Sorry, phaster. As I had mentioned above, this is a busy time for me, so didn’t have the time to give thoughtful responses to your many, varied points. You took the time to write a lengthy post, so I wanted to be sure to give a proper response to your writings.
Your post lists a number of grievances, and each deserves a separate post because the issues are not related.
——–
[quote=phaster][quote=CA renter][quote=phaster]
[quote=CA renter]The worst employees tend to leave before benefits vest to any large extent. That doesn’t mean that some dead wood isn’t hanging around after too many years — and I absolutely support making it easier to fire truly bad employees.[/quote]
could not agree more, and think this concept should be extended to entrenched politicians (both on the left and right) because it seem they enable lots of the problems:
This link addresses how to report slumlords or illegal construction. It does not say anything about “entrenched politicians,” nor does it show any kind of a link between politicians and slumlords or illegal construction.
Having read your piece on the construction of the garage, I’ll assume that you’re suggesting some sort of link between what you describe as “entrenched politicians” and the construction of a detached garage on private property that you seen to take issue with because it (presumably) has caused some sort of backup in the sewer lines of neighboring properties.
You then go on to talk about the Mills Act (totally unrelated to the other construction/building issues), and I think BG explained things quite well in her above post. There is nothing “fraudulent” about the Mills Act. And if you think it was “sold” to the public in a deceitful way, then you certainly must think that Prop 13 is fraud on a grand scale, since it was sold as “a way to keep granny from being taxed out of her own home.”
[quote=phaster]I have my own sad example when I encountered the “old boys club,”, that is kinda how I stumbled onto the issue of public “pensions,” basically I followed the money motive trail…
I have a feeling there is something akin to a watergate type mentality w/ local politician (goldsmith and gloria) who are being sued for wanting to delete eMails from both their personal and official city accounts.
I think these officials are trying to hide public employee sins of the past that have something to do with software that allows building permit fraud and tax dodges possible with properties labeled as “historic”
Jim Mills, a former state senator from San Diego who pushed for the law’s creation in 1972, said he is surprised by how the financially strapped city has embraced the program during a time when it has had to close swimming pools, reduce library hours and delay sewer and water projects.
“I have to admit what I had in mind was significant buildings and houses, and I now see houses being covered by the Mills Act that were not what I had in mind,” Mills said.
Imagine you’re a developer with a pal who handles permits for the city of San Diego. And say you thought the permitting fees were a little too high. Not to worry, your pal says, and he knocks down the price for you.
I’ve actually taken the time to read most/all of the information you’ve provided in your links and timeline. I’m not sure that any actual fraud was committed, though. It looks like the new garage was indeed a replacement for an older garage, even if the older garage was torn down in ~1991. The easement for the sewer lateral was recorded in 1929, so the original garage existed over the sewer easement. As for the setback requirements, I think there might be a typo, because it gives the setback requirements in yards instead of feet. There is no way that a 10 yard setback requirement is in place for garages in the front of the home. The lots simply wouldn’t allow for that. If the setback requirements are in feet, which would make far more sense, then the setback requirement for the new garage would be 1′, if I’m reading that right.
If you look at neighboring lots, they all look as though the garages are placed at the lot lines, so the original garage probably existed at the very edge of the lot, right about where the current garage is located.
As for the owner increasing the footprint of the garage, that is noted on the drawing used for the permit.
You’ll also note that the garage failed to pass inspection on a number of occasions because of foundation issues. It’s also noted that they did not see the sewer line during the inspection.
All that being said, there are going to be situations when the building department will try to work with owners/builders to facilitate a project, and they might allow a variance if they believe it won’t cause any problems. People apply for, and get, zoning variances all the time. There is nothing fraudulent about it. The other option would be to make everything so incredibly rigid that nothing gets done. California and its cities have some of the most stringent building codes in the country.
If you’re one of the plaintiffs in this case, have you tried to talk to the owners of this house to see if they would pay to have the sewer laterals re-routed so that they don’t run under the garage? What sort of remedies have you worked on, other than trying to get them to tear down their permitted garage that they’ve had built on private property?
While I certainly understand your frustration, it doesn’t mean that there is any fraud, and it certainly doesn’t lead to some hidden conspiracy regarding unions or public pensions. There is no “old boys’ club” that I can see in this particular story.
———————-
Your assertion that Jan Goldsmith and Todd Gloria and wanted to delete public and private emails isn’t true, at least not from what I’ve read. The issue in this case is whether or not personal, private emails are subject to FOIA requests.
The likely issue here is whether or not Goldsmith was feeding the media “news” regarding Filner. He’s also said to have spent a significant amount of time campaigning for the likes of Mitt Romney, or pushing the agenda of certain well-connected folks from within *private industry* during working hours. Things of that nature are what people want to learn more about.
From your link:
Briggs, who filed the cases against Goldsmith and Gloria, claimed in court papers that Goldsmith is wasting taxpayer money by giving the council bad advice on public records matters, and “he is actively and purposefully spending a substantial amount of his time during official business hours communicating with the media.”
Briggs asked a judge to order Goldsmith to stop doing these things, and to pay back the city for “the illegal waste that he has committed.”
Early this year, Briggs filed a request for “any and all emails” from Goldsmith’s personal account between 2008 and 2013 “that pertain in any way to the official business of the City of San Diego.”
The city responded 10 days later, saying it had no responsive records.
“As you likely are aware, the email address … is not a city email address, nor does the city have access to such an individual’s personal email account,” the response said.
Briggs said the city subsequently identified about 2,500 emails to or from Goldsmith’s personal account — and turned over about 1,000 of those — that could be construed as public records.
More may be released as the records are vetted for privacy concerns, although city officials do not concede that state law requires them to do so.
The issue of public officials using personal email to conduct public business has vexed local governments across the state, which has no specific rules governing their release.
In June, the state Supreme Court said it would review a case in San Jose, in which officials declined to release personal emails to and from the mayor and council members regarding city business.
A lower court found that the city could not be expected to release emails that were not in its possession.
And that KPBS link regarding the software that would allow for “fraudulent” transactions? NO FRAUD WAS FOUND. The issue here is that the auditors thought some employees had access to certain modules in the software that they shouldn’t necessarily have access to. It’s like people in sales having access to the accounting modules. The apparent reason for this is that the building/planning department is understaffed, and people are trained to do more than one thing when necessary. It also looks like they are working on fixing this.
“Luna recommends 13 changes to the Development Services Department including restructuring its management to create greater internal controls, separating employees’ responsibilities so they can’t access as much of the computer system and documenting more changes to individual permits. He attributed much of the failures to inefficient staffing, high workloads, limited supervision and deficiencies with the computer system itself.
Department head Kelly Broughton disputed almost all of Luna’s findings, contending that his auditors didn’t understand how the computer system worked and that its internal controls were strong.
The department, Broughton said in its official response, “follows appropriate access protocols; and documents and records changes in the system appropriately. We believe the authorities currently granted to employees are appropriate and proper.”’
