MATT POTTER, San Diego Reader
October 30, 2008
Loony
One of the oddest political websites this season is spikemike.com, a full-on — if not particularly artful — attack on San Diego city attorney Mike Aguirre. At the top of the page is a video showing a couple and their small dog watching Aguirre on TV. As Aguirre says “I could have had the support of the powerbrokers if I’d gone along with their financial scheme,” the pup goes ballistic, yapping at the screen until Aguirre’s visage switches to a commercial for Aguirre’s GOP foe Jan Goldsmith. A deep-voiced announcer then intones, “Sometimes, you have to go with your instincts. Spike Mike.” A line at the bottom of the page says, “Not authorized by a candidate or committee controlled by a candidate” but doesn’t offer a clue to its sponsors.
As it turns out, the site is bankrolled by the San Diego County Lincoln Club, a group of pro-development, Republican business types. According to state disclosure forms, the group paid $9500 to Sacramento consultant Mike Madrid to gather anti-Aguirre hits from the Union-Tribune and throw up the seemingly amateurish site. “There was a lot of Aguirre stuff to work with,” says Madrid, explaining the relatively high price he charged.
Among those helping to finance the Lincoln Club’s endeavors in recent weeks, including the anti-Aguirre effort: talk show host Roger Hedgecock ($2500); Sempra Energy ($100,000); and Suncoast Financial Mortgage Corporation ($10,000), the company of David Malcolm, who pled guilty in April 2003 to a felony conflict-of-interest charge arising from a South Bay power plant deal he secretly engineered while a port commissioner."
This San Diego Reader article is HERE.
MATT POTTER, San Diego Reader
October 22, 2008
Where Are We?
A week ago Saturday, as President George W. Bush and other federal officials hastened to bail out the U.S. economy, Democratic San Diego city attorney Mike Aguirre, facing his own uphill battle against his better-financed GOP opponent Jan Goldsmith, sat down to lend perspective to the sell-off on Wall Street and to how it might affect traditionally Republican San Diego. He also reflected on some radical moves — including putting the City’s pension fund into bankruptcy — that he insists the City will eventually have to make in the face of the predicted long-term financial squeeze besetting the world.
In terms of the global financial meltdown, what do you think about the future of property and sales taxes here? Is that going to be a problem?
Well, I think it’s a problem because we’ve allowed the [city] pension [fund] — the present value of future benefits of the pension — to be in excess of $7 billion. The assets are now somewhere below $4 billion, so the deficit has got to be somewhere in the neighborhood of $2 billion to $2.5 billion, maybe as high as $3 billion. With the shrinking property taxes and the shrinking sales taxes and the shrinking hotel taxes and the increasing liabilities of the pension plan and the backlog of infrastructure, we have a combination of the worst factors, which, you know, many people have been concerned about, been warning about — such as myself and Diann Shipione and Pat Shea. And now the City finds itself in that situation, and they’ve stuck their head in the sand. No one wants to get the information out. Even people that are with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns, they recognized the crisis that they were in — because they’d gone long on debt — and they took action.
Here in San Diego, we’re doing nothing. We’re just letting the situation get further and further out of hand. That’s one of the reasons that I’ve asked that a full accounting be made, right now, of exactly where we are with the pension deficits and then the plan be adopted to reduce the distributions to levels that are proportional to the ratio of assets to liabilities now. ’Cause what’s happening, as with all Ponzi schemes — and there’s no question the pension plan is a Ponzi scheme, because of the 50,000 years of credit that were created with no funding — you’re moving new money in to pay for the old liabilities, and pushing off the amortization into future years, and then reamortizing every year the losses.
We need to really look at whether we have to put the pension plan into reorganization. That needs to be done now, while there’s still good assets there. The pension is paying out about $400 million a year now. And that is a cash drain that has been paid for with money that should have gone to streets and roads and bridges and securing water supplies, having to be able to put out fires, and things of that sort. All the things that the government does to empower people have been curtailed, all the things the government does to protect people have been curtailed, except when it comes to the pension plan. And there we’ve built a Taj Mahal of pension benefits.
To read the remainder of this San Diego Reader article click HERE.
RON CARRICO, San Diego Daily Transcript
October 27, 2008
Aguirre vs. Does it matter?
Once again The San Diego Union-Tribune is putting an op-ed on the front page of its "Our Region" section. On Monday, Oct. 20, the article asks, "Pop quiz: Name the judge that is trying to unseat San Diego City Attorney Michael Aguirre. Follow-up question: Does it matter?"
In other words, anyone but Michael Aguirre. This is another blatant editorial comment as the U-T continues its constant criticism attempting to unseat a city attorney who truly represents the people and not the special interests.
