voiceofsandiego.org: Letters... City Worker: U-T Went Too Far

Wedenesday, July 01, 2009 | What a kick in the teeth to those of us who work for the City as dedicated public servants working for moderate pay, who have seen workloads increase year after year with not even cost of living increases; who opted for a solid retirement package (remember, we won't get Social Security or Medicare when we retire) and job stability rather than the higher pay of private employment. For the UT to have posted a City Salary Website such that anybody, anywhere can type in my name and see what they think has been my salary history is morally wrong! And the data it displays is also factually wrong!

I did not receive the salaries listed under my name, and I have not received those pay increases. I wish! Would you care to review my W-2s? I'm a Senior Analyst and make less than $70,000 a year - and always have. Other senior analysts in my work section have different salaries listed despite the fact that none of us get additional pay or overtime or perks, and all of us are at the same pay scale.

With this website, every single employee, good and bad, can be singled out, scrutinized and evaluated by any person on the street. How would you feel if YOUR OWN current and past salaries were out there for the world to see? And what if the salaries listed were wrong? What if your "ex", family, church or charitable organization thought you made thousands more dollars per year more than you actually do? What if your landlord wanted to raise your rent based on this incorrect and inappropriate website?

Yes, of course public salaries should be made available to the public. But by classification or job type. Not by individual name! And NOT with incorrect salaries.

Shame on the UT for publishing this website!

I completely agree, if I was a city worker I would be getting real tired of the "public eye should see all" bull. While I do think there are problems with high end public safety "managers" making 200,000+ income, it clearly should not have been broken down by name. Perhaps those watch dog people would want to put their full name out there? Doubt it!

Posted by Anon | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 12:58 pm

Its my understanding that the wages posted are what it cost the city not what goes on their w2.

Posted by Sam | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 1:11 pm

I'm in agreement with this as well. It's absurd to have personal info thrown out there for public consumption. Particularly in light of the frequency of ID theft. The UT could have made their point by providing pay by position without the names. This is a total privacy invasion. I sure hope this gets to the courts. It's one thing to make a public information request about a government employee for research purposes, its a whole different matter to put it out for international consumption (just a weblink away). Scary!

Posted by jameses858 | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 2:51 pm

This isn't true because a large portion of Police overtie is paid for by the Padres, Chargers, Street Scene, federal grants etc. The amount for me was overstated by $10k. I know that is not for medical because I don't get that much for my benefits.

Posted by Dawg53 | reply to this comment
July 2, 2009 9:04 am

Dawg, Were you one of those who had that 10k bump your salary over 100K? I ask because it seems a lot of people who were in the mid 90's found themselves over 100. Oddly enough, the UT made a big deal out of city employees making over 100k per year. I would argue the numbers were not as high as they allege and the UT has stooped to manufacturing stories.

Posted by sdcrimefighter | reply to this comment
July 5, 2009 11:57 am

As a matter of fact the jump did put me over the 100k mark as well it did for several of my coworkers who were right on the cusp. Interesting.

Posted by Dawg53 | reply to this comment
July 5, 2009 4:41 pm

In order to get a true persepctive on what the City pays for salraies of it's employees, we need to see a break down of how much the City is reimburesed, from outside agencies for the salaries...for example, Special events coordinators are charged and mandated to have parking controllers, PD and FF personnel at events. How much do the Chargers, Padres also pay to the City for salaries? Officers are required to attend court for subpoenas as a result of the work they do. How much does the County reimburse the City for these overtime wages? How much do the PD and FF receive in reimbursement for federal grants and supplying mutual aid? There are 10' s of million dollars if not more received by the City that the citizens do not pay for, yet the overtime is mandated.

