Here's something you might be interested in.
Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Are we fluoridated? Or not?
Dentist sues city for not releasing documents
On May 20, David Kennedy, a local dentist who was turned away after requesting documents pertaining to the addition of fluoride compounds in the city's water supply, filed what is the latest legal complaint against the city for violating state records acts.
According to the complaint, the city "systematically failed to reply within ten days as required by the [Public Records Act]. In some categories they did not reply at all. In other categories, the response was a partial disclosure of documents, claiming the remaining documents were forthcoming (which was never the case). In response to some categories, the city asserted the deliberative process privilege to shield disclosure of documents that would embarrass the City or show the City has acted against the popular will of the people of San Diego."
Questions of whether or not the city should fluoridate the water supply date back to 1954. At the ballot that year, residents passed a proposition that prohibited the city or any agency from adding any fluorine compound to San Diego's drinking water. Similar outcomes at the polls occurred in 1968 and in 1978.
In 2009, things changed. That year San Diego received a $3.9 million grant from the First 5 Commission, an organization that advocates for healthy decisions in children five years or younger, to pay for two years of fluoridation. The treatment began in 2011 and lasted through 2013.
In September 2013, Kennedy began requesting to see documentation on the grant and whether the treatment continued, and, if so, who was paying for it. Shortly after, city officials notified Kennedy that it had over 4 gigabytes of emails and other documentation for him. But before handing all of the documents over, the city attorney's office had to review the material.
More than seven months later, the review continues, says the complaint.
This isn't the only instance where San Diego officials have been accused of withholding documents from the public. The city is embroiled in several lawsuits, including two that name city attorney Jan Goldsmith directly.
A spokesperson for mayor Kevin Faulconer says that despite the expiration of the grant, the Public Utilities Department continues to fluoridate the water. At press time, the mayor's office was looking into the source of funding.
Here's something you might be interested in.
Are we fluoridated? Or not?
Dentist sues city for not releasing documents
Are we fluoridated? Or not?
Dentist sues city for not releasing documents
On May 20, David Kennedy, a local dentist who was turned away after requesting documents pertaining to the addition of fluoride compounds in the city's water supply, filed what is the latest legal complaint against the city for violating state records acts.
According to the complaint, the city "systematically failed to reply within ten days as required by the [Public Records Act]. In some categories they did not reply at all. In other categories, the response was a partial disclosure of documents, claiming the remaining documents were forthcoming (which was never the case). In response to some categories, the city asserted the deliberative process privilege to shield disclosure of documents that would embarrass the City or show the City has acted against the popular will of the people of San Diego."
Questions of whether or not the city should fluoridate the water supply date back to 1954. At the ballot that year, residents passed a proposition that prohibited the city or any agency from adding any fluorine compound to San Diego's drinking water. Similar outcomes at the polls occurred in 1968 and in 1978.
In 2009, things changed. That year San Diego received a $3.9 million grant from the First 5 Commission, an organization that advocates for healthy decisions in children five years or younger, to pay for two years of fluoridation. The treatment began in 2011 and lasted through 2013.
In September 2013, Kennedy began requesting to see documentation on the grant and whether the treatment continued, and, if so, who was paying for it. Shortly after, city officials notified Kennedy that it had over 4 gigabytes of emails and other documentation for him. But before handing all of the documents over, the city attorney's office had to review the material.
More than seven months later, the review continues, says the complaint.
This isn't the only instance where San Diego officials have been accused of withholding documents from the public. The city is embroiled in several lawsuits, including two that name city attorney Jan Goldsmith directly.
A spokesperson for mayor Kevin Faulconer says that despite the expiration of the grant, the Public Utilities Department continues to fluoridate the water. At press time, the mayor's office was looking into the source of funding.
Comments