No question Mike Aguirre is a pain in the neck -- a prickly, contentious and divisive guy. But he is our guy! He is a champion for the people's interests -- not the usual downtown crowd that runs so much of our city politics. You know the insiders who pick and support politicians like their last former judge, Dick Murphy, in becoming mayor of San Diego.
Before electing "Does it matter" to replace Mr. Aguirre, we must assess whether he has done a good job and whether "Does it matter" would do a better job.
First, look at the real candidate: Judge Jan Goldsmith. To begin with, recall that the insiders wanted Superior Court Judge Dick Murphy and helped elect him mayor. Unfortunately, he resigned after the pension debacle and his part in issuing the ballpark bonds on fraudulent information became known -- and just days after Time magazine named Murphy one of three worst mayors in the United States.
So a judge as a city attorney you ask? After Judge Murphy we should have second thoughts. Here are a few facts about Jan Goldsmith. He recently moved to San Diego from Coronado. After being mayor of Poway he served three terms in the state legislature and then lost the race for state treasurer. Thereafter he was appointed to a judgeship in El Cajon where he joined his wife, Christine Goldsmith, on the bench.
Now if you want a measure of Jan Goldsmith's political juice and connections -- having the governor appoint two judges in the same family means heavy political connections. With political connections come responsibilities and IOUs.
Being an attorney, I have appeared before Judge Goldsmith many times -- my personal opinion is that he is a good judge. Certainly not outspoken but reliable, fair and predictable. Basically he is plain vanilla; cautious and conservative and for years, he was hidden away in the smallest courtroom in El Cajon.
With respect, I think Judge Goldsmith would be a city attorney who follows the orders of the mayor and or City Council. Which raises an interesting point -- as Mike Aguirre stresses, the city attorney is elected to be separate and apart from the mayor and City Council. Since the powers that be chose Judge Goldsmith to replace the fervently independent peoples' advocate, Michael Aguirre, will Jan Goldsmith independently fight to protect the citizens of San Diego? Not a chance, is my answer.
In 1931 an election pamphlet stated, "The City Attorney is to be elected by the people ... to fearlessly protect the interests of all San Diego and not merely be an attorney appointed to carry out the wishes of the council or mayor."
Under San Diego City Charter §40 the city attorney is "the chief legal adviser of, and attorney for the City and all Departments ..." In the 77 years that have passed since voters decided to elect the city attorney, the city charter has not changed to have a mayor or council appoint the city attorney.
Meanwhile, what has Mike Aguirre accomplished besides annoying the official and the unofficial power structure of San Diego? First of all, he has worked hard to correct many of the problems caused by the previous eight years of a lap dog city attorney.
Also, under Aguirre's leadership the city attorneys stopped the Sunroad development and forced the developer to remove two floors that were a hazard to flight operations at Montgomery field and violated FAA guidelines. In DeAnza Cove HOA v. City, the court rejected plaintiffs' $48 million claim for relocation costs. The city was dismissed from a lawsuit that sought to stop the transfer of the Mount Soledad War Memorial to the federal government. The city attorney in City v. Metropolitan Correctional Center recovered an $807,485 payment for under-billed water fees. The San Diego Superior Court awarded the city of San Diego $4.4 million in attorney's fees as a result of prevailing in the remaining claim filed by South Bay developer Roque De La Fuente II, which was dismissed this past June. Also, in Border Business Park v. City, the California Court of Appeal overturned a 2001 $94.5 million verdict against the city. Along with that, the city attorney is still pursuing setting aside the multi-billion dollar pension deficit caused under the blind eye of the prior city attorney -- a lap dog of the mayor and City Council.
So the bottom line is, do we want the proven watchdog champion of the people's interest, Mike Aguirre? Or do we want "Does it matter" -- plain vanilla former judge Goldsmith to answer the call of a few IOUs?
It matters. A lot.
Carrico is a San Diego attorney and can be e-mailed at ron.carrico@sddt.com.
WILL CARLESS, Voice of San Diego
October 20, 2008
As Race Draws to a Close, Aguirre Makes an Issue of Goldsmith's Political Past
Vince Hall, vice president of public affairs and communications at Planned Parenthood of San Diego & Riverside Counties, doesn't agree with the challenger's assertion that he was a free-thinking legislator.
Hall said Goldsmith came to Planned Parenthood for support in 1992 during his first state race when he was battling with Connie Youngkin, a militant anti-abortion activist, for the Republican nomination. He said the group contributed independent expenditures to Goldsmith's campaign and mustered thousands of pro-choice Republican women voters who helped sail Goldsmith to victory.
It was the first time the local San Diego affiliate of the organization had committed independent expenditures in a Republican primary, Hall said. He said it chose to support Goldsmith because he had completed a questionnaire that showed he was pro-choice and would help push the organization's agenda.
He didn't.