Posted by Gene | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 1:38 pm

Yes, with individual names. You work for the people of the City of San Diego. Your salary and compensation is paid through tax dollars. Your sense of entitlement to privacy and privilege in the public sphere is overreaching, and without merit. For example, a citizen can by law request detailed copies of correspondence you receive and make in the course of your work, and this information has to be disclosed to them. This dynamic isn't anything new for you or the other public employees. Nor is it only exclusive to government workers; non-profit corporations also disclose many of the names and salaries of their employees as well. More transparency and taxpayer accountability is needed in a City Hall that's nearly bankrupt from decades of sweetheart deals for lobbyists and expensive pay-outs for incompetent employees and political hacks.

Posted by UTC | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 2:07 pm

Actually, not all city employees salaries are paid for through taxes. As noted by many, for special events private organizations may be contributing to police and/or fire salaries. For staff in enterprise fund departments, those salaries are generally covered by the fees for using the department services.

Posted by Kate | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 4:35 pm

Thanks UTC. You saved me the trouble of writing a longer comment. I agree COMPLETELY with what you have to say. What makes a City employee any different than a federal employee? Every last vestige of what they earn and do as an employee is public knowledge. San Diego employees, GROW UP! You are on the gravy express train and you don't even want to pay the fare.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 8:12 pm

Edgar, you claim to be a retired federal public safety official, with over 30 years....what is your full name please? What was your salary for your final six years? And exactly how much do you receive in retirement yearly? I am a taxpayer. You worked for me, and I pay your bills. I, and everyone else on this site, have a right to know.

Posted by D | reply to this comment
July 3, 2009 2:52 pm

Hi Edgar, I agree with you to a very, very small degree. Salaries should be made public. NOT THE NAMES. When you apply for a position with the City and pay is based on a salary- you get a low to high range of what to expect for pay. As a cop, additional pay is for additional talent, extra tasks, more education and longer hours. In short, you work harder and longer, you get paid more. BUT, cops are not paid a salary. we are paid by an hourly wage. We are paid by the City but they receive premium compensation for contracts with the Padres, the chargers, and many many movie producers where police protect the public from thieves drunks, and 5150's. If you believe what the UT did was honorable, moral and ethical, then I agree with D. Salary and pension PLEASE!

Posted by Ron Weiss | reply to this comment
July 4, 2009 7:08 am

We already know its the years of abuse and mismanagement by city leaders. Going back to the days of Pete Wilson and City Manger Ray Blair (now deceased). Pete needed money for projects the city could not afford. To get it they removed all the City employees from the Social Security and Medicare. By doing so the city would save millions of dollars, millions they diverted to other projects. To get the labor groups to go along, they promised to open a health care trust and provide lifetime medical coverage to retirees, just like Medicare. Well the promises were never implemented and the following Mayors, Managers, and Councils decided to use a "pay as go" approach. Fastforward 25 years and we find ourselves in the financial mess rooted in City Management so long ago.

Posted by JustWondering | reply to this comment
July 2, 2009 5:00 am

UTC - Can you please post your full name, what you do, and how much you earn? Also any public assistance (taxpayer dollars) you receive.

Posted by Curious | reply to this comment
July 2, 2009 5:54 am

UTC: There are enough individuals commenting about wether it is right or wrong to list all of the City workers names and their "salaries". I think it is morally wrong at the very least. What I think is totally unethical and should be rectified is the fictional numbers you have used as salaries. I have never been paid a six figure salary from the City of San Diego. In factI do not get a salary. I get paid by the hour! I have stopped my subscription to the U.T. and I know of many others that have as well. I would like to see those that Know it was morally and ethically wrong to print names and fictional salaries to follow my lead!!

Posted by Ron Weiss | reply to this comment
July 2, 2009 7:10 am

OK, What is your name where do you work and what do you make? I'm sure your not going to answer those questions, because you will say it is nobody's business. Fine, but I see no reason to but names to salary for public employees, making public what certain employees make a certain positions, that's fine but putting names is going to far.

