMaio knew some city employees would be among those invited to the fundraiser at his home,' Fulhorst said. 'If you as a candidate put city employees on a solicitation list, you are considered targeting them.'

She said the letter covers candidates who send out mass solicitations as long as city employees are not specifically targeted. She added that DeMaio did not know about the advice letter until after the investigation was under way.

I'm sure DeMaio will try and brush this off as not being a big deal. Some may think it was just an e-mail list, and deserves little attention. I disagree.

Even if this were nothing more than an e-mail list containing 90 people who shouldn't be on the list, it underscores a major flaw in the right-wing's "Superman."

At worst, DeMaio seems to feel he can bend rules to conform to his benefit and lie and deflect his way out of responsibility. At best, he has twice been extremely sloppy in following basic campaign rules.

Either way, these two violations highlight the reason so many distrust his motives. It also showcases himself as being exactly what he claims to be fighting against.

How can you be a "reformer" when you behave the same as those you claim to be acting against?

District 7 Grantville

From today’s Voice of San Diego:
http://voiceofsandiego.org/articles/2008/08/13/survival/485distseven081208.txt


Marti Emerald said she supports the Grantville Action Group, the group of some of Grantville's business and property owners who oppose the designation of the community as a redevelopment area. She said she sides with the small business owners there who fear being pushed out in favor of the new vision for the community under redevelopment.


A legitimate position especially in a City of Villages.


April Boling said she believes Grantville will redevelop whether it's a redevelopment project area --"Redevelopment, capital R," she calls it -- or not. She supports the creation of a master plan for Grantville and the creation of the redevelopment area. Her chief reason: reinvesting the tax increment generated there to take care of the big infrastructure needs in Grantville, like aligning Mission Gorge Road with Interstate 8.


The problem with redevelopment zones is that they encourage the creation of development corporations (CCDC, SEDC) that run over established businesses and create the Mission Valleys that April wants to avoid.

Redevelopment zones were created in he early 1970’s to help the most blighted areas get on their feet. What has happened is that local governments have used them, especially in California since Prop 13, to recapture taxes lost from property by creating a larger sales tax base in areas that questionably qualify as a redevelopment zones.

There is a Grantville Action Group that wants to have a say in their future. Let them. Small businesses are the backbone of a thriving society and they know their customer base best. Grantville isn’t where it could be but it’s not on life support. Making the area a redevelopment zone would deny the locals a fair say in their future and strip them of the responsibility of maintaining their own back yard.

Managed Competition & You

So once in a great while something that U-T prints catches my attention other than the Fry's ad.

Yesterday, it was Gerry Braun's article on managed competition. In it, Braun explains the complexity of the seemly simple task of dead animal removal. While on the surface, the job seems simple enough. You pick up the dead animal and take it to the dump to be disposed of. But there are so many variables that muddy up that simplistic notion that you begin to ask.

Does any private contractor really want this hassle? If some heartbroken person, frantically looking for their beloved pet calls to see whether their pet was picked up. Will the contractor find out? If there is a licensed pet that is picked up, will contractor try to contact the owner? I mean the list can go and on.

Now imagine if this was wastewater? Or water purification? Will the contractor put the public interest over profit? Will the contractor adhere to the guidelines in place to ensure the city isn't getting skimmed? Will the contractor bid honestly? I don't know about you but sometimes the private sector isn't the best place to run public works because public works inherently are types of projects that must be done in a manner that is done safely and securely for all. After all it's our money and our services and I don't want to worry the some contractor wanted to save some money by hiring people that weren't properly trained in order to pocket a few bucks at the expense of the city because it wanted to squeeze out a little bit more profit.

If Managed Competition is the future; by what mechanism can we be assured that our tax dollars aren't used in a manner that benefits contractors who are looking to maximize profit by endangering the public and shortchanging it too.

What are your thoughts?

"The Change You Deserve."

Warning: slightly salty language at the end so it might be NSFW
but still funny...

Say No to the Governor's Attacks on State Workers

If a state budget is not passed and the Governor's illegal Executive Order remains in place, we need you to support state workers by protesting with us:

WHAT: Informational Pickets

WHERE: State Building
1350 Front St.
Wednesday, August 6
12 p.m. to 12:30 p.m.

DMV
3960 Normal St.
Thursday, August 7
7:30 a.m. to 8 a.m.

Also, call the Governor at (916) 445-2841, and tell him to exercise leadership and get a responsible budget passed!

Schwarzenegger proposes tax increase

From Today's Capitol Alert:

Last Updated 3:38 pm PDT Monday, August 4, 2008
By Jim Sanders and Kevin Yamamura - jsanders@sacbee.com

http://www.sacbee.com/1090/story/1132181.html


Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has proposed a temporary one-cent increase in the state sales tax for the next three years in exchange for long-term fixes he believes would solve the state's perennial budget woes, several sources familiar with the negotiations said Monday.

The governor's proposal comes as he and lawmakers are 35 days into the fiscal year with no approved spending plan.

Schwarzenegger has said he opposes tax increases, but was willing to consider all options to close an estimated $15.2 billion shortfall in the $101 billion general fund.

The state sales tax is 6.25 percent, but most counties have local tax additions, such as those for transportation projects, that drive the actual rate higher. A one-cent increase statewide would raise $4 billion to $5 billion a year, based on $29 billion in sales tax revenue expected in the current year.

Aaron McLear, a Schwarzenegger spokesman, had no immediate comment Monday when asked about the one-cent sales tax proposal.

The governor's sales-tax proposal appears to put him squarely at odds with his own Republican Party, which consistently has argued that the state has a spending problem - not a revenue problem.

Democrats are not certain to embrace the sales tax hike, either. Critics argue that sales taxes are regressive, meaning that the greatest impact falls on low-income Californians.

The long-term budget fixes that Schwarzenegger wanted in return for a sales-tax hike would include a system to save revenue in a rainy day fund during good years to bridge budget gaps in down years.

If we lose the 78th in November, this may be a reason why.

From today’s Wall Street Journal:


The Democratic State Central Committee of California has paid $450,000 in legal fees for state Senator Don Perata, while a separate group, taxpayers for Perata, has paid $550,000, according to filings with California’s secretary of state.


People give to the CDP to elect Democrats, not cover the asses of elected who spend money and then abandon the cause for which they were spending other people’s money.

More reason to give locally.

Wal-Mart's Anti-Worker Tactics Continue

The Wall Street Journal today reported that anti-worker mega-company Wal-Mart is holding mandatory meetings where they strongly encourage their employees to vote against Democrats in November.