Instead, for his first three years, Goldsmith was absent at many of the votes Planned Parenthood deemed vital to its cause. Then, in 1997, Goldsmith voted against the organization's position on every one of the 13 pieces of legislation Planned Parenthood supported.
"I've never had a conversation with the man about what is it that happened when he was flying 20,000 feet over Fresno on his way to the capital that his core philosophy on one of the key political issues of our time turned 180 degrees," Hall said.
Goldsmith said he doesn't want to talk about abortion issues because they have nothing to do with the city attorney's race.
But Hall, whose organization has endorsed Aguirre, pointed out that the city has several ordinances, such as a "bubble ordinance" that protects women on their way to an abortion clinic, that are the city attorney's responsibility to protect and that concern a woman's right to choose.
And, while Goldsmith doesn't like to talk about it, the abortion issue from the early 90s also gives valuable insight into the challenger's credibility when it comes to his pre- and post-election stances. While abortion may be a tangential issue in the city attorney's race, the ability of a candidate to keep his promises is not.
To read the remainder of this Voice of San Diego article click HERE.
GLT
September 11, 2008
The Debate Debate
City attorney candidate Jan Goldsmith has cancelled on at least three recent debates or candidate's forums citing scheduling conflicts. The cancellations have led incumbent City Attorney Mike Aguirre to claim that Goldsmith is shying away from public confrontations with him.
The city attorney challenger canceled on a debate scheduled for last night at the Coalition of Neighborhood Councils. Dwayne Crenshaw, executive director of the group said Goldsmith's campaign called about a week ago to cancel.
"They said he had double-booked his schedule and apologized," Crenshaw said.
Goldsmith also recently canceled on a debate that was to be hosted in early October by the local chapter of Common Cause, a national political advocacy organization. Jeanne Brown, San Diego organizer for Common Cause, said the debate was agreed to by Goldsmith's campaign in July, but a month or so later the campaign called to say Goldsmith couldn't make it.
"The woman who called was very abrupt and just said she had a conflict," Brown said..
To read the remainder of this Voice of San Diego article click HERE.
GLT Editorial
September 11, 2008
'The Garden at This Skunk Party'
City Attorney Michael Aguirre may be the most misunderstood and underappreciated elected official in San Diego.
Aguirre endures weekly lashings in The San Diego Union-Tribune, and he’s upset the establishment and lost the support of once-loyal allies (including labor unions and some longtime Democrats).
Every now and then, it takes an objective source to put something, or in this case someone, into perspective; cue the Wall Street Journal, the country’s most prestigious financial newspaper.
In a Sept. 6 editorial titled “A San Diego Retirement” the WSJ praised Aguirre, calling our City Attorney “the garden at this skunk party,” and lauded his efforts to overturn illegal pension benefits to unionized public workers.
“Taxpayers … need a rabble-rouser like Mr. Aguirre willing to stand up to union interests,” the editorial stated. “The San Diego attorney faces a tough re-election battle in November, but he’s setting off an alarm that voters across America need to hear.”
Aguirre’s lawsuit, which was tossed out of trial court and is now under appeal, could reverse $900 million in illegal pension benefits which were approved in 1996 and in 2002, and make a significant dent in the $1.2 billion pension deficit taxpayers will shoulder for years to come.
Crumbling under the deficit is the city’s infrastructure, public safety and public services (libraries, municipal pools, etc.)
Despite Aguirre’s efforts, he’s become one of the least popular elected officials in America’s Finest City; less popular even than the “derelict politicians” (as the WSJ referred to them) – including our own Council member Toni Atkins and Council President Scott Peters – who continued to underfund the pension, shaming and nearly bankrupting the city, and who caused the city to lose its bond rating.
Aguirre isn’t one to stay quiet; in no uncertain language, he’s publicly pointed out the fraud and corruption carried out by our elected officials. And, to be fair, at times, he’s overstepped his boundaries (most notably when he called for an evacuation of the city during last year’s wildfires).
To read the remainder of this GLT article click HERE.
ANDREW DONOHUE, Voice of San Diego
September 8, 2008
'The Garden at This Skunk Party'
San Diego's political scene was buzzing this weekend over this Wall Street Journal editorial praising City Attorney Mike Aguirre for his battle against public employee pensions.
To read the remainder of this Voice of San Diego article click HERE.
Wall Street Journal
September 6, 2008
A San Diego Retirement
"Taxpayers ..... need a rabble-rouser like Mr. Aguirre willing to stand up to union interests."
To read the remainder of this Wall Street Journal article click HERE.
KATHRYN S. BURTON, Letter to The Daily Transcript
September 4, 2008
City Attorney's Office Well Staffed
I am writing in response to Dan Coffey's vitriolic editorial "Aguirreland," (The Daily Transcript, Aug. 28, 2008). Contrary to his statements, I had been a lawyer since 1984 in another state where I worked both in the public and private sector. I did take time after passing the California Bar to raise my family before re-entering the work force -- as do many other attorneys with family obligations.
