Where Indy racers fear to drive
Allow me to propose a way to resolve our city’s budget crisis, fully fund education, and get a pretty good start on retiring the national debt. Let’s just enforce the traffic laws on city streets and use the fines to pay the bills. Perhaps a flippant overstatement of the financial benefits, but a deadly serious subject nonetheless.
There can be no disagreement that speeding on city streets is epidemic. When was the last time you saw somebody actually come to a full stop before executing a right on red? How about red lights and stop signs? And God help you if you happen to be a pedestrian in a crosswalk. Lest anyone think I exaggerate, consider the recent tragic and appalling story of the couple, one killed and the other seriously injured in a crosswalk near UCSD by a red light runner ” a story that is sadly replicated too many times throughout an average year here in San Diego. The list is endless and the consequences too sad to contemplate.
Also endless is the list of benefits that would derive from wider compliance to traffic laws” enhanced public safety at the top and reduced accidents with a corresponding reduction in insurance premiums, to name just a couple.
I know the police department has plenty of other high priority items on their agenda, but it seems to me that we need to step up to this one. I suggest a good place to start would be Governor Drive between I-805 and Genesee Avenue, where, on an average day, most Indy 500 contestants would fear to venture.
Joseph J. Andrilla, University City

Call for a truce and working together
It is time for University City residents to get together around political issues that they do agree about. The Regents Road bridge dispute will be settled in the courts. Let’s put that aside now to focus on other local issues of concern, such as: the misguided plan to use Miramar as a dual use airport, the overdevelopment of North University City such as the four gigantic condominium towers, and the expansion of the Westfield Shopping Center, the need for additional fire stations and the goal of improving our local schools and library services.
I do hope that we can call a truce in the skirmishing over the bridge. I must point out to M. J. Schuster and the other bridge proponents who have written letters to the Golden Triangle News and the Union-Tribune, that ad hominem attacks of bridge opponents as “spoiled children” or NIMBYs” is unfair and counterproductive. Let’s stop the name-calling and organize together where we do have agreement.
Let’s also desist from blanket condemnation or sycophantic praise of our local politicians. We must take the issues one by one in determining whether we agree or disagree with a political figure. I strongly disagree with Scott Peters’ decision about the Regents Road bridge and just as strongly support his position against the “trestles” toll road. I thought Jerry Sanders was dead wrong in his support of the bridge on Tuesday, Aug. 1, but on Friday, Aug. 4, I found myself cheering his quick and decisive action against the “gay bashing” at Balboa Park.
As to M. J. Schuster’s sensible proposal to work together to keep a commercial airport out of Miramar, when and where do we start? Sign me up.
Charlie Pratt, University City

Which airport is safer?
Jason Wells’ review of the airport problem is the best I have read to date (“Campaigns coalesce,” UC/Golden Triangle News, June 22, page 3). Factors, I believe, our citizens need to face well before Nov. 7 are:
1) Can San Diego "ever" get enough water and sewer processing for another million residents, in spite of airport needs ” and on top of our ridiculous funding problems?
2) Marines have always been the most adaptable of all our military and they could move to Yuma now with the defense quarter trillion budget! They did at El Toro!
3) Where are the facts about which airport is safer (not just noisier), Lindbergh or Miramar, for residents ” after millions spent on "studies"?
Walt Tice, Pacific Beach

Smoking ban not a priority
The new and much-heralded ordinance banning smoking in parks and at the beach is undermined by none other than our city staff.
Despite the good intentions of the City Council, a police officer was on TV over Labor Day weekend announcing that he decided that enforcing the ordinance was “not a good use of taxpayers’ money.” He said that he had directed his officers not to enforce the ordinance.
So I wasn’t surprised to see smokers light up on the sand.
Certainly the police need to prioritize law enforcement, but to announce that nobody will be cited for violation of a law isn’t helpful.
Bill Collins, Pacific Beach

Comparing Kroll, Police Compensation Study
The mayor, city attorney, city council and citizens of San Diego were appalled by the cost of the Kroll investigation. Was it really necessary to spend $20 million on such an investigation? Was the city overcharged? The mayor has retained a company to do a comprehensive study of compensation for city employees. What will the final cost of this study be and is it necessary?
Twenty million dollars was a lot of money to spend on the Kroll investigation, but where would we be without it? We still would not have financial reports capable of being completed, the IRS would revoke the tax-exempt status of the pension system and the city would be forced by the IRS to pay tens of millions of dollars back into the pension system. The bottom line is the city paid $20 million for the investigation so the city could “move forward.”
“Moving forward” is what the mayor is claiming to be doing about police retention with his salary study. Mayor Sanders has allotted $250,000 for a comparison of take-home pay for city employees as compared to other municipalities. However, the hidden costs of this survey will far surpass the price of the Kroll report.
Despite already being down nearly 200 officers (10 percent of the entire force), a number that is increasing at an average of 17 per month, Mayor Sanders refuses to negotiate with the SDPOA to make any mid-year adjustments to stem the departure of the officers. Instead, the mayor says he will wait until next year to do anything about the contracts imposed on the officers and their exodus.
At the rate of 17 officers leaving per month, the SDPD will be down an additional 204 officers this time next year as we wait for the compensation study and meet and confer process. Although not all of those officers will be leaving for other agencies, they will all have to be replaced (eight officers left for other agencies in July). It is estimated to cost $500,000 to train a journeyman officer, which equates to $102 million in training expenses to the city just to maintain our current critically understaffed levels, let alone filling the nearly 200 vacant positions. For the sake of argument, should you only count the officers leaving for other agencies, the cost is $48 million (in addition to the $36 million for the 72 officers that went to other agencies last year). Either way you look at it, the cost far exceeds the tab for the Kroll report.
Matt Dobbs, police officer, El Cajon