According to the WSJ:

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is mobilizing its store managers and department supervisors around the country to warn that if Democrats win power in November, they'll likely change federal law to make it easier for workers to unionize companies -- including Wal-Mart.

The article claims that Wal-Mart's reasoning behind the move is to stop passage of the Employee Free Choice Act. Wal-Mart has stooped to a new low in trying to force their employees to vote Republican.

I wonder if these mandatory meetings where they "informed" their employees of how they would like them to vote were any different than the intimidation and other practices that are used to prevent employees from forming a union.

I shouldn't be surprised since it is just another example of Wal-Mart doing everything it can to prevent the fair treatment of their employees.

From the CDP

John Chiang, our Democratic State Controller, is standing up to Arnold Schwarzenegger, and I'm writing to ask you to stand up with him.

Unfortunately, in the midst of a looming multi-billion dollar budget crisis and a protracted budget battle, Gov. Schwarzenegger has decided that the best thing he could do was put the screws on our state workers by attempting to withhold all but $6.55 an hour of their pay until a budget is signed.

Despite withering criticism from almost every corner of California since he announced this scheme last week, Gov. Schwarzenegger just signed an Executive Order mandating it.

Not only is it extremely unfair and mean-spirited to force state workers to involuntarily loan the state money during a time when everyone is feeling the pain of our struggling economy, it's also not even Arnold's call to make.

According the non-partisan Legislative Counsel, it's our Controller not our Governor who has the authority to decide these types of things.

Fortunately we have a fighter in our Controller John Chiang, who has declared that he will stand up to Arnold's unfair and unproductive gimmicks and pay our state workers what we owe them.

Please stand up to Arnold and stand with Controller Chiang by writing a letter to the editor of your local newspaper today.

www.cadem.org/standuptoArnold

Over the last few days, over seven thousand of you have signed our petition supporting John Chiang in his courageous stand against Arnold Schwarzenegger's irresponsible and unwarranted plan to slash the pay of state workers.

Now we need to step it up.

Today we're asking you to take your support for Controller Chiang to the next level. Please send a letter to the editor of your local paper explaining why you support John Chiang and oppose Arnold Schwarzenegger's harebrained scheme to use state employees as pawns in the budget impasse.

There will almost certainly be lawsuits filed about this, but right now the fight is in the court of public opinion. The Letters to the Editor section is one of the most widely-read sections of any newspaper, and politicians take what appears in that section very seriously.

The California Democratic Party has set up a web page that makes it easy to write a letter to the editor on this topic. Just go to www.cadem.org/standuptoArnold. We have sample letters, talking points, and some pointers to help you get started.

This fight is not only about the wages of our state workers. It's about the differences between Democrats and Republicans. It's about leaders like John Chiang who are trying to be productive and politicos like Arnold who only engage in stunts. It's about who we are as Californians and whether we are going to allow our state to act as though a civil servant who puts in an honest day's work doesn't deserve an honest wage.

Please take a moment and send a letter to your newspaper today.

Sincerely,

Sen. Art Torres (Ret.)
Chairman

Tony Young Recall effort

According to today’s UT,



San Diego City Councilman Tony Young has become the target of a recall effort in part because he supported the ouster of Carolyn Smith, president of the Southeastern Economic Development Corp.


The Fourth City Council District has always been a fractious place. You’re either loved or not. Mediocre popularity is not tolerated. Tony Young has been in this zone of “not exactly loved but above tolerable” for a while. I was only a matter of time before someone tried this. All that was lacking was a pretext.

I personally don’t think this recall has the legs to work but the Fourth is anything but predictable and I wouldn’t be very surprised if it did pick up steam from the dissatisfied.

The question isn’t if there are enough names out there; it’s about getting them. Besides, I think the scare of a recall will help keep the office focused on their task at hand.

First Teachers, Now State Employees...Governor Likes Playing Budget Games with Other People's Pay Checks

While we have always known that Governor Schwarzenegger does not think too highly of worker's rights, he recently announced a plan that would make the state's 200,000 employees the lowest paid workers in all of California.

Under the Governor's proposed executive order, which could be signed at any minute, state workers' pay would be slashed to the federal minimum wage of $6.55 an hour until a state budget is passed.

Luckily, State Controller John Chiang has stood up for all of the state's workers by openly defying the Governor's plan. While the Governor states he must do this to bridge the gap until a budget is approved, the Controller contends that the state has enough money on hand to cover bills through September.

In the meantime, state workers are asking for help from all Californians. Members of SEIU Local 1000 will be holding informational picket lines at DMV offices tomorrow starting at 7:30 a.m. If you have time, stop by to support all state workers. The offices are located at:

Chula Vista
30 N. Glover St., Chula Vista
(near N. 4th Ave. & Hwy. 54)

El Cajon
1450 Graves Ave., El Cajon
(near Hwy 67 & Bradley Ave.)

San Diego -- Clairemont
4375 Derrick Dr.
(off Genesee Ave. N. of Balboa Ave.)

San Diego -- Otay Mesa
6111 Business Center Ct.,
(off Hwy. 905 & Corporate Center Dr., 2 ½ miles E. of I-805)

U-T R.I.P.?

Because the Union-Tribune isn’t exactly coving it’s own sale, the Voice of San Diego had this bit from Randy Dotinga’s article:
http://voiceofsandiego.org/articles/2008/07/28/news/01ut072808.txt


"Given the devastation and uncertainty in the industry, it is unlikely that a public company would make a large purchase right now, as they would have their head handed to them," said Lauren Rich Fine, a retired Merrill Lynch newspaper analyst who teaches at Kent State University.

Instead, analysts think the most likely buyer would be a private company or a group of investors. But even that's a long shot considering that the few newspapers on the block aren't attracting offers.

At this point, everything is speculation, of course. Details about the U-T's financial condition are hard to come by since it is privately owned and not required to release data publicly.

One thing is clear, however: Battered by sharp falls in subscribers and advertising, the nation's 21st-largest newspaper is not in a position of strength. Its bid for buyers seems to be a sign of desperation.

"It defies all reason to want to sell the newspaper now, unless they believe that things are only going to get worse from here," said Alan Mutter, a media analyst and former newspaper executive.


What I find interesting is that even though San Diego is the 6th or 7th largest city in America, the U-T has the 22nd largest circulation of the country’s major dailies.

Huh?

Maybe the free-marketers on the editorial board should do a piece on how their own newspaper’s inability to compete, especially in a monopolistic situation, is a sure sign that they shouldn’t be in this business in the first place.

The Voice the San Diego is regularly scooping them with one-tenth of the resources and nowhere near the same size of staff, although with layoffs at the U-T there may now be parity.