Posted by zollner | reply to this comment
July 2, 2009 3:34 pm

The difference, zollner, is the law. If you feel so strongly about maintaining your personal privacy, I suggest you give up all the baubles, bangles and cadillac perks of public employment and take a job in the private sector -- you know, where your bosses are not the taxpaying citizens of the city.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
July 3, 2009 4:28 pm

Edgar, if that's all you have to fall back on "cuz it's legal" might I remind you that a few years ago it was legal to shove a camera up under a womans skirt as long as she was out in public. Does that mean it was ever right? NO. I guess we could have told her "if you don't like it don't wear skirts" but the decent thing to do would be just refrain from the activity completely.

Posted by sdcrimefighter | reply to this comment
July 9, 2009 7:58 am

Capitol Weekly has been doing this for years to state employees. Just another issue you need to deal with when you work for the public. Your work phone, work e-mail, and now your salary can be made public. Again, this has been done at the state for a very long time.

Posted by former state employee | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 2:14 pm

While I respect your opinions, I don't think ya'll are getting the point I'm making that it should not be put as a publicly searchable DB on the web, (disregarding the inaccuracies as I don't have evidence of that myself). Reminds me of the difference between making something available by official request vs allowing anyone to easily bypass the rules of that request and get the data. If you want that info you should have to jump through the appropriate legal hoops to get it, NOT just be able to search for anyone with lastname of smith and see what they make! Like when that grad student was going to post a map of all the major fiber optic lines running through the ground in the US for some term paper. He got his data publicly but USgovt stopped it's publication.

Posted by Anon | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 3:51 pm

I just spoke to someone at UTs Signonsandiego who told me that there was such outrage at the posting of city employee's names attached to their compensation, they had to disable the Disqus system that allowed readers to comment online and in real time. There was such an outpouring of anger and vitriolic, foul comments that the UT had no choice but to temporarily shut it down. Apparently some very bright and creative computer gunslinger was able to hack the system--and write some pretty bad stuff. A shame because with the list published there is no way now for a thorough airing of the ordinary citizen's point of view. There were some great, insightful comments from City employees too. We are losing our ability to know what is happening in our society. VOSD has been noticeably silent on this issue. Why?

Posted by Linda Tegarden | reply to this comment
July 2, 2009 3:39 pm

Yet the UT didn't disable the comment section for the database nor did they take the database down. Me thinks the UT speaks out of both sides of their mouths.

Posted by sdcrimefighter | reply to this comment
July 4, 2009 10:05 pm

The Sacramento Bee has a special web page for state employees (which also includes the UC which are in a separate system) link Public employee salaries being an item of public record is the norm in many other states and also for Federal employees. If the city is handling it badly, then complain to the person in the city who's reporting the numbers. But after many abuses by some bad apples over the past decades, the public has come to expect (and deserve) transparency in government pay and benefits.

Posted by State employee | reply to this comment
July 2, 2009 5:55 pm

Though it is legal, it certainly strikes me as invasive. Plus, this database included all payments to people through their paychecks, which can grossly overstate their pay and year-over-year increases. These include uniform allowances, mileage reimbursements, tuition reimbursements and many other factors that are not money going out the door for the City. City workers are mad and taking to the 'net: See link and link

Posted by Firebrand | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 3:21 pm

Cry me a river. I can hardly wait for the other City employees in the $100,000 coven to speak up and justify their existences. Reduced hours at recreation centers, potholes, broken water mains, etc so we the taxpayers can finance hefty salaries, DROP, and cadillac health care. Boo hoo in advance for the City employees who will dare to complain such as the well compensated fire personnel who contribute so frequently to VOSD. you gotta love them.

Posted by Grasca | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 3:27 pm

I agree. Transparency is good. I forfeited my anonymity here. Do you have the intestinal fortitude to do the same? Few here do. Perhaps you did at one time and couldn't take the heat. So now you're Grasca. Well be sure to spell my name right! THOMAS MORRIS. You all can see what the UT says I make and then subtract an average of 14,000/ year and you've got my real W2. I work hard, get paid well and taxpayers do have a right to know that. Releasing people's names solves nothing, but go ahead, get your thrills. This whole thing has made me see the light. I worked about 600 hours of overtime last year. I've worked less than 20 hours of OT this year. It's much nicer. My wife still doesn't work outside the home and what a happy home we have.

