山东痛风发作能不能吃草莓(济南尿酸高多久会引起痛风) (今日更新中)

SAN DIEGO, Calif. (KGTV) - Nearly six years after it passed, Proposition B will be in front of two courts this week, with the future of San Diego pension reform on the line.Prop B was on the ballot in June of 2012 and passed with 65% of the vote. It promised to solve San Diego's pension crisis by giving new City hires a 401(k) style retirement plan instead of a pension. The change went into effect for all city hires except police officers.Since then, it's been mired in legal challenges.Shortly after it passed, union leaders sued, arguing that any changes to union employment agreements have to be negotiated first before they're placed on a ballot. They said that then-Mayor Jerry Sanders violated that rule when he openly campaigned for the Proposition in 2012.In 2015, the State Labor Board agreed with the union claims.That ruling went to the California 4th District Court of Appeals, who overturned the Labor Board's findings in 2017.In 2018, the State Supreme Court reversed the 4th District's ruling. The Supreme Court sent the issue back to the lower courts to decide what an appropriate "remedy" would be to Sanders' improper campaigning."They did not say 'Overturn Prop B.' They could have," says Reform California's Carl DeMaio, who wrote Proposition B. "They said, 'Hey, district court, find out how you punish the City of San Diego for this violation.' What’s the punishment? A slap on the wrist, a speeding ticket?"The 4th District will hold an open session on Monday, March 11 to begin that process. DeMaio says if the District Court rules to overturn Prop B, he plans to appeal that decision."Do you think they’ll actually overturn the citizens initiative? If they do, we will counter-sue on the punishment phase," says DeMaio.Meanwhile, the US Supreme Court will also look into the Proposition this week. On Friday, they'll decide whether or not to hear a case based on the First Amendment. Supporters of Prop B say the California Supreme Court's ruling violated Mayor Sanders' First Amendment rights of free speech and his ability to openly support or oppose items on a ballot."The issue is whether for not elected officials have first amendment rights," says DeMaio. "Can an elected official actually give an opinion on a ballot measure? I think yes. Even if I disagree with that opinion, it is their constitutional right. He doesn’t lose his personal free speech rights to take positions once he's elected."The US Supreme Court will announce their decision on Monday, March 18th. 2515

SAN DIEGO (KGTV)- With the rainy season ahead, the City of San Diego is offering ways for residents to save money on their water bills by removing lawns and installing rain barrels. The City is offering .25 per square foot for lawns that are converted to turf that can capture rainfall for reuse. Homeowners that convert their lawn into drought resistant landscape can apply for financial rebates.Customers may receive  per gallon of barrel storage capacity for residential rainwater collecting up to 400 gallons or 0 per property. Rain barrels are a great way to conserve water and reuse for irrigation purposes as well as preventing pollution, according to city officials. Applications are available for Rainwater Harvest, to apply click here. For more information on the types of rebates and water conservation tips visit the City's website. 949

SAN DIEGO, Calif. (KGTV) -- Facing a steep surge of COVID-19 cases in California, Gov. Gavin Newsom said Sunday that he is shutting down bars in several counties across the state and recommending closures in others.Newsom made the announcement on Twitter hours after the state reported 5,972 new coronavirus cases on Saturday.San Diego County was not on the list of closures or recommended closures."NEW: Due to the rising spread of #COVID19, CA is ordering bars to close in Fresno, Imperial, Kern, Kings, Los Angeles, San Joaquin, and Tulare, while recommending they close in Contra Costa, Riverside, Sacramento, San Bernardino, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Stanislaus, & Ventura," Newsom tweeted at 12:17 p.m.On Saturday, Los Angeles County health officials reported "significant increases" in COVID-19 cases, including 2,169 newly confirmed cases and 23 additional deaths. The seven-day average of Los Angeles' daily new cases is more than 1,900; an increase of nearly 600 daily new cases from two weeks ago.State officials reported a total of 206,433 COVID-19 cases and 5,872 fatalities of June 26."We are actively monitoring COVID-19 across the state and working closely with counties where there are increased rates and concerning patterns of transmission," said Dr. Sonia Angell, the state's public health director. "Closing bars in these counties is one of a number of targeted actions counties are implementing across our state to slow the virus' spread and reduce risk."The recent surge as hit some areas of California hard. Imperial County, with a population of 175,000 people on the state’s border with San Diego and Mexico, was ordered to reimpose stay-home orders amid a surge in positive coronavirus tests.Imperial's positivity rate has averaged 23% in the last week, compared with 5.7 % percent statewide. Newsom said there is also a need to decompress the county's hospital system, which other counties have helped do by accepting patients."I noted a positivity rate over a 14-day period in the state of California at 5.3 percent. The positivity rate over a 14-day period in Imperial County is approaching 23 percent," Newsom said Friday.The Imperial Valley provides many of the vegetables in U.S. supermarkets during winter.In San Diego bars are fearful they're next.Roy Romero, CEO of Tivoli Bar and Grill (the oldest bar in San Diego County) said they just got back in the green after opening up two weeks ago."It's scary because we just got back," he said passionately. "I just hope and I keep saying, 'Wow man, I know they're going to close down again if people don't start doing the right thing.'"Stay with 10News for updates to this developing story.FACEBOOK REACTION TO SHUT DOWN 2716