Diversification of portfolios, especially when it comes to revenue streams, is a basic lesson in business. I guess the management at the U-T thought it better not to try to improve their product beyond the superficial.

Well, the market has spoken.

John McCain get Computer Help

Rep. Davis left off labor list

From Capitol Alert
Posted by Shane Goldmacher on July 24, 2008 10:08 AM

On Wednesday, Captiol Alert published the list of endorsements for the California Labor Federation, which backed Democrats -- and only Democrats -- across the state.

But one incumbent congresswoman was left off the list.

The San Diego Union Tribune noticed that area congresswoman Susan Davis was missing. The paper reports:

Bryan Blum, political director of the statewide labor group, said it followed the recommendation of the San Diego-Imperial Counties Labor Council that it withhold an endorsement from the four-term San Diego Democrat because of an inconsistent voting record on trade issues.

"It does go back to her voting the wrong way on some trade issues," Blum said. "The folks in San Diego had some issues because they felt she made a commitment to vote one way and she voted the other."

And if you act now, we'll give you an another Shamwow set for free!

Nope, not talking about Shamwow. I'm talking about today's headline in the U-T about putting the paper up for sale. I'm not a big fan of the U-T. I mean on any given day the front page of the U-T is essentially stories pulled by either the New York Times News Service or AP. If I wanted a cut and paste newspaper I can make myself one without the U-T's help. I can't remember the last time I actually bought a U-T and when I do get a copy from somewhere I mostly check what are today's deals at Fry's. (Oooh! a 4GB USB flashdrive for $12! The Deer Hunter DVD is only $5.99!) Another thing I hate about the U-T is how it avoids any bad news about San Diego that make news on major nationwide newspapers.

A great example was an expose by the New York Times and Frontline about corrupt ICE agents getting rich helping smugglers transport drugs and other contraband into the US. The biggest case was here in San Diego. It was a front page story on the New York Times and that night was the focus of a Frontline documentary. All this attention but not a peep from the U-T. And don't get me started on the Editorial page.

Should this paper be sold, would it really be a "...sad day for San Diego." like Mayor Sanders states? I don't think so. If anything it might help San Diego to have a premier newspaper befitting it's status as second largest city in the most populous state in the union. After all, let's be honest it seems that all the biggest stories in the last few years have been broken by Voice of San Diego or someone else other than the U-T. Hopefully new owners can build a newspaper that will serve all San Diegans; not just a select few. But then again, the sale may just speed up the decline.

Sigh.

Your thoughts?

P.S. Is it me or does Mayor Sanders look like Shemp?

"Energy Crossroads" Screening with Debbie Cook

Peak Oil Film & Discussion
Think Gas at $4.50 is Expensive?
Tuesday, July 29th

FEATURING: Award-winning film Energy Crossroads (2007)

SPECIAL GUEST: Debbie Cook
Huntington Beach Mayor and Candidate for Congress

Film begins at 7:00pm
Discussion follows at 8:00pm
Joyce Beers Community Center
3900 Vermont St. (in Hillcrest Trader Joe's shopping center)

RSVP to: Progress@ProgressiveSD.org
Suggested Donation: $10-20 (but no one will be turned away for lack of funds)

Think gas at $4.50 is expensive? Most oil industry geologists and analysts predict that within a few years, world oil production will reach a peak and then begin an irreversible decline, as huge decades-old oil fields are depleted. This is likely to significantly increase the price of everything produced from or transported using oil, including gasoline, plastic, chemicals, and food. Join Progressive San Diego and Huntington Beach Mayor Debbie Cook for a movie and discussion about peak oil, its impacts on our sprawling region, and what San Diego can do to mitigate its effects.

Debbie Cook, Mayor of Huntington Beach, California is an attorney and environmental activist and is currently running for U.S. Congress in California's 46th district. She serves on the boards of directors of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO-USA) and the Post Carbon Institute, and has spoken internationally about what local governments can do in response to the imminent peak in world oil production.

For more information visit:
Progressive San Diego
Debbie Cook for Congress

Labor Votes to Oppose Developer’s Initiative of 10th Avenue

The membership of the San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council, AFL-CIO, last night unanimously voted to oppose a ballot initiative that would destroy maritime industry at the 10th Avenue Marine Terminal.

The campaign to defeat the measure will be one of the Labor Council’s top priorities in this fall’s elections, according to Labor Council Secretary-Treasurer Lorena Gonzalez.

“These are some of the last good, blue-collar, middle-class jobs left in our region,” said Gonzalez. “The 120,000 working families of the Labor Council are outraged that a private developer is pushing a misleading plan that is destructive to the region’s working waterfront.”

San Diego Bay’s working waterfront provides the region with 42,000 jobs and adds an economic impact of $7.6 billion annually to the region.

The initiative, which will be placed on the Nov. 4 ballots of residents in San Diego, Chula Vista, National City, Imperial Beach and Coronado, would change the Port’s master plan to allow for the redevelopment of the 10th Avenue Terminal for private use.

The plan would allow for private building on a deck constructed on top of the terminal, and would reduce the region’s ability ensure both business growth and port security.

“This isn’t under-utilized land in desperate need of redevelopment,” said Gonzalez. “It is a valuable part of our economy. From the banana you eat for breakfast to the cement used to make the sidewalk below you, there is a good chance that every day you use a product that came through the 10th Avenue Terminal.”

Anti-Union Measure’s Defeat in Chula Vista is Final

The Chula Vista city clerk has officially notified supporters of an anti-union ballot measure that they have failed to submit enough signatures to qualify their initiative for the November ballot. The action makes the failure of the measure final.

The measure was aimed at stopping Project Labor Agreements on publicly funded projects. Interim City Clerk Donna Norris reported that 7,092 signatures were submitted in the permitted time window, well short of the 9,062 needed to qualify. Had election officials performed signature verification, the actual number of valid signatures submitted would have been far lower.

Earlier, proponents had lost a legal appeal to allow additional signatures to be submitted, because they had violated a state Elections Code provision requiring notice of a petition drive to be published in a local paper, and an affidavit of publication filed with elections officials within 10 days. The proponents of this measure filed their affidavit more than two months late, in violation of the law. The city clerk then properly rejected the petitions.

San Diego City Elections Ballot Order

The results from the random drawing held today:

City Attorney
Mike Aguirre
Jan Goldsmith

District 1
Sherri Lightner
Phil Thalheimer

District 3
Stephen Witburn
Todd Gloria

District 7
April Boling
Marti Emerald

Free ‘Duke’ Cunningham? Will President Bush Overlook the Minor Transgressions of an Otherwise Loyal Conservative-- Again

From today’s California Progress Report

By Bill Cavala
A veteran of over 30 years in Sacramento

It seems that former San Diego Republican Congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham, now serving his sentence for corruption in a minimum security federal facility, has petitioned President Bush for clemency.

