MIKE AGUIRRE'S RECORD AS SAN DIEGO CITY ATTORNEY

• REORGANIZED THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC INTEREST

Our first challenge was to build a City Attorney’s office to serve the public interest. The City Attorney would no longer be a self-serving excuse maker for City Hall wrongdoers.

City officials had sought and obtained the services of city attorneys to enable and aid officials to plan and commit frauds and, in some cases, even crimes. What’s worse, the attorneys did not care about the wrongdoing going on around them.

They were removed from office.

We have recruited, mobilized and maintained a formidable team of City attorneys devoted to doing what is best for San Diego.

On every floor of our office, our Internet page, and above my desk is this quote: INDEPENDENT CITY ATTORNEY.

The city attorney is to be elected by the people. This is a guarantee that the legal head of the government will be able to fearlessly protect the interests of all San Diego and not merely be an attorney appointed to carry out wishes of council or manager.

The quote is from voting materials used in the 1931 election when voters decided to have an elected City Attorney.

Like a lost artifact the independent role of City Attorney was buried under layers of special interest decay.

In a series of reports and seminars we have celebrated the wisdom of the eight San Diegans who put the elected City Attorney on the ballot in 1931.

On 26 April 2005 the City Attorney issued a 94-page historical report documenting the independent role of the City Attorney.

On 26 October 2005 one of the State’s foremost legal authorities issued an opinion supporting the City Attorney’s independent role.

On 7 August 2007 the City Attorney invited the legal community to his seminar at the County Bar on the role of the independent City Attorney.

In August 2007 the Charter Review committee consultant reported that Charter §40 did give the City Attorney “a free hand” to represent the City in Court.

Never has San Diego needed an independent City Attorney more than today; and never has the independence of the City Attorney been under attack more than today.

• PROTECTED PUBLIC INTEREST - RULE OF LAW

Five City officials stand indicted for alleged criminal conduct involving the pension. Others knowingly violated federal securities laws. A total of 37 were found to have violated legal duties. Council members participated in the unlawful transactions.

According to regulators, the City violated sewer replacement laws; clean water laws; storm drain laws; and water and sewer rate laws.

Violating the law was a way of life in City government. Obeying the law was considered a policy choice.

We broke our law violation addiction when the City Attorney quit enabling the violators.

• PROTECTED PUBLIC INTEREST - ILLEGAL PENSION DEBT

We learned members of the City Council voted to intentionally underfund the City’s pension obligations so that they could increase pension benefits but push off the costs associated with those increases into the future.

In November 2006 the SEC found City officials acted with the “intent to deceive, manipulate, or defraud.”

One investigator found the Council’s actions resulted in “an illegally funded pension system.”

This investigator found pension officials also “violated Section 1090” a California conflict of interest law.

The pension plans own lawyers found board members “breached their fiduciary duty.”

These lawyers also found evidence of “a conspiracy between the City and Unions to cause the Board members to breach their fiduciary duties x.”

Taxpayers face pension benefits of $6.844 billion. They face $1 billion of unfunded retirement health benefit IOU’s. A total of $8 billion.

People are paid more to retire than to work. Over 500 have pensions worth $1,000,000. The average public safety pension is $900,000.

We are trapped in a vicious structural deficit cycle. The City vacillates between underfunding the budget and underfunding the pension.

The SEC advised the City “would have difficulty funding its future annual pension contributions unless it obtained new revenues, reduced pension benefits, or reduced City services.”

The Wall Street Journal warned to sell bonds San Diego may pay a “moral hazard fee.”

Your City Attorney took effective action to break the structural deficit cycle by asserting the City’s legal rights against the illegal pension debt.

As Judge Jeffrey Barton wrote, “The legal principles the City uses to challenge the benefits in this action appear to be one of the few available mechanisms to do so under the remedies in the state court system.”

The court ruled against the City “despite the creative use of these principles and the excellent presentation of the case at trial by the City.”

The Council had failed to protect the people, “[P]revious inconsistent positions taken by the City before the filing of the cross-complaint raise significant obstacles to the City’s current effort to undo the remaining pension benefits.”

Our case to set aside the pension benefits, based on how they were granted is before the appellate court.
The people of San Diego need to win. I believe they will win.

We continue to pursue the Court case because justice has not yet been done, and, therefore the court has not yet completed its proper function.

A second court case focuses on shortcomings in the administration of the pension plan. The pension board gave away 8,000 service years at a cost to taxpayers of $146 million in violation of the Municipal Code. We are asking the court to set aside that gift.

We filed the case so our chance to take corrective action did not slip away.

We went after others responsible for the pension mess and have recovered $6 million.

On 6 February 2007 the City Attorney called for an end to the DROP program. The Mayor has agreed. This could save taxpayers more than $200 million.

We need to end the use of purchased credits for early vesting and early retirement.

Elected officials should give back service credit years.

The City Attorney has also called for labor negotiations to be in public and televised.

In February 2008 I proposed a plan to restore integrity to labor-management negotiations and end the back-room deals.

Coverage of federal pension and labor-management reform laws need to be extended to cities and city pensions. The City Attorney has issued two Interim Reports documenting this need.

Some limited progress has been made.

In 2004, the pension board’s tax lawyer advised that a City pension could not be given to a union president.

On 10 May 2006 I advised the pension board it could not grant a City pension to a union president not employed by the City. The board granted the pension anyway.

On 21 December 2007 the Internal Revenue Service ordered the City pension given to the union president to be stopped because it violated the law.

Certain Council members voted to spend $50,000 of taxpayer money to find a way to pay the union president a pension.

• PROTECTED THE PUBLIC INTEREST - THE ENVIRONMENT

The people of San Diego wanted to practice and promote responsible use of the earth’s ecosystems and resources so we, and future generations can enjoy our natural habitat.

On 15 April 2007 our office prepared an ordinance requiring recycling. It is now law.

On 29 February 2008 the City was given the green light to proceed with the suit to clean up the gas plume under Qualcomm.

I am proud to be endorsed by the Sierra Club.

• PROTECTED THE PUBLIC INTEREST - FIRE PREVENTION

On 5 November 2007 we issued a fire report discussing the legal requirements the City must meet to reduce fire risks.

In January 2008 we began work on fire prevention ordinances based on the Very High Fire Zone maps prepared by CALFIRE, required by state law. Shortly, we will issue another report on legal issues related to fire prevention.

• PROTECTED THE PUBLIC INTEREST - WATER SECURITY

San Diego could have started solving its water shortage problem 14 years ago. In 1994 the state Public Health Department told the City it could safely begin re-claiming water. Had we started then we would not have a water storage crisis today. I released the letter on 12 February 2008.

On 17 September 2007 I called for mandatory water conservation. The San Diego County Grand Jury endorsed the idea two weeks ago. A water conservation ordinance has been given to the Water Department. No action has been taken.

Without water reclamation, conservation, increased storage and desalination we cannot honestly certify that sufficient water exists to support large new housing projects, as required under state law.

WHY REELECT MIKE AGUIRRE

The above is my record of my service to the public interest.

To our critics we say better the occasional faults of a City Attorney trying to serve the public interest than the consistent misuse of the office by those servicing private, selfish interests.

In 1931 the editor of the Hillcrest News told his readers a yes vote for the new Charter with the elected City Attorney would “Give San Diego a New Deal.”

In 2004 you gave San Diego a “New Deal” when you restored the City Attorney’s office to its original purpose to fearlessly protect interests of all San Diego.

In 2008 you can give us the four years we need to make the restoration permanent.

Let us march on together till victory is won.