Comments so far on this story:

1. Billy Bob Henry wrote on May 11, 2008 11:04 PM:
"The Ethics Commission, like our Mayor, is a J-O-K-E. All politics, all the time."

2. La Playa Heritage wrote on May 12, 2008 12:36 AM:
"link The Ethics Commission also did not do an investigation into the manipulation of the videos of City Council meetings on City TV. Our particular instance of getting edited out of the online video for Non-Agenda Public Comment during City Council meetings was resolved. However, no investigation into the root cause of the online video manipulation was every investigated by the Ethics Commission. Who edited the online video tapes to get rid of the online public records? Who purposely delays the uploading of controversal public meeting videos? The Ethics Commission also did not look into the Categorical Exemption for Single Family Homes in the Coastal Overlay Zone which would wipe out 90 percent of_all discretionary Coastal Development Permits making most projects ministerial, not subject to CEQA, and bypassing the Community Planning Boards, and Community Plans. This would be accomplished by not following proper procedure for Municipal_Code changes."

3. Charlie Pratt wrote on May 12, 2008 6:53 AM:
"Ian, it is impossible not to see parallels between what is happening in San Diego and Washington, D.C., a beleaguered administration cynically uses the administrative apparatus to hide, obfuscate and defend itself from much needed reform. The solution is the same in both places: throw the rascals out!"

4. Pat Flannery wrote on May 12, 2008 7:48 AM:
"“temporarily blackened the reputation of a widely-read blogger, Pat Flannery”???? The only thing that has “temporarily blackened” my reputation is you saying that it has been “temporarily blackened”. Thanks Ian. On the contrary, I have received many complimentary emails on the way I have handled this issue. It is what it is, part of a dirty fight between Scott Peters, his union backers and Mike Aguirre. Please don’t make it any dirtier than it is."

5. Pat Flannery wrote on May 12, 2008 7:48 AM:
"“temporarily blackened the reputation of a widely-read blogger, Pat Flannery”???? The only thing that has “temporarily blackened” my reputation is you saying that it has been “temporarily blackened”. Thanks Ian. On the contrary, I have received many complimentary emails on the way I have handled this issue. It is what it is, part of a dirty fight between Scott Peters, his union backers and Mike Aguirre. Please don’t make it any dirtier than it is."

6. Jack Griffiths wrote on May 12, 2008 9:24 AM:
"With today's letter by Mr Trowbridge one wonders if during his study of biology the Professor discovered a new species of human beings. HOMO MUNICIPALIS:a civic minded,professionall educated individual who, once employed by the City of San Diego, becomes genetically immune to all ethical and moral conditioning normally associated with honest public service. It seems there maybe a Manchurian Candidate increment in employee orientation we're unaware of. This is becoming more absurdist than investigative."

7. Steve K wrote on May 12, 2008 9:56 AM:
"The Sunday U/T 'Dialog' section was practically a campaign flier against Aguirre."

8. Where is the Ethics Commission wrote on May 12, 2008 10:13 AM:
"Again at NTC, Developer McMillin is poised to REMOVE $466,000 of FUNDING for Public Benefit-'Given Away' Public Pools-to become a PUBLIC BOND ISSUE (most expensive) that will most likely 'never happen.' At 5/13/08 mtg.,"On May 6, 2003 the City Council directed staff to eliminate the water feature from the Park and direct the cost savings of $466,726 toward the design and development of a future aquatic center within the Park." Noting, again, "The design and construction of an aquatic center is not the responsibility of Master Developer," McMillin passes the buck to Redevelopment (monies it is in control of-NO Project Area Committee at NTC), 'funding it' with Public Taxes. The RA has made similar 'community promises' with former bond issues that Never Materialized. Are Mark & Scott ready to put an INSURANCE BOND up, to GUARANTEE it being done, time certain? If not, True 'Special Interest' Theft!"

9. ian trowbridge wrote on May 12, 2008 2:03 PM:
"#1 From Don Bauder's blog posted Sunday: I reached Cabrera and Gustafson. Cabrera says the commission would not have given out closed session information over the phone, other than the fact that there will be a hearing. Gustafson said the same thing. The question, however, is why this matter was announced in early May, a month before the election, when the hearing is not until July 25. Cabrera continues to insist it is not politics. He will have a chance to comment on that many times."