And what Republican is more deserving?

Elected on his war hero record, “Duke” became an icon of the Republican right.
Following the entrepreneurial spirit that guided his party, Duke parlayed his position in the government and his GOP credentials to a point where he could influence the award of tax-paid contracts. A friend got the contracts. “Duke” got, among other things, a mansion.

Isn’t that Republican teamwork? The American way?

Of course, it was against the law. But “Duke” was bigger than a few silly rules. Besides, the good he did in conservative causes deserved a more fitting reward than a simple Congressional salary. He made money for others, it was only right they give some to him.

Now, stripped of office and of his ill-gotten gains, he only asks that he no longer be treated like a common criminal.

After all, is he worse than Karl Rove?

Maybe the President should consider blanket pardons for all Republicans in public office during his two terms as President? After all, to err is human…

http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/07/cavala_free_duk.html

Booze Ban Ballot?

According to today’s Voice of San Diego, Peters and Faulconer are proposing to put the beach alcohol ban on the November ballot.

The amusing part of this is Faulconer:

"People have had a chance to come down to the beach and see the results," Faulconer said of the one-year trial ban that is set to expire in November. "Now it is time to allow the voters to have the final word on this."

This from a guy who was booed at Pacific Beach Town Council meetings for not taking a stand the issue in the first place.

Besides, I thought the voters already had a say in 2002.

Responsible drinking is about as elusive as responsible adulthood so I can see the point. I just wish Kevin had grown a pair earlier in the debate when it would have mattered instead of punting to the taxpayers.

The Other Propositions as of Today

Field Poll results, prepared exclusively for Capitol Alert, on California voters' views of several ballot measures on the Nov. 4 ballot.


Voters favor expanding high speed rail, improving the treatment of farm animals, notifying parents of teens seeking an abortion, expanding California's use of renewable energy and changing the state's redistricting process.

That's according to a new Field Poll that surveyed voters on five measures on the November ballot.

All five were ahead, though two (the abortion and redistricting measures) fell short of the 50 percent mark - which political strategists usually consider a poor omen for a measure's chances.

Proposition 1 (High speed rail)
Yes: 56 percent
No: 30
Undecided: 14

Proposition 2 (Treatment of farm animals)
Yes: 63 percent
No: 24
Undecided: 13

Proposition 4 (Abortion notification for minors)
Yes: 48 percent
No: 39
Undecided: 13

Proposition 7 (Renewable energy)
Yes: 63 percent
No: 24
Undecided: 13

Proposition 11 (Redistricting)
Yes: 42 percent
No: 30
Undecided: 28

Of note:
On four of the five initiatives measured – Props. 1, 2, 7 and 11 – less than one voter in four claims to have any prior awareness of the measure. The one exception is Prop. 4, having to do with parental notification of teen abortion, although even here less than half (45%) report any awareness.

Field Poll: California voters' disapproval rating on Bush highest since 1961

This isn't exactly news but it does show how much of a drag He has become to the Republican brand.


From the Sacramento Bee
By Kevin Yamamura - kyamamura@sacbee.com
Published 12:00 am PDT Saturday, July 19, 2008
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A3


President Bush's disapproval rating in California has reached the highest mark for a president since the Field Poll began tracking White House numbers in 1961, according to its latest survey released Friday.

Less than a quarter of California voters – 24 percent – said they approve of Bush's job performance, compared with 71 percent who said they disapprove.

The latter mark is higher than Nixon's 70 percent disapproval rating in August 1974, the same month he resigned from office after his role in the Watergate scandal was revealed.

Only 18 percent of voters said they approve of Bush's handling of the economy, a drop from 24 percent who said the same in May. Voter appraisal of Bush's handling of the Iraq war has remained steady at 28 percent approval, compared with 27 percent in May.

"What's driving this particular poll down are the significantly lower ratings he's getting on the economy," said Field Poll Director Mark DiCamillo. "His Iraq ratings seem to have stabilized. I would consider those to have bottomed out."

More Republicans approve of Bush than disapprove, by a 54 percent to 38 percent margin. But the poll found that 90 percent of Democrats and 83 percent of independent voters disapprove of Bush.

Three-quarters of voters also believe the nation is headed on the wrong track, while 15 percent said it is going in the right direction, and 10 percent had no opinion. That is the gloomiest voter outlook since July 1992, when the state was mired in recession.

The Field Poll did not ask voters their feelings about Congress during its July survey.

In May, 30 percent approved of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a San Francisco Democrat, compared with 39 percent who disapproved. In December, 30 percent approved of Congress, while 56 percent disapproved.

"Institutional measures, whether it's Congress or the state Legislature, are often lower when things aren't going well because there isn't any one personality underpinning the institution," DiCamillo said. "The institution itself is often seen as not doing its job if the economy falls on hard times."

PRIDE and Republicans

With Sanders in support of gay marriage, where does that place Goldsmith, Boling, and Thalimier?

Anyone know?

And will it affect their races?

Your thoughts...

FPPC: DeMaio Violated Political Reform Act

This just came across my inbox from the Party:

San Diego City Councilmember-elect Carl DeMaio ran on a pledge to bring transparency to City Hall, but even before he finished filing as a candidate he was trying to hide information from the public, according to California’s political reform agency.

DeMaio was warned by the Fair Political Practices Commission last week that his Statement of Economic Interests fails to disclose required information about the clients of the consulting companies he owned until 2007.

He has until July 28 to come clean with the public about his clients at the Performance Institute and American Strategic Management Institute or face fines amounting to $5,000 for each violation of the Political Reform Act.

Officeholders and candidates for public office in the State of California are required to complete a Statement of Economic Interests, known as Form 700, so that the public is made fully aware of its representatives’ business interests before they’re elected to office. DeMaio’s statement currently does not include such information.

DeMaio’s Performance Institute made millions of dollars as a federal contractor, according to www.fedspending.org, a website that tracks U.S. government contract spending. His American Strategic Management Institute is a for-profit business that provides consulting to private companies. He reported selling both companies to Thompson Publishing Group, Inc. just before he began his bid for the City Council seat.

“Carl DeMaio’s failure to comply with this rule while he ran for City Council District 5 conflicts with his stated commitment to open government,” said Jess Durfee, Chair of the San Diego County Democratic Party.

