By Charles Pratt, University City

Phil is affable enough but his view of politics mirrors that of Todd Gloria: Both compromise any principles they might have in a desperate effort to win election. Thank you Charlie for providing examples of Phil's duplicity that I was unaware of. It says volumes about Phil that he would take money from folks who would change the State Constitution to deprive some individuals of their right to a civil marriage. It shows how little respect he has for the Constitution. He has no respect for California's natural assets either: He supports a group called Build the Shorefront Now who want to pave over the Downtown water front and build a wall of skyscrapers that would block access to the ocean. There is a clear choice between Thalheimer and Lightner and if you care about your city Sherri Lightner is the obvious choice.

Posted by Ian Trowbridge | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 3:35 pm

More smears from Trowbridge. Can't even comment on an article on district 1 without trying to drag down Todd Gloria. Name one position Todd has changed for political expediency. Stop with the smears Trowbridge. If you did you might have some time to look into Stephen Whitburn's links with Carl Demaio and the posters on Red County.

Posted by district3resident | reply to this comment
October 4, 2008 1:41 pm

Phil is affable enough but his view of politics mirrors that of Todd Gloria: Both compromise any principles they might have in a desperate effort to win election. Thank you Charlie for providing examples of Phil's duplicity that I was unaware of. It says volumes about Phil that he would take money from folks who would change the State Constitution to deprive some individuals of their right to a civil marriage. It shows how little respect he has for the Constitution. He has no respect for California's natural assets either: He supports a group called Build the Shorefront Now who want to pave over the Downtown water front and build a wall of skyscrapers that would block access to the ocean. There is a clear choice between Thalheimer and Lightner and if you care about your city Sherri Lightner is the obvious choice.

Posted by Ian Trowbridge | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 3:35 pm

Ian Trowbridge continues to slander Todd Gloria in a nasty effort to support his candidate. Gloria's positions may not be Ian's cup of tea, but they are positions that Gloria has long held and consistently espoused. Trowbrige should by all means pump for his candidate. But his Rove-like smears of Gloria serve only to diminish the number of individuals who otherwise might heed his counsel on civic issues. It's sad, and it's avoidable. Just stop the falsehoods and make positive points on behalf of your candidate, Ian.

Posted by jon | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 5:51 pm

Wasn't it the Voice that ran the story re: Phil's 2004 campaign manager admitting that he was the one at "fault" for defining Phil's "strategy" to be a community advocate? I met Phil and I liked Phil - thought his deliberate promises to preserve community plans, support the interests of his (actual) constituents and not take it in the rear from developers was genuine. Local politics revolves around community issues - a candidate's stance on these is often more important than anything else - certainly more important than what party they represent. So to Phil's current supporters, do you honestly believe him? With his prior, and only history in San Diego politics clearly showing he is not a man of his word, why in the world would anyone put their trust in him?

Posted by Celeste | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 6:08 pm

Sherri Lightner came out to University Heights last evening to join some of the other Council candidates at the Neighborhood Historic Preservation Coalition candidate forum. She articulated her views on neighborhood issues pretty well, which is to be expected of someone who has been actively involved in her community for so long. Phil Thalheimer, on the other hand, never returned the phone calls or emails inviting him to the forum. Since he won't come out and talk the neighborhoods about his views, we can only guess at what he has planned for us, should he be elected. We can only guess why he wouldn't attend. After all, we gave him a choice of dates when we first planned the event. At least he could have had the common courtesy to RSVP his regrets. Now I hope voters RSVP their regrets to him.

