Comments so far on this story:

1. Glenn Fiddich wrote on May 9, 2007 11:16 AM:
"Perhaps if Mayor Sanders had a City Attorney he could rely upon for actual city-related legal work, he would have known that a charter review committee could be elected. But he doesn't have such a City Attorney, and he won't, at least until he is starting his second term. I can only imagine how difficult it must be to be the mayor of a major city, and not have a municipal attorney. Unfortunately, this isn't hyperbole - there is as a practical matter no city attorney for the City of San Diego."

2. Billy Bob Henry wrote on May 9, 2007 11:56 AM:
"Next time ask the Mayor if we are going to file for BK before he leaves office, or after............and what he is doing to get the pension scam in check-so far it has been a big ZERO.........OOOOOOO"

3. Kathi Ward wrote on May 9, 2007 9:23 PM:
"BBH, according to AGHuirre's own actuary, the pension fund is 97% funded, and the City is finally making it's obligated payments. There was no pension scam - the only scam was the City dipping into the employee's pension fund to pay for city services - that was the real scam! Get off of this one Billy Bob - you are just wasting our time!"

4. Billy Bob Henry wrote on May 9, 2007 11:46 PM:
"Kathi-our pension hole is getting BIGGER every single day. Don't forget we just paid 100% of the CITY's tobacco money into your stupid retirment slush fund. 100 MILLION dolllars to you and your buddies. That money could have 1) Built a new library, 2) fixed the boardwalk sea wall at Mission Beach, 3) fixed the sewer system, 4) repaved streets, 5) added more after school programs, but where did that 100 MILLION go? Into your pocket. Thanks. Now show some resect to the tax payers you and your buddies are ripping off. That is all I ask, some respect :), BTW-as more nd more Gov employees retire the bigger the whole gets...ask Carl DeMaio fi you don't belive me. Carl does not lie."

5. Norman wrote on May 9, 2007 11:54 PM:
"Ask the mayor when CCDC is going to pay back my city the money they owe. Also, does he have faith in Chief Lansdowne considering the Chief didn't take the time to check the facts in his presentation to the city council during buget discussions. Maybe the Chief made the same "mistakes" when he chose not to inact the warrent on Sun Road. Just a thought....."

6. Peter Q wrote on May 10, 2007 12:08 AM:
"Ok-giving credit where credit is due-I think the Mayor knows more about Public safety then I do. Thus I'm will to accept without question his statement that the Police need pay raises and the Firefighters don't. But when it comes to accounting and financial issues, I'm giving my background a little more credit. The Mayor says that "for every dollar we take out of CCDC we lose about $7 in leverage. I was Chairman and CEO of CCDC until about 5 years ago, and at that point we had long since stopped contributing public money to attract Private developement-I doubt this has changed. So what leverage would we lose if CCDC money went to help the City? Next, CCDC says they are budgeting to put $300 million into Parks-Parks remain in Public ownership, thus they pay NO taxes. So using these funds for other purposes would not effect City Income--to Be cont."

7. Dave Cohen wrote on May 10, 2007 12:21 AM:
"BBH...So the retirement fund for city employees is "stupid?" Labor agreements and the law be damned, I guess. No, what's stupid is the city deciding not to pay what it owed when it owed it. It's called meeting your obligations."

8. SDGal wrote on May 10, 2007 1:59 AM:
"Doesn't anyone remember the story of the Goose and the Golden eggs? To say that pension obligations would better be spent on libraries, the sewer system, streets, etc. is comparable to the farmer who thought he could disembowel the goose to get more eggs. Whether the City outsources or keeps it's labor in-house, the goose must be cared for- if you want the eggs. This scarcity-minded attack on labor is tiresome and wasted energy."

9. Questioner wrote on May 10, 2007 2:39 AM:
"The Voice did a better job this time in asking some tougher questions and providing a little analysis so the public gets a clearer picture of the impact of local government's decisions. An informed public makes for more meaningful public debate. Ditto for the Will Carless article today. Thank you."

10. Billy Bob Henry wrote on May 10, 2007 4:07 AM:
"Dave-the pension funds are stupid at their present level and retirement age- 90% of highest years salary for life-starting at age 50 is, without a doubt, not only stupid-it is foolish from a fiscal point of view-ad it CANNOT be sustained. As for the law and the labor agreements-the court has not issued a final ruling. Mike has stated, with some persuasive authority, that the argeements were "fixed" or at the vey least tainted. I agree with him. So the law is in question on the agreements until a final order has been entered. But whether or not the law upholds the agreements, I do think the retirement at 50 making more than your average years salary is stupid."