“It is ironic that Mr. DeMaio ran for office on a platform of making government more transparent when in fact he was violating open government laws by failing to disclose his own financial interests,” Durfee said. “If Mr. DeMaio were truly interested in open government, he would have told the public who his clients were.”

But DeMaio, a Republican, never claimed ownership in either business in his Form 700. Instead, he reported that he was the sole proprietor of an entity named “Carl DeMaio” and that both companies merely did business with “Carl DeMaio.”

“It is clear that Carl DeMaio is not being forthright with the public,” the Democratic Chair said. “He needs to come clean with the people of San Diego before we can trust he will have the public interest in mind when he becomes a councilmember.”

In light of DeMaio’s web of financial interests, Durfee further called on him to pledge that he will not conduct any private business with government contractors while holding public office.

Free Speech and the Blogosphere

So on the front page of the Business Day section of today's New York Times, a great story about balancing the law and blog posting. What is really interesting is that there seems to be a political bent to the specific blog that was targeted by the New York City's DA in attempting to find the IP addresses of anon posters criticizing Republican lawmakers and posting news reports about investigations that supported their criticism.

Luckily, the subpoena was withdrawn after “The district attorney was not aware that a subpoena was sent nor was he aware of the content of the comments, until after the subpoena was sent. The district attorney reviewed the matter, determined that a subpoena was not necessary at this time, and directed that it be withdrawn.”

But this story should give every blogger and those who publish blogs pause. We are a progressive blog but we don't try to stifle people in the expression their positions as long as it is done in a manner that is more or less in line with common decorum. I think we have only banned one comment in the time this blog has been up, which is a testament to our readers and our posters. However, if government entities begin issuing subpoenas to investigate posters just because they express their opinions anonymously how can real discussion take place? I would like to think that bloggers on both sides of the spectrum share this common thread of being able to express one's political views without fear of retribution from that politician or political entity. That is entirely anathema to what this country stands for. I mean wouldn't you be less inclined to share your opinions on say Jerry Sanders, Donna Frye or any other elected if they could find out who you are? Don't we have rights?

What do you think?

Some Republicans are Freer than Others

It appears that the freedom-loving Republican Central Committee has an issue with members who attempt to express their freedoms.

According to the San Diego Reader’s City Lights section this week, there were a series of slate mailers put out to advertise candidates running for positions on the Republican Central Committee. Thing was, the people selected for ballot placement were those most likely not to challenge Chairman Tony Krvaric.

According to Joe Deegan of the San Diego Reader:

Krvaric did not reply to my phone message asking if he were behind the Central Committee lists on the slate mailers. Members of the committee’s executive board haven’t confessed to anything either, according to Laura Sumrall, who thinks her close association with Steve Francis made them “a little cautious” of targeting her completely. (She opposed the committee on its endorsement of Jerry Sanders over Francis for mayor of San Diego.) “But the discussion of the Central Committee lists happened in a silent meeting the executive board members will all deny,” Sumrall tells me. “We have a mole who was sitting in the meeting outraged but kept his mouth shut and told us about it later. And a couple of them have slipped and said, ‘But, you know, you can’t have people on the committee who cause trouble and aren’t willing to work together.’ ”

And this:

“There are a few people,” according to Cowlishaw, “who would like to control everything, including Tony Krvaric. They want to have no dissent, no confusion about what they want done. They want everybody to get along and have the same idea and be on the same page. I can understand that to a certain degree, but there has to be some discussion. I am vocal in my opinions, though mostly outside of meetings. But I don’t think my views were anti anything.”

And this:

But things happened a bit differently with the recent mailers. Printed at their bottom, a note stated that an asterisk next to the names of the candidates meant the candidate had paid to be on the slate. All the candidates for the Republican Central Committee had the asterisks. But Sumrall says she didn’t pay a dime to appear on any slate. “So I called the number on the mailer that had my name, and I got a recording,” she says. “It did not identify a business. It just said to leave my name and number, which I did. I also asked why I was on the slate and who paid for it. Nobody ever returned my call, though I called twice.”

Records at the office of the San Diego County Registrar of Voters suggest what happened. Between January 1 and May 17, an organization called Citizens for a Better San Diego County took $18,300 in contributions, including $8300 from Atlas Hotels and $5000 from Thomas Sudberry. (Sudberry is currently petitioning the City of San Diego to build Quarry Falls, a massive condominium development in Mission Valley.) Citizens for a Better San Diego County, whose treasurer is Seventh District candidate for San Diego City Council April Boling, then made payments to five groups for “slate mailers to support SD Co Republican Central Committee candidates.” Family, Faith and Freedom Association and California Taxpayer Protection Voter Guide each received $2500. Citizens for Good Government received $2100, California Voter Guide, $2875, and Official Non-Partisan Voter Guide, $3000.


I’ll give the Democratic Central Committee this; It may be a chaotic and entertaining free for all but at least contrary opinions are expressed.

I guess freedom of dissent is not the Republican way, but buying a Central Committee is.

Democrats endorse Aguirre

My understanding was that the vote for the endorsement had one nay and all the rest aye.

From today's UT:


SAN DIEGO – Incumbent City Attorney Michael Aguirre won the overwhelming endorsement of the county Democratic Party last night and said afterward that he was eager to ramp up his re-election campaign.

“We'll soon be announcing our campaign consultants and our campaign manager and I'll be going door-to-door,” Aguirre said. “We're also setting up 50 coffees throughout the city, and we'll be carrying out a very vigorous campaign.”

Aguirre, a Democrat, faces San Diego Superior Court Judge Jan Goldsmith, a Republican, in the Nov. 4 election. While the race is ostensibly nonpartisan, party support can be helpful to candidates through mailers to party members and other assistance.

Aguirre finished second to Goldsmith on June 3 in a five-person race that included two other Democrats, including City Council President Scott Peters. The county Democratic Party did not endorse anyone in that race because it did not reach a consensus about which of the candidates was most electable, said party chairman Jess Durfee.

In November, however, “we're supporting Aguirre 100 percent,” he said.

Aguirre has been a polarizing figure at City Hall as he has frequently clashed with Mayor Jerry Sanders and the City Council on issues of the deficit-plagued employee pension fund and the role of the city attorney.

All the while, Aguirre has declared himself the city attorney for the people of San Diego – a posture that resonated with some in attendance at last night's meeting at the State of California Building downtown.

“I don't know of anybody who has stuck his neck out as much as Michael Aguirre,” said Mary Christian-Heising, a longtime Democrat. “Let's get behind the Democrat who has stood for us.”

How much the party will spend on campaign materials has not been decided.

“We haven't developed our plans for candidate support at this point for the fall campaign,” Durfee said. “We'll assess that as we look at our resources.”

