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
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
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
Man struck by police cruiser gets day in court
The city is self insured for incidents like this one. The city's public liability fund, is budgeted from your tax dollars and pays settlements and/or jury awards from cases brought by injured parties. Cases are first reviewed by the city's risk management department then, if a claim is denied, litigation is the next step. While city liability is pretty clear in the information provided, we don't have the whole story, i.e. Percentage of potential contributory negligence, if any. What we don't know from this story what steps have been taken since litigation commensed, i.e. deposition of the parties involved, expert opinions on injuries, collision dynamics and their results. Insurers, (the city in this case) have a duty to be honest, forthright and act in good faith. At the same time they should not squander our tax dollars. But willful misconduct has consequences. The story and plaintiff's attorney *implies* the City Attorney is acting frivolously and this case should be settled. Until all the facts are public knowledge I'll wait to form an opinion myself. Cases should not be tried in the media as this potentially tampers with a juror pool.— August 23, 2016 5:16 p.m.
Taxpayers association thumbs down Chargers proposal
Are you suggesting I try to vote three times?— August 23, 2016 9:01 a.m.
San Diego taxpayers to be Chargers laughingstock?
Exactly! If the voters approve the boondoggle of tax dollars then paying for it becomes the taxpayers problem and not the Spanos family, the NFL, or the billionaires who run it. When no one books the undersized and separate convention center 'expansion' the taxpayers still pay to maintain the empty building. So far the silence of our so called elected leaders is deafening. Our Mayor purposely ignores it. However, when the bill comes due with TOT revenue way short of the promised mark he will say his hands are tied. He's just following the will of the people and the bonds must be paid. Our council members are following his lead because no one wants to have the powerful NFL against them come election time. And our "friends" in County government, we can count on them to make up the shortage? Yeah, sure, they'll just bring wheelbarrows of money right over. No, they'll say the same thing ...it was the will of the city of San Diego taxpayers, not the 'county' taxpayers. Yes, 'Fungible' is a great word to describe how this boondoggle will be paid for. Here are two more words to be used for the 'Convadium'. Gullible to describe the voters who support it. Destitute to describe the city we live in if this Convadium for billionaires is supported with our tax dollars over the next 30 years.— August 20, 2016 8:56 a.m.
San Diego taxpayers to be Chargers laughingstock?
Sadly, the argument is there is always enough tax money. If there isn't just raise 'new' taxes. And to avoid defaulting on the bonds the city will tell us there is no other choice.— August 19, 2016 3:58 p.m.
San Diego taxpayers to be Chargers laughingstock?
While I am no expert either, I do understand words have meanings. Sadly, bond holders may not agree to those meaning or may dispute them especially when large sums of money become the overarching issue of the dispute. That means the Courts, based upon the skills of arguing attorneys not ballot language, ultimately decide their meanings. Once again from a historical perspective the City's record in such disputes is not a winning one. So in reality we are asking the taxpayers to backstop well over a billion dollars to a privately owned business. Seems nuts to me when we have so many pressing issues that really affect the quality of life in San Diego.— August 19, 2016 3:48 p.m.
San Diego taxpayers to be Chargers laughingstock?
The trick is understanding the loopholes and direct and indirect results. The so called "general fund" is the name of the fund which pays for most, but not all of, the day-to-day city operations. There are general fund departments, for example, police and fire. But there are many other "funds" within the city. For example, the water utilities is an "enterprise fund" department. Its operating budget comes from renenues paid by ratepayers. Then there are bonds....no city has a billion in cash laying around so for projects like this, so the city sells bonds ultimately GUARANTEED in this case by collected Transit Occupancy Tax or TOT. Currently TOT supports many city programs if the TOT falls short, then the money has to come from other city fund sources. One such source is the city's emergency fund. The bottom line here....two points ... This is a complex financial undertaking, the city's history or, if you like, batting record to use a mixed sport metafor, is dismal in such matters AND that's with using and paying for so called EXPERTS. Secondly, bonds are guaranteed by taxpayers, not politicians. If you fail to pay the bonds your credit rating goes in the toilet and all those infrastructure plans you were going to finance with new bonds just became way more expensive or just can't be done. We just went through several years of not being able to access the bond markets and have a billion dollar backlog of deferred projects. Those are some of the details conveniently left out of the Charger propaganda campaign.— August 19, 2016 1:40 p.m.
San Diego taxpayers to be Chargers laughingstock?
I'm just wondering....If the new so called convadium is approved it will be one of, if not the smallest, NFL venues. Why would NFL owners, the vast majority being billionaires who know how to make a buck, ever consider it as the site of their overhyped premier event. If the did who'd be footing the bill for the substandard temporary seating needed to sardine in enough seats to make more money for the owner? Is that spelled out somewhere? What about those fantasy numbers touted by the NFL on taxes generated by Super Bowls? It's too bad we can't use those fantasy dollars to resurface our dilapidated streets, replace our rapidly aging concrete-aspestos water pipes (yes we have miles of aspestos lined fresh water pipes), replace the deteriorating and failed storm water and sewer systems, maintain and refurbish our parks their structures and our beaches. So go ahead vote to give a billionaire owner and millionaire players huge tax subsidies. But consider this it's not just for this year, but every year for the foreseeable future. Remember the 1997 bonds used to expand the stadium. WE ARE STILL PAYING for those bonds. The expansion the Charger ownership demanded under the threat of leaving San Diego. Sound familiar San Diego?— August 19, 2016 11:09 a.m.
San Diego taxpayers to be Chargers laughingstock?
Quoting Alex Clarke above...."Never under estimate the stupidity of Charger fans and San Diego voters."— August 18, 2016 6:23 p.m.
Port District goes after parking scofflaws
As long as the revenue from the meters goes to maintaining the lots, adjacent landscaping, and beautification of the parkland I have no problem with new meters and higher rates. But to keep our elected leaders honest, a mandatory audit of revenues and expenses should be required. Too many times revenue from sources such as metered parking goes to so called "other" needs the port commissioners come up with. That leads to deferred maintenance and higher costs which leads to more taxes, new or higher fees. This vicious cycle of inefficient government fed by higher fees and or taxes has to end. Audits mean transparency and accountability.— August 5, 2016 12:12 p.m.
Edison pushed San Onofre beyond breaking point
Yet with this documentation and other facts uncovered by Mike Aguirre, Kamala Harris, our Attorney General for the State of California, does and will do nothing about this fraud. You want to believe Harris would jump on the opportunity to show she's a law and order champion, but it's just the opposite because she bought just like all the other corrupt politicians. Then to make matters worse, the lemmings of California, will send her to Washington D.C. as one of our two U.S. Senators. What will it take to get Californians to wake up?— July 21, 2016 9:21 a.m.