SAN DIEGO (KGTV)- Many Americans say cell phone are their lifelines. But what happens when yours breaks? Whether for convenience or for price, third-party repair shops are the choice for many customers. Unfortunately, some Apple users with the latest phones say they're not able to go to third-party shops. Four years ago, Christopher McQueen said he found the perfect niche business. “People are always breaking their phones, late at night,” McQueen said.He is the owner of Mobile Cell Doctors. Any brand, any phone, any version. He will come to you and fix your phone.“To be able to fix your phone in 10 minutes, versus a 3-hour fiasco at Apple, it was a need that was definitely there,” McQueen said. He said he can fix any hardware problems, except on the most recent iPhone models - iPhone 8, 8 Plus and X.Just recently, iPhone 8 user Lucas Peckham went to McQueen to get his broken screen replaced. His choices were 0 with McQueen or 9 at the Apple Store. He chose the cheaper, more convenient option.Peckham said everything was flawless until one morning, he woke up to a phone with a frozen screen. He could not swipe, touch, type, or do anything with his device. Peckham said it happened after his phone automatically updated overnight, installing the Apple 11.3 Software.McQueen said he was suddenly inundated with calls from all of his previous iPhone 8 customers. “It’s been a nightmare,” McQueen said. He said he had fixed about 100 iPhone 8’s in the last six months. He suggested to his customers, to do what they hoped to avoid by going to him in the first place - go to the Apple Store. But Peckham said, when he showed Apple the problem, he was told, because he previously used a third-party repairman, they could not repair it. Instead, he had to replace it with a brand new screen for 0 - or buy a whole new phone. “I totally felt screwed,” Peckham said. With no other option, Peckham said he gave in, spending six hours at the Apple Store, and paying up the 0. “It was basically a way for Apple to create kind of a monopoly on the iPhone screen,” Peckham said. Last month, California became the 18th state to introduce a “Right to Repair” Bill, which would require electronics manufacturers to make repair information and parts available to owners and third-party repair shops.McQueen hopes this legislation passes, so mom-and-pop business owners like him also get to have a piece of the pie. “I would love to fix those,” McQueen said. “But until they release the software to run the phones that would allow third-parties to work on those devices, we can’t fix them.”10News spoke to Apple, who said they do work with Authorized third-party dealers that are not Apple Stores. Those specific repair shops have all the latest repair equipment and gadgets to fix all hardware and software problems.  2965

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A judge ordered California's attorney general to release police misconduct records predating Jan. 1, when new transparency legislation took effect.San Francisco Superior Court Judge Richard B. Ulmer, Jr. on Friday also rejected arguments by Attorney General Xavier Becerra that his office should not have to release records of local law enforcement.The legislation was designed to guarantee public access to disciplinary records involving investigations into officer shootings, use-of-force incidents and incidents involving officer misconduct.The tentative ruling was a win for the First Amendment Coalition and National Public Radio member KQED-FM, which sued Becerra's office for records under the legislation."Judge Ulmer's order sends the clear message that the Attorney General is not above California law," said David Snyder, the coalition's executive director.In response, Becerra's office said Friday it would release records from before 2019 but only those regarding Department of Justice officers. The office said in a statement that requiring the office to release records involving other departments "would result in duplication of efforts."The judge ordered the attorney general's office to meet with the coalition and KQED to work out the logistics of releasing records.Ulmer said the 1st District Court of Appeal had already decided that the law is retroactive. He also dismissed the argument that making the attorney general provide records of local law enforcement would be burdensome.Ulmer said lawmakers could not have been oblivious to the potential cost of carrying out the legislation, and "the people will likely be agnostic as to which tax-funded agency foots the bill." 1724

来源：资阳报