Aguirre may need all the help he can get. He was elected in 2004 by a slim margin – 50.4 percent to 49.6 percent – over Leslie Devaney.

Help Strengthen Living Wage Enforcement in San Diego

The Center on Policy Initiatives has been on the forefront of pushing legislation that benefit all San Diegans. They were the principle movers on the Living Wage Ordinance that passed in 2005 and now are pushing for a strengthening of the Ordinance to include strict penalties for non-compliance and an enforcement provision that will safeguard compliance would prevent stuff like this and would ensure that the contractors aren't skimming off the fat of taxpayer dollars and stealing from the City. Please help CPI by contacting the City Council in urging them to support this effort. Click here to find out more! It's time to put some real teeth on this policy that is helping San Diegans out of poverty.

Bonnie D wants 3rd Term

So Bonnie Dumanis has decided not to run for Attorney General and instead focus on reelection in 2010. I guess partisan witch hunts don't play well outside of San Diego County. Also I guess vowing not to turn the D.A.'s office into a political office and then backtracking and endorsing in almost every race, thereby turning it into more of a political operation then one of the public trust doesn't play either. So know the question becomes will she waltz in the office like she did in 2006 or will someone challenge her in 2010?
Any ideas on who?

San Diegans Asked to Boycott Coca-Cola Products Starting this Fourth of July Weekend

As Fourth of July fireworks, barbeques and pool parties heat up, employees of San Diego County’s two Coca-Cola bottling facilities have asked San Diegans to forego Coca-Cola, Diet Coke, Sprite and other Coca-Cola beverages because of the company’s anti-union conduct.

Earlier this week, more than 600 drivers and warehouse employees at Coca-Cola Enterprises’ San Diego and Oceanside bottling plants went on strike to protest the company’s unfair practices. Last year, employees at the Oceanside facility voted to become members of Teamsters Local 683, yet the company has been unwilling to negotiate a contract that is comparable to those in other parts of Southern California.

“Coca Cola Enterprises wants to treat its Oceanside workers as second-class citizens,” Teamsters Local 683 Secretary-Treasurer Shannon R. Silva said. “They want to drag down the standard of living for Oceanside workers. These workers deserve parity with other Coke employees in Orange, San Diego and Los Angeles County.”

The San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council is asking that its 120,000 members and all other San Diegans observe this boycott until Coca-Cola agrees to settle a contract that will provide equality for their employees in Oceanside.

“Unfortunately Coca-Cola has gone from asking San Diegans to ‘Have a Coke and a smile,’ to ‘Have a Coke, less rights, lower pay and fewer benefits,’” Labor Council Secretary-Treasurer Lorena Gonzalez said. “We will not stand by and watch as Coke tries to destroy quality middle-class jobs in our community.”

Coca-Cola products include: Coca-Cola, Diet Coke, Fanta, Dr. Pepper, Fresca, Sprite, Minute Maid, Dasani Water, Squirt, Rockstar and Canada Dry, among others.

Uptown Throwdown!

So now that the general election is upon us let's look at one of the more interesting local races to come around in a while outside of the City Attorney's race. I'm talking of course between the throwdown between Todd Gloria and Stephen Whitburn for District 3. The reason why this is interesting is that who ever wins might become the premier locally elected city Democrat. I mean after all it's possible that one of these guys might run for Mayor or State Assembly in a few years. But it also going to be very contentious as both candidates have very similar positions on choice, marriage equality, equal rights and essentially share the same progressive values. Looking at the money side, if one checks the San Diego City Clerk's office you'll see that as of 5/17/08 Whitburn raised $114,730.66 and Gloria raised $61,788.00 and during that same fundraising period from 3/18/08 to May 17th Stephen raised $8,000 more than Todd. While impressive, $73,000 of that roughly $114,000 were loans so in essence they've raised the same money. Also, both have an impressive list of endorsements. Stephen has Rep. Bob Filner and Donna Frye. While Todd has Rep. Susan Davis (his boss), Francine Busby and the rest of the Democrats on the council with the exception of Toni Atkins and Scott Peters. So like all races that have candidates with similar positions, it's all about perception and minutia.

Todd has been presenting himself as public safety choice that understands the problems of crime since he himself lives in City Heights, a low income neighborhood that has yet to be revitalized like Hillcrest and many sections of North Park. He has been presenting himself as someone who understands that the needs of the city can't just be met by the city alone but with building partnerships with community stake holders like local business and community groups to continue the revitalization of D3 and push it to the El Cajon Blvd corridor and City Heights while maintaining the atmosphere of those neighborhoods.

Steven has been presenting himself as the real Democratic choice and wants to be the voice of the district and ensure that special interests do not run the table. He styles himself as a continuation of the activist model City Councilperson like Donna Frye. Someone whose door is always open to his community and won't be bullied into making compromises that may negatively impact the district.

Now personally, I think both are compelling and are great candidates and I don't envy those that have to choose between these great candidates. But, like many intra party fights. Sometimes they get ugly quick.

Stephen supporters keep talking about how Todd isn't progressive and is in the pocket of developers. While Todd supporters feel that Stephen is condoning some of the questionable statements made by his hardcore supporters and isn't ready for prime time.

Also the November election is a totally different animal than the primary as first-time voters and voters that only vote in Presidential elections come out. These voters might receive a mailer with Stephen and Donna (by the way, during each of her runs for Mayor, her strongest support was in D3) and vote his way. Or Todd might try the Obama act. Trying to bring together DTS's and moderate Republicans to his coalition, painting himself as someone who will listen to them and take their concerns to account.

So my thoughts? Like I said both are great and would be a wonderful addition to the Council. But looking at the landscape of the new City Council and we are going to need a counterweight to incoming D5 Councilperson Carl DeMaio. This guy is smart, ambitious and brazen. I mean one day he's taking orders from the powers that be and then the next he's hugging Donna Frye talking about how he's all about reform. This guy is already laying the groundwork to take on Kevin Faulconer for the Mayorship and we are going to need some that can keep this guy in check and match him toe for toe. I personally think that if look through that prism, Todd is that guy to keep tabs on DeMaio and would be the perfect counterweight to check him.

But then again those are my two cents.

Penny for your thoughts?

