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
Motion for WEBA Protest at Issue before CPUC
Big Mike has already spoken out on this matter in the KUSI Turko Files story "Way Too Cozy", stating that shareholders and not ratepayers should foot the uninsured wildfire legal expense bill, just one of the many consequences of the FIRST PRIORITY CONDITION on Sempra Energy... http://www.kusi.com/features/turko/91681224.html?… At least we know of one other attorney besides Aguirre who practice before CPUC, namely UCAN's Michael Shames...— August 3, 2010 10:40 a.m.
Motion for WEBA Protest at Issue before CPUC
In its ruling on utility holding companies to infuse capital into utilities EVEN IF IT RESULTS IN A HOLDING COMPANY LOSS, CPUC cited the good times benefits to Sempra Energy and the other IOU holding companies from siphoning off revenues from the utilities that could have been used for line undergrounding or other capital improvements to property and other assets. Instead, the cash flows from us into SDG&E via monthly earnings only to flow out to energy sector speculators via Sempra Energy's targeted 35-40% dividend payouts compared to SE quarterly retained earnings.— August 2, 2010 10:05 a.m.
This Crisis Is New? The City Confessed Six Years Ago
I think we need to all step back and see that the 1/2 cent sales tax increase is not the only "tax" that this City Council is subjecting us to. As long as the City Council refuses to look at the 1970 electricity franchise agreement with SDG&E and raising the 3% annual franchise fee to pay for vital public safety services, we will be "taxed without representation" if the Wildfire Expense Balancing Account (WEBA) and PeakShift at Work/PeakShift at Home (PSW/PSH) rate hikes are allowed by CPUC, including a $118 million charge to all SDG&E consumers for a five-year television ad campaign to convince us that paying more for daytime electricity usage is good for our checking accounts.— August 1, 2010 11:25 p.m.
Wilco Industries: What SDG&E is looking for in Distributed Generation
A class action lawsuit is a lot like going to war, costing millions of dollars and many casualties with no guarantee of success even if all battles are won. A more likely positive outcome could be had at the ballot box once San Diego voters realize that they hold the franchise power according to the 1970 San Diego ordinance that enshrines that power...— August 1, 2010 11:18 p.m.
Very few of San Diego's ballpark condos were built because of the ballpark
This article seems to go hand in hand with the proposal to raise the Tax Increment cap from around $3 billion to $9 billion in and around Petco Park, keeping that $9 billion in the hands of the developers who control CCDC or at least lead CCDC about by the nose. Maybe the Tax Increment cap raise will come about as another unannounced "change" to the City Charter.— July 28, 2010 3:33 p.m.
Did Somebody Change the Charter?
You know, that recent City Council admission by the Independent Budget Analyst, saying she hasn't yet sat down with the City chief financial officer to look at output from SAP's new One SD accounting/business system, somehow makes complete sense in the light of the above...— July 28, 2010 2:59 p.m.
Does SDG&E's Sunrise Powerlink Really Make Sense?
Since SD Hispanic Chamber of Commerce blog post disappeared just now, awaiting email response from Chamber as to position RE PSW/PSH and WEBA on small businesses and residents...— July 27, 2010 1:05 p.m.
None
Has San Diego Hispanic Chamber of Commerce taken a position on the proposed SDG&E rate hikes for Wildfire Expense Billing Accounts (WEBA) and PeakShift at Work/PeakShift at Home (PSW/PSH) as to their effects on small businesses and residents in San Diego? If not, then why not?— July 27, 2010 12:36 p.m.
Streetlights in the dark
RE #5 "ITEM-53: Proposed Broad Spectrum Street Lighting, EECBG Municipal Energy Efficiency": Something else to research...— July 27, 2010 12:30 p.m.
Defending Small Businesses and Residents from SDG&E
RE #11: From what I've been reading in power utility industry journals over the last decade, the last thing power industry players want the public to find out is how those players plan on making money through Distributed Generation (DG in industry-speak). Solar DG is extremely kryptonite-like to investor owned power utilities, mainly because there's no money to be made from free fusion energy from the Sun. The "proper" industry standard model for solar DG implementation (as explained in the industry journals) is to take up space at the customer's place of business or residence, have the customer pay for the installation that ultimately is the property of the investor owned utility (there are FERC reasons for this transfer of ownership), then have the customer pay for (1) the electricity generated by the installed photovoltaic solar panel array and used by the customer, (2) the utility maintenance contract for said array, and (3 - optional) the permit fees required by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for customer's installation to be named as a Qualifying Facility (QF in industry-speak). Without FERQ QF certification, there is no reason under at least California law to reimburse a DG customer for the amount of excess electricity generated by that customer, then taken by the utility, and finally sold to somebody else at a tidy profit for the utility, with nothing passed back up the chain to the power-generating customer who's generally paying for the utility's power for sale in the first place.— July 27, 2010 12:27 p.m.