Posted by Maggie McCann | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 6:21 pm

You can't tell the players without a program:1: VOSD opens the gambit with a front page hit piece on Erve Rosh Hashanah and then pulls it the evening of the High Holy Day obviating any critical comments.The very next day we have Mr Pratt's follow-thru that so obvious it's practically amature.2: Mr Pratt is a self styled ideologue of Labor's left wing and the self appointed NIMBY-in-Chief of everything UTC. PLease review his many letters to the VOSD for confirmation.3: Mr Trowbridge has obviously gone pathological over Todd Gloria from District 3 and seemingly will use any thread and any opportunity to bash him.Unabashedly. Trowbridge is also a Lightner contributor. 4: Ms Lightner has been hiring campaign staff from Craig's List. New hire Celeste is loyal to her paymasters' script which desperately uses classic homophobic phrasing to attack anyone who hires workers,vendors and does contsructive things, as in,PROGRESS.

Posted by Yankee Gent | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 6:16 am

That's some nice Republican spin. "Hit Piece?" The article seemed fairly balanced to me. If anything, it was more slanted toward Mr. Thalheimer, as Ms. Lightner was not quoted while he was. (Oh, and by the way, the article is still accessible.). As for "classic homophobic phrasing" from Celeste's post, that is rich! Mr. Thalheimer is the one who supports Proposition 8, and you have the temerity to call someone who criticizes him "homophobic?" Spewing false rhetoric is a poor substitute for addressing the issues.

Posted by boomerite | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 1:58 pm

Boomerite: Thalheimer's statement to Washburn were mangled in the quotes almost to the point of deception. For the longest time Thalheimer's position has been to wait upon the finders of fact to determine the fate of the Regent's Road Bridge and then to call for a public safety decison as the best alternative working with the surrounding community. UC Connect and its thousands of members have traffic as their primary and its important make that distinction. Organization vrs individual. Never have I heard or seen written that Thalheimer advocates for an eminent domain application in any case.Celeste auto-sodomizes her own argument when she suggests that work projects are the enemies of the working voters and those that advocate for them are being penetrated and used as receptacles. Unions acknowledge that up to 45% of their members are Republicans and work is needed here abouts to forestall this growing economic disaster.

Posted by Yankee Gent | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 4:50 pm

These comments coming from an alias of Civil War origins. funny. My comment simply referred to being kicked in the rear - why anyone would think otherwise is beyond me. Try to focus on the issues buddy. There is a right way and a wrong way to approach development - If the impacts associated with the development are honestly/truly identified and mitigated - great. However, if impacts of a proposed project are glossed over, or unable to be subsantially mitigated, then that development should be seriously questioned as a matter of public policy and service to the surrounding communities.

Posted by Celeste | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 5:47 pm

OK Buddy, here is a few issues:Perhaps you might enlighten us with Ms Lightner's reasons for voting NO on the La Jolla Library and why she felt the La Jolla Shores Lifeguard Station didn't meet her standards. And if she's so focused on District One just why was she lobbying so furtively at City Council during the District 7- Grantville hearings? Developers do need to be supervised at every step along the process. That's in the natural order of things San Diego, however, to demonize them all so capriciously is simply obstructionism at a time when construction employees are facing foreclosures, vendors are going bankrupt and material suppy costs are going through the roof. Rather, perhaps, we should be calling for the standardization of all City planning group criterias, electing re-development agency over-sight & auditing leaders and giving the City's development services crew a swift kick in

Posted by Yankee Gent | reply to this comment
October 3, 2008 5:41 am

First off Yankee, I suggest you purchase a new grammar checker for your computer before posting your comments. The proper way to express your first thought would be, "Ok, here are a few issues", not "is a few issues". Secondly, you seem like a bitter, angry person who would rather spew venom at an innocent person rather than telling me why I should vote for Phil.

Posted by Shawn Rawlings | reply to this comment
October 3, 2008 10:36 am

If I recall correctly, Sherri Lightner voted against the expansion plans of the library because of insufficient parking. That is called enforcing City parking codes. As for the La Jolla Shores lifeguard tower, she supported the community-approved plans of 2004(?). The project was delayed because of lack of funding and was recently appealed just as funding became available. Sherri Lightner was NOT part of the appeal. With regard to her involvement in the Grantville hearings, I find it informative that she takes an interest in issues outside of District 1. After all, the City Council makes decisions for ALL of the districts. I agree with you that developers need to be supervised every step of the way; Sherri Lightner has a track record of forcing them to follow City laws and regulations. Mr. Thalheimer's recent stances on development are decidedly less stringent.