10. Ian Trowbridge wrote on May 12, 2008 2:07 PM:
"#2 I assume, then, that the so-called ethics commission refused to investigate Sainz's attempt to get the IP addresses of those in the city attorney's office. This was the shockingly unethical activity that caused Rick Reynolds to protest, and led to his firing for not being a team player. If the purported ethics commission were going to investigate anything, this would be it. Hopefully, the lawsuit by Reynolds will shed light on this shabby activity."

11. Jack Griffiths wrote on May 12, 2008 2:36 PM:
"Your Assummptions,rank speculations and muddy innuendo are not material facts upon which reasonable and prudent people will make decisions or vote. Is it so unreasonable to wait for the finders of fact to determine exactly what's afoot here before you impune the integrity and splash everyone with that muddy brush you're wielding? Need I remind you that in this Republic a person must be shown the prosecutional due diligence, evidentiary justification and due process of law before they're strung up, even on these jaded pages. At least practice the decency and restraint that comes with identifying your remarks as YOUR OPINION. Please!"

12. Christopher Hall wrote on May 12, 2008 8:57 PM:
"Mr. Griffith's poesy is drooled out from a pen so pretentious and cocky that it makes me wonder whether his motives are driven by his conscience or by those who prop him up to back the crusty old local establishment."

13. Algernon Sidney wrote on May 12, 2008 11:06 PM:
"Ian, you've jumped the shark. Again."

14. Honesty Pays wrote on May 13, 2008 1:05 PM:
"You obviously have no clue what the Ethics Commission even investigates. It is called the Ethics Commission, not the morality police. It investigates violations of campagin laws, not employee firings or questionable e-mails. Before you accuse and defame people, get the facts correct. You are as ignorate as Mike Aguirre and Pat Flannery."

15. Algernon Sidney wrote on May 13, 2008 5:58 PM:
"Pat Flannery, I join others who have asked you to allow comments on your blog so that your mistakes can be corrected. You don't need to respond to the comments if you don't want to, but since you make this claim that you rely only on sourc documents and such you should have no fear of a little sunlight. Why are you afraid of that sunlight, Pat? Pat?"

16. Jack Griffiths wrote on May 13, 2008 7:04 PM:
"I have abiding and unconditional respect for the efforts of both Mr Trowbridge and Mr Flannery to bring us out of obfuscations and Mushroom state we've collectively been consigned to by the U-T and the PR pros.Being forced into the light of critical consciousness is no less painful as one might imagine is giving birth.I guess that's why they call it labor.What concerns me is that the value they contribute to our nuevo-Jeffersonian common wealth is radically diminished the by loss of civility and slanderous reductions that we brought to when we fail to restrain our very understandable frustrations because people's learning curves differ so dramatically and their attention spans fall prey to the seductions and ease of simple name calling when they can't seem to back up from the blackboard and see the obvious patterns that are so clear to the Gents from the experienced and more jaded cultures."

17. Christopher Hall wrote on May 14, 2008 8:16 AM:
"Ian, in the spirit of your letter I propose the ethics commission look into the run-on sentence and nuevo-grammar of Mr. Griffiths' comment just above. It's a crime against humanity! // OK, here's just the first half of that sentence: 'What concerns me is that the value they contribute to our nuevo-Jeffersonian common wealth is radically diminished the by loss of civility and slanderous reductions that we brought to when we fail to restrain our very understandable frustrations..." // Gil Cabrera -- get on it now!"

18. Ethics for All? wrote on May 17, 2008 5:23 PM:
"I understand that the Employee Hotline isn't just for employees anymore. Thanks to Donna Frye, everyone witnessing misconduct by city employees is invited to report it at(866)809-3500. The Office of Ethics and Integrity currently oversees it but the proposed budget puts responsiblity with the Office of the Auditor. Both classified and unclassified(everyon non-union)staff need adhere to the regulations. The Employee Code of Conduct says NO to "improper use of position" (page 9) link I wonder if Sainz and the Mayor have read that one? Another resource - link"

19. Will Dawson wrote on May 19, 2008 12:30 PM:
"When will the "ETHICS COMMITTEE" really look into the violations of the city charter by Tom Story? He violated the non-contacr rule 14 times Is'nt this an ethical violation that is real? Does the "ETHICS COMMITTEE" have any ethics or are they just a political lap dog for Sanders. If the mayor appoints the "ETHICS COMMITEE" and controls them how can we trust them to look into ethics violations without bias or a politacal axes to grind. And so it goes in San Diego"