Posted by thom | reply to this comment
July 3, 2009 3:20 pm

Guess what, Thom? I couldn't care less what you make per year. You are going to have to keep that to yourself because I have no intention of looking. What bothers me is that you apparently make a lot of money to spend your time: 1) trashing the people for whom you work and who hired you -- the taxpayers of San Diego; 2) badmouthing (and thereby engaging in insubordination) your superiors in your department (what is it, anyway, the fire department?) and at city hall (a dismissable offense, I believe); 3) wasting taxpayer resources (you couldn't possibly write all your many uninformed missives on your own time and with your own equipment, not with all the work you say you and your colleagues have to do -- you couldn't prove that last point by me) and 4) in general demeaning the professional reputation of the fire department.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
July 3, 2009 9:59 pm

And, Thom, since you are so proud of your singular achievement of not cloaking your true identity, you should know that a colleague of yours, a member of SDPD, likewise feels the same. Guess what? He comes up with the same results: ingratitude; utter disdain for the taxpaying citizens of this city; and abject insubordination. It's a nice gig you two have. You are to be congratulated.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
July 3, 2009 10:10 pm

The IRS requires disclosure of the Top 5 Key employees salaries... not the janitors. The new 990 requires the top 20 employees making over 100k.... What the UT did is not the same. When you get hired on as a trash truck driver, I don't think this is what you signed up for. Department directors... fair game... trash truck driver not.

Posted by Downwiththedatabase.com | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 3:42 pm

Public servants! Right? Public servants -- that's what they're called. So who in their right mind could say that I am not entitled to know how much I am paying my employees? You work for me, people. If you don't want the public to know your salary, don't feed at the public trough! I think this data actually helps make the case that we are so under-staffed in our police and fire departments that the overtime is killing the bottom line. Compare our police/firefighter per thousand citizen ratios against nearly any other city in America. Think we're tight-fisted? Thrifty? Penny-wise? Well, think again. We're wasting millions on overtime because of our pathetic staffing levels.

Posted by Ted Blake | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 4:39 pm

What's really sad is to see that some of the worst employees make more than the finest. I checked the pay for some people in City Planning and Community Investment - people whom I know from firsthand experience can't even compose a grammatical sentence or understand a simple idea, and found that they make more than some very knowledgeable and diligent experts in Streets and Park and Rec. Sad.

Posted by Value Mileu | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 6:06 pm

It's certainly unfortunate that the data posted up there is incorrect. The UT should correct any errors. However, I don't understand why you're so hesitant to have your salary posted. I mean -- it's not like anyone can steal your identity with that little information. And if someone at work is jealous of your salary, what are they going to do? Hassle you? Big deal -- tell them to take a walk and get back to work. Seriously, lady -- folks are loosing their jobs and defaulting on their mortgages and you can't even admit to how well you're doing?

Posted by Robert | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 6:14 pm

Just because you can-doesn't mean you should. While it is true that that city worker salaries are public information, I think that the UT abused its power. The data should have been used to support the argument that city workers were paid more-not less over the past several years. However, what they decided to do was to create a tool that relied on one knowing the names of individual employees. The intent was give the public the means to snoop their family, friends, neighbors or acquaintance. In my opinion, there is a point when journalistic license becomes thuggery. This is more about intimidation and selling newspapers and less about the "truth."

Posted by SdGal | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 9:33 pm

SPSP replaces S/S for employees. Employee and city contribute 6% annually into account invested in mutual funds. Assuming 3% annual pay increase and 8% return, this plan provides payments in addition to city pension and possibly DROP benefits. Some retire with more than they earned while working for the City. The retiree health benefits include medical, dental and vision with small co-pays. We should all be so lucky.