Posted by boomerite | reply to this comment
October 3, 2008 2:59 pm

I really admire Sherri Lightner exactly because she had the civic-minded spirit to stay through a very long afternoon at city council to be there to weigh in against a fouled-up redevelopment scheme—Grantville. This is something that one of the D-7 candidates did not do. Remember, it’s a combination of district-only parochialism and mayors whose priorities are football stadiums, political conventions and ballparks, over proper maintenance of our infrastructure, which have contributed to pension, healthcare and deferred maintenance deficits. We need council members who look beyond the borders of their own districts.

Posted by Brian T. Peterson, DVM | reply to this comment
October 3, 2008 3:28 pm

Ahhh, Yankee knows the true meaning of Thalheimer's quotes. Just another one of Phil's cronies!

Posted by Shawn Rawlings | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 10:02 pm

I believe Yankee Gent is confused with all this "new information". Boomerite is correct to point out that Mr. Thalheimer attended a Yes on 8 rally with the likes of Duane Hunter and Brian Bilbray; not two of the civil rights advocates that first come to mind. Saying anything about "homophobia" is entirely ludicrous and laughable. I believe you should stop swallowing all the Republican talking points. Just face it, Thalheimer is an hyper-conservative opportunist who will take any side of any issue, just as long as he knows it will get him more power. Use your vote wisely Yank ;)

Posted by Shawn Rawlings | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 9:57 pm

If it is true that Phil Thalheimer puiblicly supports Proposition 8 (outlaws same sex marriage) and attends fundraisers for it, then my family of registered Republicans will change our votes from him to Sheri Lightner. We are sick and tired of candidates who feel that they must move to the right on social issues in order to motivate some to vote for them. We supported Phil and others for keeping the cross atop Mt Soledad because it has been there for so long but advocating a constitutional amendment to discriminate against a minority is repugnant and unamerican. Any individual should have the right to marry the person they love. We should not interfere with their happiness and commitment. Civil marriage has nothing to do with religion or the raisng of children. Happy marriages must not to be outlawed by Phil or any of us.

Posted by Disappointed in Phil | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 10:22 am

Here is the exact wording for a fundraiser Phil attended on August 16th of this year: "California Marriage Amendment Fundraiser: Join us in the battle to save marriage: With Master of Ceremonies Rodger Hedgecock (ANYONE REMEMBER MAYOR HEDGECOCK?) " Special Guests: Duncan D. Hunter, Philip Thalheimer and Michael Crimmins. Guest speakers included the Chairman of Protect Marriage.com and the director of the National Organization of Marriage. Now i ask two things: One, does San Diego really want to go backwards in terms of civil rights? Two, how can Carl DeMaio ally himself with Phil?

Posted by Shawn Rawlings | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 10:04 pm

Thalheimer has been around for a long time. His years with the San Diego Data Processing Corporation made him privy to much of the dealings that later came under scrutiny and resulted in board and executive dismissals. He did not report what was going on although he was in a position to do so. He is independantly (Qualcomm) wealthy so he well could have blown the whistle to stop the abuse of public funds. He only used the inside information years later to position himself for a run for office. He doesn't inspire confidence. I don't trust his motives and I really don't know where he stands on issues.

Posted by Not to be Trusted... | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 4:42 pm

If I remember correctly, he was in charge of SDDPC when he spent thousands of tax money on parties. The only principle he has is himself.

Posted by Fran | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 4:54 pm

If I remember correctly, he was in charge of SDDPC when he spent thousands of tax money on parties. The only principle he has is himself.

