Listen

Read

Watch

Schedules

Programs

Events

Give

Account

Donation Heart Ribbon

Avatar for collegegrad

( collegegrad )

Comments made by collegegrad

Do You Pay Extra Property Taxes? Mello-Roos: Who's Paying What (Video)

I don't think this is a fair and full characterization of Mello-Roos. When 100 new homes are added to a community, there is an instant burden to the existing infrastructure: schools, fire, police, roads, etc. Rather than having all of that increased cost imposed on developers as fees (which would add to the selling cost of that new home) developers made a pact with the devil and had the legislature create this new law allowing the infrasturcture burden to be passed directly to the home buyers as taxes for the next 40 years. Win-win for developers and the local government! Oh, somebody actually has to pay? For 40 years? Oops...

May 29, 2013 at 8:05 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

San Diego Is Tough On Bad Air

so...... who are these chronic violator businesses, where are the twenty sites and how do we see the list?? apparently putting them on this bureaucratic 'secret list' hasn't magically made them 'come clean'. pehaps it's time to try to shame them into compliance?

November 15, 2011 at 1:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

San Diego Business Owners Want Fair Play From Amazon

in response to 'teddychan':

amazon (and other mail order businesses) have been following federal law in collecting no state taxes. the courts have consistently so ruled for decades. california is in fact trying to impose NEW TAXES where they were not owed before. our state passed a NEW LAW this year to try and exploit a loophole in the federal court rulings that make a sales-tax-collection exception where the company has a physical presence in the state. this NEW LAW calls california-based 'online partners' with internet linking to the amazon website part of amazon. Come on now.

California may well be forced to close fire houses and libraries. let's lay the blame where it belongs, not on amazon who is in fact following decades of federal law but on our own statehouse. it's not amazon's job to pay modesto's teacher's or lompoc's policemen's salaries --- why should they, they're not even in our state!

August 18, 2011 at 10:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

San Diego Business Owners Want Fair Play From Amazon

Maybe the words 'fair play' in this title should be in quotations since it doesn't seem to go both ways. i don't hear amazon complaining that local stores should be made to bear the costs of shipping goods to my house so that they can be more competitive.

sales tax should not be imposed on amazon purchases because mail orders put very liitle burden on the local infrastructure. a local store DOES use the roads, sewer, city planning, street cleaning and especially police and firefighters. whatever services we recieve from our sales taxes are used a lot more by a local business than by a mail order shipper.

the federal courts have consistently ruled on the criteria for legally collecting sales taxes for many years. i'm sorry that our state is broken and spends more than it collects. our state government is desperate for easy fixes and is laying this legal burden on someone else rather than fixing its own mess.

August 12, 2011 at 10:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Business Fee That Funds Affordable Housing May Double

1) much of this piece is the position of 'the san diego housing commission.' would you explain who they are? are they the recipient of this linkage fee? a redevelopment agency? an advocate for the poor? a business lobbying org?

2) is 'the san diego county taxpayers association' really a business group as might be inferred from this story?

July 11, 2011 at 1:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Skipping School Costs San Diego Districts More Than $100 Million

while it is lamentable that an individual school does not take full advantage of potential income, i believe that the broad premise of this article is flawed. the argument just doesn't scale up for an entire school system. the funding of individual schools by the number of students actually in class (vs number enrolled) is merely an budget allocation methodology, not a way to increase the overall budget for education. in a given year, it's a zero sum game. over a period of years, what one school gains, another loses. i stongly suspect that the allotment for each child each day goes up and down each year based on the total education budget divided by the total expected attendance.

paying schools based on number enrolled instead of number present in class would merely decrease this allotment per student and remove incentive for schools to correct truant students.

June 28, 2011 at 8:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

New SDSU President Named

The irony of students complaining about a few hundred dollar tuition increase while purchasing a $3 cup of coffee is not lost on your listeners.

May 16, 2011 at 7:39 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Electric Cars Light Up New Owners, But Could Stress Power Grid

from the article:
“I was spending $74 a week to fill my SUV up, every single week,” said DeCamp. “That’s $290 a month for just gas. Just fuel.”

DeCamp figures he paid a bit more than $17 for the electricity to do the same amount of driving in the past few weeks."

-- by immediately following the '$290/mo' with this 'same amount of driving' statement you've left the listener with the impression that DeCamp has replaced a $290 gasoline bill with only $17 of electricity.

in fact, i believe that that the $17 figure is probably DeCamp's equivalency to the $74/week number, not the $290/mo. This is a nice savings and did not need to be embellished. Making simple assumptions (not given in the article) like $4/gal for gas, 20mi/gal for the SUV and 15 cents/kwh, this comes out close to the previous weekly gasoline expense, not the monthly.

Please be more careful with your figures. Please proof-read and fact-check a little better. i really rely on kpbs for news and i expect better than this.

May 12, 2011 at 8:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

A New Gold Rush Leaves A Mark In Southwestern States

"Plancarte and mine managers are pleased because the price of gold in the international market has risen by more than five times in the last decade. It’s going for about $1,400 an ounce. But in some parts of this mine, there’s gold worth even $2,000 and $3,000 an ounce, because it’s more concentrated within the rock."

Pure (24kt) gold is actually ~US$1500/oz and there's no such thing as 'more concentrated' gold that's worth $2k or $3k. Please fact-checks these articles.

May 10, 2011 at 7:25 a.m. ( | suggest removal )