1. What is your view of how elected leaders won approval of first-ever trash collection fees on more than 200,000 single-family homeowners?
Elected leaders won approval for trash collection fees with a slick PR campaign. Should we be spending money on such an effort at all? No. Taxpayer money is reflexively wasted. For example, the city often and redundantly prints glossy, double-sided mailers that will likely end up in landfills with their toner cartridges. There is no regard for the environment. At the same time, officials lecture residents about sustainability.
Before asking more than 200,000 single-family homeowners to pay a new fee, leaders should slash wasteful spending and stand up to undue corporate influence in order to restore fiscal health and public trust. San Diegans are already paying too much to live here, we can’t afford it! This problem is only compounded by state laws thrust upon us like SB 79, which sell “affordability” as a pretext to pack us into our communities like sardines without proper infrastructure planning, such as electrical, sewer and certainly not parking.
2. What is your view of the imposition of parking fees at Balboa Park and do you think the mayor and council did enough to control costs before taking this step?
The imposition of parking fees is an aberration forced upon the public by a government desperate to close a structural budget deficit of over $100 million on revenue of $2.1 billion. Let’s call it what it is: a bailout by taxpayers. Our leaders failed to control costs before resorting to yet another fee on families, workers and visitors trying to enjoy one of San Diego’s greatest public assets. When government repeatedly reaches for new fees instead of scrutinizing existing spending, it reveals a deeper failure of leadership. We simply cannot afford the current approach.
3. Voters gave landslide approval in 2006 to a “managed competition” process in which some city services can be outsourced and strongly supported pension reforms for most city workers in 2012, but elected leaders have pursued neither policy in recent years. Would you?
Voters exercised common sense in 2006 by approving managed competition, and the question itself correctly notes that it passed by a “landslide.” This means there was a clear mandate from the people that cannot be ignored! Elected leaders should not ignore voter-approved reforms simply because they are politically inconvenient. Managed competition must be instituted immediately to avert a looming bankruptcy. Merit-based contracts that are competitively bid will improve services, reduce costs and maintain accountability. The same is true for pension reform. We also must confront the growth of government bureaucracy, especially layers of middle management whose long-term pension obligations place increasing strain on future budgets. If we want to protect essential services, we must be honest about what the city can and cannot afford.
4. What is the single issue you feel deserves more attention?
The single issue that deserves more attention is planning. In too many areas, there is a complete lack of it. From bicycle lanes to nowhere to replacing trash cans that were upgraded only months earlier, the pattern is the same: poor planning, wasted money and diminished public confidence. The core function of government is to spend taxpayer dollars wisely. That requires discipline, vision, frugality and genuine responsiveness from City Hall. When government plans properly, quality of life improves. Read more about our S.A.F.E. initiative on sddistrict2.com and remember to vote Paul Suppa, Esq., for District 2 on June 2. Thank you for the opportunity to be of service.
Go to sddistrict2.com for more information about the candidate.