Posted by Fran | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 4:54 pm

Phil was in management at DCB (not as CEO) and then moved to the city at the same time becoming a director at DCB. He was on the board during the heady days of tequila, credit card abuse and crazy contracts. He certainly wasn't much of a reformer until David Godfredson and I blew the whistle. I would point out to Yankee Gentleman that the only reason he can look up my campaign contributions because unlike him I blog using my real name. Even so, he missed the fact I have also contributed to Marti Emerald's campaign. I guess I like to support honest Progressives the a history of community service and core values rather than maintain -the-status-quo establishment DINOs and Republicans.

Posted by ian Trowbridge | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 6:55 pm

Why stop there? Besides the bridge, taking money from developers, and tolerating discrimination, Thalheimer has also changed his position on the La Jolla Children's Pool and paid street parking. As late as November of last year, Thalheimer supported paid street parking. Now he's against it. In 2004 he defended seals at the Children's pool. Now he's against them. Thalheimer seems to have a hard time trusting his own judgment. Many voters may find themselves unable to trust him either this time around.

Posted by westcoast | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 7:39 pm

Mr Thalheimer honors Mrs Scripps intent on the Children's Pool and he's been backed up by State directives, Court decisions, City Council votes and those who live in that neighborhood. When finders of fact take such unequivocal positions a law abiding person gets on board. Parking, paid or not, has always been an issue in Downtown La Jolla and nothing has changed. Thalheimer initially supported those in the community who oppossed paid parking until it became apparent that there was an empty lot on Herschel Street that would have been perfect for a parking garage. A constructive alternative solution that would have resolved many of the issues and brought the community together and helped local businesses. He holds that position today.

Posted by Yankee Gent | reply to this comment
October 4, 2008 6:32 am

Simply stated, If people want a City Council that votes in favor of a living wages, water recycling, gay-marriage rights and protection of current municipal pensions, then voting for Phil should not even be contemplated. If you want more municipal outsourcing, privatization and de-unionization, then elect Phil to join the mold of the Council that has brought our City misery in the past 8 years.

Posted by Shawn Rawlings | reply to this comment
October 4, 2008 9:50 pm

Phil Thalheimer says he resents being labeled a "social conservative"? This is a man who spoke at a fundraiser to raise money to highlight the differences between people in support of Proposition 8. This is a man who sent out attack mail pieces against Marshall Merrifield during the Primary specifically calling himself a "Conservative Republican" and calling Merrifield a "Liberal Republican" and Sherri Lightner a "Liberal Democrat". On this mail piece, Thalheimer used unflattering photos of the other candidates and a professional photo of himself. This is a man who begged George W. Bush to intervene on the Mount Soledad Cross when his own efforts failed and who posted a picture of him and Bush on his website as a campaign tool. I say, call a spade a spade!

Posted by Shawn Rawlings | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 9:47 pm

Mr Trowbridge your campaign contributions are a matter of public record. You blog under your given name because you're running for public office and have been for some time. IMHO, you'd make a better Independent than a Progressive, at least then, you'd have the numbers to field an intra-mural softball team. DINOS & RINOS make up the over-whelming majority in this town which is why they supported Thalheimer in sustaining the Soledad Vet's Memorial and Jessica's Law.Their core values in respecting the sacrifice of our men & women who've served this Republic and the parents who wanted their children protected from sexual predators were amply demonstrated when they supported Thalheimer and his volunteers during those ballot initiatives. In both cases they were supported by the majority of the Democratic leadership. Federal & State Senators, Congressmen, Assemblymembers, County Sups and City Council.A bi-partisan effort in sustaing core values in community service.

Posted by Yankee Gent | reply to this comment
October 3, 2008 5:07 am

If you like the way the city is run now by politicians who work for the developers and not the voters, vote for Mr. Thalheimer, Todd Gloria and April Boling. If you want to see real change in the way our city council and our city work, vote for Sherri Lightner, Steve Whitburn and Marti Emerald.