SAVE THE DATE: Peak Oil Film & Discussion

Peak Oil Film & Discussion
Tuesday, July 29th

Featuring: Award-winning film Energy Crossroads (2007)

Special Guest: Debbie Cook
Huntington Beach Mayor and Candidate for Congress

Film begins at 7:00pm / Discussion follows at 8:00pm

Joyce Beers Community Center
3900 Vermont St. (in Hillcrest Trader Joe's shopping center)

Think Gas at $4.50 is Expensive?
Most oil industry geologists and analysts predict that within a few years, world oil production will reach a peak and then begin an irreversible decline, as huge decades-old oil fields are depleted. This is likely to significantly increase the price of everything produced from or transported using oil, including gasoline, plastic, chemicals, and food. Join Progressive San Diego and Huntington Beach Mayor Debbie Cook for a movie and discussion about peak oil, its impacts on our sprawling region, and what San Diego can do to mitigate its effects.

Debbie Cook is the Mayor of Huntington Beach, California; is an attorney and environmental activist; and is currently running for U.S. Congress in California's 46th district. She serves on the boards of directors of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO-USA) and the Post Carbon Institute, and has spoken internationally about what local governments can do in response to the imminent peak in world oil production.

http://www.debbiecookforcongress.com/

Eyes on the Prize.

The Prize, of course, is the 50th Congressional District. Nick Leibham, the Democratic nominee, has been aggressive in his quest to unseat Brian Bilbray. Bilbray, as you recall, won in a close election fight against Francine Busby in 2006 after the resignation of Randy "Duke" Cunningham. Yet thanks to the soft economy and general sour mood of the electorate against Republicans. Leibham has been chipping away at Bilbray, raising money and his profile. So much so that the D trip has jumped in with radio ads targeting 13 Congressional Districts including the 50th reminding voters about his support of big oil. So, have a listen and give your thoughts.

Jan Goldsmith at the San Diego Democratic Club

Last week it was reported in this blog that Mike Aguirre got the Dem Club nod but it did not mention that Jan was also there to plead for a no endorsement. Thanks to an old bylaw, Jan, a former Republican Leader in the State Assembly, could address the largely progressive and most effective Democratic party club in the county. Now to say this was weird is to understate it. I mean here's a guy who spent his entire political career trying to dismantle everything the Dem Club supports and is founded upon. He been on the record against marriage equality. He's endorsed by the San Diego Minutemen, who aren't exactly agents of tolerance with people of color. So this guy , that has questionable supporters at best, is talking to the Dem Club. A club that has carried the banner of inclusion and tolerance since its founding. What's next? Shrub joins The Climate Project and begins to crusade against Climate Change.

Your thoughts?

John & Cindy McCain failed to their property taxes for 4 years

According to Newsweek:

San Diego County officials, it turns out, have been sending out tax notices on the La Jolla property, an oceanfront condo, for four years without receiving a response. County records show the bills, which were mailed to a Phoenix address associated with Mrs. McCain's trust, were returned by the post office. According to a McCain campaign aide, who requested anonymity when discussing a private matter, an elderly aunt of Mrs. McCain's lives in the condo, and the bank that manages the trust has not been receiving tax bills on the property. Shortly after NEWSWEEK inquired about the matter, the McCain aide e-mailed a receipt dated Friday, June 27, confirming payment by the trust to San Diego County in the amount of $6,744.42. County officials say the trust still owes an additional $1,742 for this year, an amount that is overdue and will go into default July 1. Told of the outstanding $1,742, the aide said: "The trust has paid all bills shown owing as of today and will pay all other bills due." [Link]

Now, I know when you're an heiress to a beer fortune and you have properties all over the country, sometimes it is hard to keep track of all those different property tax bills that you receive. And I can see how sometimes you might forget paying one of them for 4 years or so.

UPDATE:

Is anyone surprised that there has been no mention of La Jolla property issue in the local media. I cannot help to believe that if the issue was about a Democratic presidential candidate, the UT would be all over the issue.

Lieberman Must Go!

I cannot believe that just 8 years ago this guy was the Democrats VP nominee.

Mike Aguirre wins SDDC Endorsement

In what turned out to be a rather long and contentious meeting tonight, the San Diego Democratic Club endorsed incumbent Mike Aguirre for City Attorney. The meeting went on for over two hours, and during the discussion period became heated as some members of the club accused each other of making personal attacks upon each other. In the end, there were enough votes for Aguirre to secure the club's endorsement.

Now with the SDDC endorsement, Mike Aguirre will seek the Democratic Central Committee endorsement scheduled for July 8th. An endorsement he has failed twice before to secure.

Philly Boy Has Bad Money Sense

With the June election behind us lets look towards the November Election. Since the media is not talking about it, then I guess someone should at least remind people about the why Phil "Philly Boy" Thalheimer can't win in November.

We don't have to go back very far, just remember the infamous San Diego Union-Tribune story, besides the other ones listed below. Much of these are from his own words and why residents of District 1 should NOT vote for him:

1) Early on he invested all his money on margin, sold short and lost it all, plus another $30,000
- He said, "I didn't realize you could lose more than you had"

2) His first job as an orderly was tough for him, because he had a hard time relating to youth and
after two years his boss told him he was not empathetic and should find another job

3) He worked for the controversial San Diego Data Processing Center

4) He left his job with the City of San Diego over people skills
- He said, “I never liked working for other people,”
- Also quoted as saying,, “As much time as I spent in local government, I never felt like I fit.”
- Now Philly Boy wants to come back to city government

5) He lucked out with being able to run the Flight Training International, even despite himself.
- Even with in his own words he called his business plan, "flawed"

6) In his previous candidate statement he says, "Phil Thalheimer will use business skills to clean
up the financial mess," he said, "refused to accept one dime of developer money," and "I have not and will not take one penny of developer/lobbyist campaign contributions."
- Is his business sense something we can afford?
- Now that he found wealth as developer he is okay with their money.
- Looking through his reports, I now see plenty of developer & lobbyist money.

7) Flip flops on the Regents bridge

8) He spent over $1,000,000 of his own personal money on his last losing city council campaign.
- It seems he really didn't learn from his other past investment losses.

Sadly, the Voice of San Diego reported Philly Boy's company, Flight Training International is being investigated by the Federal Aviation Administration. People will be watching the results of the investigations.

Buffoon-in-Chief at it Again!

Via TPM:

Ben Hueso Happened

Disclosure: I work for the Courage Campaign which has worked on the Blackwater issue, but these opinions are my own.

Earlier this week, I asked What the Hell happened in San Diego in the June 3 election. I explored a particularly underwhelming electoral performance and noted that there was a massive failure of leadership from the city's elected Democrats (active and retired). Councilmember Donna Frye supported GOP mayoral challenger Steve Francis and Council President Scott Peters ran against the Democratic incumbent City Attorney Mike Aguirre. Incidentally, both Francis and Peters failed to make it to the November runoff.