11. Peter Q wrote on May 10, 2007 4:58 AM:
"Cont... CCDC brings in about $100 Million a year in revenues--So if there is a 7 to 1 leverage, the City must be bring in $700 Million a year, from CCDC efforts alone -- If so--Lets set $100 million aside for the largest party the city has seen and let's declare the battle of the budget "WON"..... Lets be serious--CCDC has the money to cover some of the balpark payments now and over time could assume all the annual payments--without doing harm to the City's finances or CCDC's work. A park or two would be delayed--unpleasant for downtown residents, but not as bad as insuffient fire stations or not enough fire fighters. CCDC has $80 Million sitting there for a library that will not be built until the present financial crises is a memory--transfer these fund to the City. Frankly the Mayor's comments sound like he is echoing one of his advisors."

12. "Con" Servat wrote on May 10, 2007 7:33 AM:
""Retirement at 50 making more than your average years salary is stupid." Explain again BBH how this is possible? You cant retire till 50..and if you worked 30 years you'd get 90%. So how do you make more than your average years salary at age 50? Remember that you cant enter the DROP till 50, which is a 5 year program, terminating at 55! Essentially investing your entire retirement check for 5 solid years while working without the benefit offset normally associated with non Drop pay. Yet another BBH inaccuracy. Just another attempt at confusing things. Bob Kittle is that you? Or maybe is Hedgecock or Demaio. Ministers of misinformation. BBH is a LIAR!"

13. AD wrote on May 10, 2007 8:05 AM:
"Hmm..... Maybe Manchester?"

14. Dimples wrote on May 10, 2007 11:12 PM:
"Scott, Please read the May 9 SDDT article by W. ERIK BRUVOLD. Partial quote here .."Where the city of San Diego suffers tremendously is the distribution of ... taxes between local and state government....Chicag receives 27 percent of all state and local taxes and Los Angeles 13.4 percent, San Diego receives only 4.8 percent of state and local taxes collected. The rest goes to the state, the county, schools and special districts....-- the giant sucking sound in Sacramento results in a massive transfer of wealth from our community to the state and county." Please make this a focus for a future article. Thanks."

15. mel wrote on May 10, 2007 11:45 PM:
"Sanders tells you CCDC leverages theri funds. How does spending $28 million for a bridge over Harbor Drive leverage ? This is just one example of CCDC spending their millions on stupid, unnecessary projects, while the mayor proclaims a "fiscal crisis" for the rest of the city."

16. Billy Bob Henry wrote on May 12, 2007 5:19 AM:
""Con" Servative- you still ieither fail to understand bsaic math, or you are intentionally lying-yet again. So, let me put this to you in third grade level terms. PD and FD get to retire as early as age 50. They get 3% for every year worked-up to 30 years of their HIGHEST years salary. That is not their lowest years salary-it is not their median years salary-it is their HIGHEST years salary. Ok "Con" Servative, you still with me, or has that pea sized brain started to melt down? So if PD or FD made 18 grand a year in 1977, but are making 80 grand a year today-and retire after the 30 years-they get 90% of 80 grand-that would be 72 grand a year. 72K/year is about 400% MORE than the 18K they made in 1977. Do you understand the math now "Con" Servative. If too hard-let me know."

17. Dale wrote on May 12, 2007 7:46 AM:
"As Alfred E. Neumann said each month, for decades, "What me worry?" I haven't read a Mad magazine in 25 years. I didn't expect to read the 21st century version on the Voice. Giving raises to CCDC administrators, while the city smolders with debt, is just plain arrogant. Jerry doesn't care, and he doesn't care an iota about solving fiscal problems. Building a new main library, a new city hall, a bridge, etc. is like a totally leveraged, newly mortgaged, San Diego homeowner, shopping for a swimming pool, with the big payment coming due in a few years. It is just plain nuts. Kudos to Mr. Davis, and others, for trying to suggest some viable,sensible solutions. Mr. Sanders put down your Gameboy and pick up a calculator."

18. "Con"servati wrote on May 12, 2007 3:39 PM:
"Well maybe BBH you should try a writing course. The way your state your point "highest years salary" is poorly executed. Try the average salary of the years worked. Your math would suggest that and employee should average all their years worked and base pension on that number. Maybe if your took a second to review the context of your point you'd find it less likely scrutenized. The factor used today is based on the highest 1 year and 3% per year worked. That is for public safety personnel not general employee. Keep in mind that a firefighter works 240 hours per month, roughly 33% more hours worked than the 40hr/wk worker. So for your 30 years working; comparing hours worked, I've worked 40 years. But BBH believes my time from my family while at work isnt worthy of compensation."