Posted by Watcher | reply to this comment
October 3, 2008 8:48 am

Thalheimer is endorsed by the National Electrical Contractors Assn which also has endorsed Marti.Their endorsements in these non-partisan Council races are based on community service,character & integrity not partisan politics. NECA can hardly be called right wing and they have consistently put the welfare of the City first.Thalmeimer's "conservatism" is fiscal not social and anyone who has known him personally, engaged him in discussions after events or met him as he walks the District would know this fact.During his tenures on both the Penasquitos Planning Board and the Penasquitos Town Council he voted against several large development projects because they were inconsistent with the Community Plans in place or were simply out of character with the neighborhoods.The Rhodes project, the Doubletree project and the current Torrey Hills Coast Investment proposal are three of note. Finally, let's hear it for those Greek pagans! What's next? Human sacrifice?

Posted by Yankee Gent | reply to this comment
October 6, 2008 5:50 am

Yank, don't tell me you're trying to go back to 2004 Phil. Either he's 2004 Phil or 2008 Phil - which one this time? Is he the ultra-Liberal 2004 Phil who refused to accept developer contributions or 2008 NeoCon Phil who can't take enough developer money? Is he neighborhood champion 2004 Phil who said he believed that the seals should always have use of the Children's Pool in La Jolla or 2008 NeoCon Phil who admitted he "misunderstood the issue"? Is he 2004 Phil who did not want the Regents Road bridge built or 2008 NeoCon Phil who has decided that he wants it built? Tell me Yank, which Phil are you supporting? Frankly, neither Phil is any good.

Posted by Damien Westcoat | reply to this comment
October 6, 2008 3:03 pm

I think Yank supports the Phil that is paying his bills. There is no way that Yank is a free-thinking individual. It is blatantly obvious that Yankee is misinformed about his boss. Hey Yank, it isn't too late you know; you can always abandon the true demagogue and support people that actually care about your existence. Seriously, what happened to the Phil that attended the Pride Parade in 2004? And if God forbid Phil wins, which one will turn up to govern? The liberal, community activist or the conservative culture warrior, who wants to subsidize religious objects with public money in the middle of a recession?

Posted by Shawn Rawlings | reply to this comment
October 6, 2008 5:21 pm

Mr Thalheimer's position on Prop 8 is no different that Obama's or Biden's.His team supports committed couples in civil unions, the rights of hospital visitations, validity of contracts and the other civil rights benefits enjoyed by the rest of us. We see these as the culmination of a long civil rights battle conducted by the likes of Christine Kehoe and others of worthy leadership in bringing the American dream to fruition for everyone.We completely repudiate the hateful positions of James Hartfield and his polarizing ilk. If, however, you don't mind, we, like many others, wonder if one can support the concepts of tradtional marriage that have been in custom & tradition for these last 5769 years of judeo-christian heritage and still be tolerant and accepting of other persuasions without the approval or permission of the State or ballot initiative? Semantics and demagoguery make poor public policy in our opinion.

Posted by Yankee Gent | reply to this comment
October 3, 2008 12:00 pm

Is that "we" an indication of your membership in the Thalheimer campaign, or are you just using "we" in the royal sense of the word? You are mistaken about Obama's position on Proposition 8--he has publicly opposed it (again, more spin). Despite your denouncement of it, "demagoguery," unfortunately, appears to be Mr. Thalheimer's modus operandi. How else to explain his flip-flops on issues, his pandering to the conservative right by taking up the cause of Proposition 8, and his reliance on attack mailers rather than appearing at public forums where he might have to defend his own views?

Posted by boomerite | reply to this comment
October 3, 2008 3:26 pm

In the VP debate broadcast the other night Joe Biden said that both he and Senator Obama opposed gay marriage.Like Thalheimer they support civil unions, etc: That civil rights should be soverign for everyone.Not advocacy, mind you, but acceptance and tolerance of person's right to self-determination.T deeper question is what business does the State have in these matters to begin with? I'd recommend you look into Senator Kehoe's admirable history of bi-partisan accomplishment before you put her up on that lofty partisan pedestal.Her work with Republican leader George Plescia brought us SB 10 and some major resolution to the Regional Airport mess. Her across the aisle work recently earned the Governor's signature on the SD River Conservancy. Her efforts on behalf of Veterans is well known.Corporations support her and she supported both the Mt Soledad Vet's Memorial and Jessica's Law. PLease remember that the Council race is non-partisan.