Then yesterday it happened again. Councilmember Ben Hueso, who in May was rallying to Block Blackwater in his council district, announced his endorsement of Republican city attorney candidate Jan Goldsmith. This is particularly notable because Goldsmith's opponent is incumbent Mike Aguirre. Aguirre has been a champion for the city in the fight to force Blackwater's permits into public hearing at a time when a number of other city leaders have...attended a rally and then thrown up their hands.

If Jan Goldsmith as City Attorney would go to bat over Blackwater or any other number of issues that might be uncomfortable for the Mayor or inconvenient for the City Council, I would be absolutely flabbergasted. The campaign, like every other challenge to Aguirre this year, has been centered around a promise to sit down and shut up. The last thing this city needs is another elected official who doesn't have the necessary combination of power and motivation to force important issues.

As the UT newsblog notes, Hueso and Aguirre have never exactly been close. And Aguirre has taken a lot of flack throughout his term as City Attorney for his rabid pursuit of Mayor Jerry Sanders for all manner of scandal- real or imagined. But as Councilmember Hueso well knows because he's at the meetings, the City Council hasn't exactly put on a clinic when it comes to keeping mayoral power checked by the legislative branch. Fighting the good fight has consistently taken a back seat over the past two and a half years to misguided "pragmatism" that largely allowed Mayor Sanders to get anything he wanted.

So what we're left with is Ben Hueso surveying this scene- Mayor Sanders re-elected to a second term with what CW will term a convincing mandate (it's not, the turnout was too low to carry a mandate) and a City Council that will likely go from a narrow Democratic advantage to an even split, further neutering a body that had given itself over to the inevitability of the Strong Mayor government- and deciding that the best thing for the city is that the single dissonant voice of any weight in the city government should be replaced by, as the UT put it,

Hueso said the city attorney's political persuasion is less important to him than getting "the best legal advice."

If the Democratic Party in San Diego is ever going to be able to capitalize on the tremendous infrastructure building being done at the precinct and street-corner level, leading Democrats need to stop undercutting both their party and basic points of fundamental governance at every opportunity.

What happened in San Diego? Ben Hueso and destructive politics like this happened.

Cross posted at Calitics

Sometime it is hard to tell the two apart

Oh, McCain

Response to the VoSD piece on the SDCDP

From Caltics:

David Washburn's slap at the San Diego County Democratic Party in the Voice of San Diego does readers a disservice, to say the least. I'll cite just a few examples where more serious analysis would have helped.

Consider this year's mayoral race, in which a Republican challenger spent $4.5 million to promote himself as a kind of progressive independent. He couldn't even force a runoff against the incumbent.

As the "Voice" has reported in the past, incumbent mayors in the City of San Diego are virtually never unseated. So who is really "openly wondering why established Dems didn't jump in" - other than a writer trying to justify a story?

The glib comparison to a special election for Congress in Mississippi doesn't shed much light on the political reality in San Diego.

The passing reference to Republican "financial support from the downtown business establishment" understates the huge fundraising disadvantage that our community-minded candidates often face. The fact is that Democrats remain competitive and are building momentum in those races, despite being outspent by 2-to-1 or 10-to-1 or more.

San Diego isn't the only area where the kind of low turnout seen on June 3 strongly favored our opponents. But our City Council candidate placed first in District 1, where Republicans still lead in party registration. In District 7 our candidate virtually tied to force a runoff for a seat that has always been dismissed as out of reach for Democrats.

This November, when turnout will be more than double what we saw in the Primary, Democrats will enjoy a very different playing field. We're also looking forward to demonstrating the actual infrastructure we're building, from data management and professional staffing to a robust training program for our growing army of volunteers. Unfortunately, this story is long on quotes from armchair analysts and short on facts that might show a more balanced view.

Take the instance where Washburn writes: "Another piece of conventional wisdom holds that the local GOP does a better job targeting absentee voters." Had he checked, he would have found that the early voting rate among Democrats countywide in June was actually slightly higher than for Republicans.

Campaigns are indeed primarily candidate-driven. But by any measure, the County Democratic Party is vastly further developed than it was even four years ago. We have undertaken a long-term program that will bear fruit over multiple electoral cycles, helping Democratic candidates at every level.

This year's separate Presidential Primary was one of many factors skewing the June results. But in February, the majority of the vote here went to Democrats, even in some of the county's most conservative districts.

While some aspects of our plan may take longer than others to materialize, it would be a mistake to ignore the signs of a real "new era in San Diego politics" that a more thoughtful study of the underlying trends would suggest.

By November, Democrats may actually have a countywide plurality thanks to our unprecedented voter registration program and our inspirational Presidential candidate. When we translate those numbers into local victories, I hope the Voice will take the time to set the record straight.

Jess Durfee,
Chair
San Diego County Democratic Party

Voice of San Diego piece on the SDCDP

Yesterday the VoSD ran a piece by David Washburn called “Where are the Democrats?”

Points, IMHO:

• The SDCDP is working on capitalizing on the growth of Democrats, but they have coming from just about nothing three years ago whereas the Republicans have been in motion in San Diego for decades.

• Blaming the party for bad candidates is a straw man argument. Until the SDCDP is in a position to groom and foster candidates, these candidates will be self-selected. John Kern’s comments nail this issue .

• Crediting local Republican leaders for their victories is another straw man argument. The local Republicans have benefited in spite of their party organization. With the Lincoln Club and other IE’s, the candidates just need the label and little else from the party. Duane Dichiara’s comment about the Republicans just getting lucky is solid.

• Chairman Durfee’s comments were right on about the criticism being ill-informed and unfair.

• Mr. Berg’s comments about District 3 was also right on but this goes beyond the SDCDP to the general body public who will support whomever they want regardless of the “official” position because the candidates are on the same page.

• As an observer of the SDCDP, Prof. Erie’s comments ring hollow. It has come a long way since 2006 but it has a lot of catching up to do.

• Lorena Gonzalez’s observation about being alone speaks to the infrastructure which is being assembled but wasn’t available when she ran.

Growth periods are not easy, but I agree that the SD Republicans are living on borrowed time.

SDCDP Chair Jess Durfee Elected to DNC

Congratulations to Jess Durfee, the chair of the San Diego County Democratic Party, who was elected this morning to the Democratic National Committee. The election was part of the California Democratic Party's Executive Board meeting that took place in San Francisco this weekend. Jess, who has been the chair of the SDCDP since 2004, becomes one of 19 California members to the Democratic National Committee beginning in 2009. He also becomes the first DNC member to be elected from San Diego County.

UPDATE:

Over at the California Progress Report, Bill Cavala has a piece about Jess Durfee's election to the DNC this morning. [Link]