Posted by grasca | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 10:15 pm

Grasca it seems to me you have a new name. The information you provided doesn't apply to people who were hired after July 2005. They don't get the DROP, retirement health and if they are safety employees they do not get SPSP, plus no S/S. If you get hired at a young age you will be S O L and on your own. We are not all so lucky

Posted by J.J. | reply to this comment
July 4, 2009 1:34 pm

The UT action is inherently unfair and vilifies public service. In order to level the playing field between public employees working for the City, and private employees working for contractors of the City, the UT should also post the names and salaries of employees that work on City contracts.

Posted by Murtaza | reply to this comment
July 2, 2009 5:44 am

So the UT publishes the names and pay of each individual working for the city, and then can't figure out why they're losing subscribers. Maybe it's because most of us are working people who can identify with those city workers. Don't you yahoos get it? You aren't supposed to take a side! Why is the UT taking part in this anti-labor beat-down? Are they being compensated for it? Are they feeling something for they're own past labor issues? Are they going to publish their own names and compensation levels? Folks, we're all San Diegans. City workers, city managment-types, UT editors, cops, analysts, farm laborers, enlisted, officers. We can't keep trying to isolate small groups of us, and blame that part of us for our problems. We're being divided (and conquered - who's heard of the San Diego discount?). That list doesn't mention hrs worked or education levels.

Posted by wallyB | reply to this comment
July 2, 2009 6:25 am

Government employees should have a right to privacy regarding their earnings. As taxpayers we should have access to the overall budget of each department, including salary levels by position types, benefits, duties of positions. If we want to determine the efficiency of an agency, we don't need to know how much individual earns. How an agency spends the monies they receive, and whether or not they and their employees are fulfilling their duties and expectations is of concern. The only thing really served by posting some semblance of what a person earned, is to satisfy the curiosity of friends, neighbors, enemies, ex's, etc. To all - take a step back How would you feel if your specific salary was disclosed for all to see?

Posted by Privacy | reply to this comment
July 2, 2009 11:49 am

When you're paid with our tax dollars, you will be scrutinized! Don't like it? Leave.

Posted by Robert | reply to this comment
July 2, 2009 12:35 pm

That's silly. First of all, not everyone who was able to pull up that database is a San Diego taxpayer. But regardless, does that mean since I pay property taxes for the schools I can see your kids report card to make sure he isn't wasting tax dollars? Can I see your driving record to make sure you are skilled enough to be using my roads? And what about companies across America that took stimulus money? Or bailout money? Or what about you collecting stimulus money last year? Can I examine your tax records to make sure you only took what you were legally allowed? Where do you draw the line?

Posted by sdcrimefighter | reply to this comment
July 4, 2009 10:11 pm

You can try to throw everything and the kitchen sink as a diversion from my SPECIFIC comments, but we, the taxpayers, will not be fooled by your tactics. Persons in the private sector are not required to provide the information you throw at us in your retort. Public employees ARE required to surrender certain job-related information, and they know it, including you. Nice try, but your empty rhetoric fails.

Posted by Robert | reply to this comment
July 6, 2009 11:51 am

There is no spin or attempt at diversion so relax - I didn’t mention anyone in the private sector, I was referring to those who take public tax dollars regardless of where they are employed. Your comment was, "When you're paid with our tax dollars, you will be scrutinized!" If you truly believe that then let's look at where ALL of our tax dollars go not just to city employees that you don't like. That includes your kids report card. I want to see if I am getting a return on my investment. Since my property tax pays for him to attend public school, don't I have that right? Since my tax dollars pay for roads, shouldn't I know who is using them? It seems you like to pick and choose a situation that is really all or nothing.

Posted by sdcrimefighter | reply to this comment
July 10, 2009 2:55 pm

I have a question for UTC. How does publishing the name and salary of every city employee fix, correct or address the problem of sweetheart deals for lobbyyists or expensive pay-outs for incompetent employees and political hacks? Please explain, I would really like to know. It doesn't appear to me the list distinguishes between good, bad or mediocre employees. Also, I can understand that copies of correspondence might be available to the public because the subject of the correspondence might be releveant to the work being performed. What makes a city worker's name so relevant in relation his/her salary that both of them together have to be posted on line? Let's be honest with each other. There is really no compelling reason for posting the information other than it furthers the UT's deeply-entrenched anti-city employee agenda.