Posted by Yankee Gent | reply to this comment
October 6, 2008 7:40 am

"That is why I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states." ---Barack Obama. Please do not lie to the voting public by saying Phil and Obama have the same stance on Prop 8. Phil is a Yes on 8 man, while Obama is a No on 8. Also, you mention Chris Kehoe. Since you have been making a logical and fair argument the entire time, you should mention that State Senator Kehoe endorsed Lightner because she knows where Ms. Lightner stands on this issue. Again, I suggest a grammar check. "No different that Obama or Biden"? Let us have an educated an articulate argument devoid of spelling mistakes. Finally, how much is Phil paying you per comment?

Posted by Shawn Rawlings | reply to this comment
October 3, 2008 5:26 pm

Please don't put blinders on and restrict your memory of history to the grand old "judeo-christian" days. In "these last 5769 years" that you wish to cover, the pagan Greeks performed marriages between two men. Perhaps you can't find that in your old testament, but if you'd look further than the confines of your own ideological belief system, you'd find those facts. And you may want to check first with Christine Kehoe before pretending that you are somehow aligned with her, Mr. Thalheimer. She would, I suspect, be aghast to hear it. But your pretense further proves that you will say anything to get elected, even if it is the polar opposite of what you said five minutes ago.

Posted by goodhabits | reply to this comment
October 3, 2008 10:06 pm

Thalheimer deserves your support in D1: He talks the talk on community commitment and walks the walk. Here's his record. On the local community level 6 years on the Penasquitos Town Council and RPQ Planning Board. Eight years with the Penasquitos YMCA ,currently a Cmte Chair. At the County level, currently a Slater-Price appointee to the Health and Human Services Cmte and a pre-SB-10 member of the Regional Airport Advisory Board, as an owner of a flight school.Six years and former Chair with the Center for Organizational Effectiveness, a think tank for efficiency in government: State, County & City. Leadership cadre of the Mt Soledad Veteran's Memorial which garnered 68% of the votes cast on the issue.So Cal leader on Jessica's Law with a nearly 70% plurality. Recently inducted into the prestigious IMAGE program for DHS, the only flight school in America to qualify.Commitment, performance & leadership.Thalheime Polls are open!

Posted by Yankee Gent | reply to this comment
October 7, 2008 6:32 am

I was a supporter of Phil but no longer. If he is stumping for Prop 8 he does not have the open mind we are so dearly missing in this City. I have heard enough and will not vote for Phil. Nor will any of my family or friends.

Posted by Harold Freezedropper | reply to this comment
October 8, 2008 8:33 pm

Yank, You cannot even spell your own boss' name correctly. The guy's name is Thalheimer, not Thalheme. I can't really blame you for that though! But seriously, who do you think is falling for your propaganda? Thalheimer's credentials hail in comparison to Lightner's. In all honesty, I had no biased towards either one of the candidates, however, when Phil blatantly took the Yes on 8 position, he showed himself for the over-zealous NeoCon that he is. I repeat, SAN DIEGO DOES NOT NEED A CULTURE WARRIOR WHO WILL APPROPRIATE PUBLIC FUNDS FOR A RELIGIOUS PROJECT WHILE THE ENTIRE NATION IS GOING BANKRUPT! The people on this discussion thread see right through you and your lies. We all know you are his staffer trying to make him come of as the next best thing since sliced bread!

Posted by Shawn Rawlings | reply to this comment
October 9, 2008 5:44 pm

• Users may post more than one comment, but should not pose as multiple users. Multiple posts from the same IP address but with a different user name on each will be reviewed to determine whether abuse has occurred.
• Posts with overly personal attacks or unsubstantiated allegations may be edited or deleted.
• Please be patient with the posts -- there may be a delay before they appear on the site -- and make sure to enter the code in the "image verification" box.