Posted by akj | reply to this comment
July 2, 2009 6:46 pm

Stories you will never see in the UT: (1) An investigative piece on the comparatively low tax revenue generated in San Diego as compared to other large cities; (2) An investigative piece comparing salaries and benefits of police officers and firefighers in other large cities as compared those in San Diego; (3) An investigative piece comparing the police of firefighting resources (staffing, budget and equipment) of other large cities as compared to San Diego; (4) An investigative piece about the long wait time for police calls for service now that the department is down almost 400 officers. (And I'm not talking about calling the PD and asking for the average number. I mean going out and finding out from the people who are waiting, sometimes several days, to file a report on the phone.)

Posted by akj | reply to this comment
July 2, 2009 6:47 pm

What you'll never see in U-T or Voice is an investigation into the many nonprofit Community Development Corporation- and Business Improvement Association-run maintenance association districts, administered by the Economic Development division in City Planning and Community Development. Econ Dev run by Beth Murray and Ojeda, gets 4% of the take of special property assessments, achieved by rigged elections in which the City mandatorily votes "yes." The CDCs and BIDs get upward of 30%. CPCI's 2009 target was to more than double their annual collection, and thus their 4% cut, from $18 mill to more than $36 mill. The fraud and waste of these privately run taxing districts are mind-boggling. The puppet-master of the BIDs/CDCs and their acquisitions of property taxes is Marco Li Mandri, who sees the San Diego's neighborhood as malls, and himself and his CDC/BID executives as the mall managers.

Posted by Value Mileu | reply to this comment
July 4, 2009 4:44 pm

I guess I'm one of the few city employees who don't care too much. It's not life altering stuff. My issue is that it is not accurate. As much as I tried, I still can't figure out how they came up with the numbers they did. Unfortunately, since it's in the paper, alot of people just automatically assume it's the gospel. I'm just glad they don't post the pay of people in my position that work for any agency in Orange or LA counties, I'd probably want to cry.

Posted by RacerX | reply to this comment
July 3, 2009 1:18 am

As a city employee, I understand my compensation is public information, but the UT has a responsibility to ensure the information they divulge is accurate. After 29 years of receiving this rag, I have cancelled my subscription. The UT is on its death bed and the time has come to let it go.

Posted by Jim | reply to this comment
July 3, 2009 7:10 am

If you eat my bread you wear my yoke. I know the President's salary, my Senator’s, Congressman, Governor, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs right down to the lowest Seaman's salary -- so why is it that your salary is sacrosanct? A retired Sherriff just lost a lawsuit last week – trying to keep her $200,000+ RETIREMENT PENSION from the public eye. If you work for the public, your pay is public. Clear? if you want privacy, work for a private concern.

Posted by Akamai | reply to this comment
July 3, 2009 9:39 am

I'm really tired of subscribing to the Union Tribune just to read the comics and get couupons. They should go out of business and be taken over by another paper or something. They go on and on about City, County, State employees just because they probably pay their employees two cents with no benefits and they are all mad and jealous. They really don't have good writers that write about any good subjects.

Posted by dg | reply to this comment
July 4, 2009 9:57 am

Hey Edgar and Grasca and Robert...like my salary and VESTED retirements so much you complain about it here?? well I like it too. and I am gonna keep it. I guess you all should have made some better choices in life. Now you can cry all you want, but the fact remains at the end of the day YOUR lives depend on the firefighters and police and paramedics that protect you everyday no matter what city or area you live in. I am proud of what I do . When an athlete can make millions for playing a game my choice to save your bitter lives is worth every penny. BTW I write this from my OWN Computer and NOT on Company TIME.

Posted by SD FIre Captain | reply to this comment
July 6, 2009 9:08 pm

City Worker: U-T Went Too Far

By Megan Sheffield, City Heights