Observing San Diego City Hall for many years, I saw a city bureaucracy that served the special interests first and the citizens last. According to the Kroll Report, the San Diego City Attorney's office helped perpetuate the city's pension crisis in which hundreds of millions of dollars of pension benefits were granted to city employees without funding at the actuarially required rate. The former City Attorney himself, along with three veteran Assistant and Deputy City Attorneys, were determined to have acted with wrongful intent or negligently in the fulfillment of their responsibilities to the city.
Upon the election of City Attorney Aguirre, I welcomed the opportunity to participate in transforming the City Attorney's office into a municipal law firm dedicated to the public interest.
We ended the archaic practice of only promoting attorneys from the Criminal Division with no civil advisory or litigation experience to practice in specialized areas of the Civil Division. We conducted nationwide searches to locate and hire civil attorneys with expertise in their respective legal fields. Many of these Deputy City Attorneys have LLMs, Masters in Business Administration or finance, or other advanced degrees and certifications in addition to their Juris Doctorate. We hired attorneys with legal expertise in public finance, land use, and redevelopment -- areas of law basically ignored until this administration.
Importantly, we endeavored to hire attorneys who exhibited a commitment to serving the public interest in their past employment. These attorneys bring over 800 years of legal experience to the city of San Diego.
We have significantly increased the number of female litigators in a historically male dominated area of the law and have equal numbers of men and women as Chief Deputy City Attorneys.
And, unlike Dan Coffey's world view which would penalize attorneys who take time to raise their families, we have afforded attorneys like myself the opportunity to resume their careers after a break in legal service.
The city of San Diego faces many challenges in the future. I am honored to be part of a new City Attorney's office that has reformed past bad practices and is staffed with capable attorneys who truly serve the public interest.
Bob Jellison, Letter to the San Diego Union-Tribune
August 30, 2008
Shoddy Editorial Writing
In paragraph after paragraph the August 29th Union-Tribune editorial titled “Shoddy Lawyering” accuses City Attorney Mike Aguirre of providing bad legal advice and doing “shabby legal work.” Then near the end of their editorial they point out that, because of Aguirre’s actions, “the mayor must resume talks with the unions and follow the rules spelled out in the managed competition law adopted by voters.”
So, the Union-Tribune editorial board is saying that, because of Mike Aguirre’s “shabby legal work” the Mayor will have to follow the law?
Requiring the mayor to obey the law may sound like a novel concept to the Union-Tribune editorial writers, but that is what the citizens of San Diego expect from their City Attorney, and is exactly why they should re-elect Mike Aguirre.
East County Magazine
September 2008
City Attorney Mike Aguirre Takes Action on Wildfire, Water & Energy Issues
In an exclusive issue with East County Magazine, San Diego City Attorney Mike Aguirre discusses lawsuits and other actions to protect our region from wildfires, assure a reliable water supply, and compel San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) to meet legal requirements for renewable energy production.
Q: What compelled you to file a lawsuit against SDG&E over the recent wildfires that devastated East County and San Diego?
A: We’ve brought a lawsuit against SDG&E for two reasons. One, because our investigation to our satisfaction, and to anyone’s satisfaction that would look at it objectively, found that SDG&E failed to maintain its power lines in a safe condition – and that caused the fires. We were pleased to see that was confirmed by Cal-Fire. http://www.fire.ca.gov/fire_protection/fire_protection_firereports.php
Q: What do you hope to accomplish through the lawsuit?
A: We are hoping to recover about $45 million from SDG&E…The second part is by holding them accountable, they will take action now to do the brush management and the equipment improvement needed to prevent future fires [caused by SDG&E power lines].
Q: What is the status on the lawsuit?
A: We’ve already had several hearings. The respective parties are organizing now. In addition to our case, there are cases filed by a number of homeowners. There are a number of suits, including one class action. That would apply to homeowners in a similar area, similarly situated.
To read the remainder of this East County Magazine article click HERE
David Washburn, Voice of San Diego
August 21, 2008
Mike is Going to Harvard
San Diego City Attorney Mike Aguirre, along with attorneys general from California and Illinois, will go in front of a panel of judges at Harvard Law School next month to find out where their cases against subprime mortgage lender Countrywide Financial will be heard.
Aguirre and the other prosecutors have sued Countrywide -- and its parent Bank of America -- alleging a variety of deceptive lending practices by Countrywide, specifically in their dealings with subprime borrowers.
"San Diego is being hit very hard by foreclosures, and we are helping to play a role on the national level to bring justice to the borrowers," Aguirre said Thursday.
To read the remainder of this Voice of San Diego article click HERE
Mike Aguirre, Voice of San Diego
July 31, 2008
Mike's Turn
Contrary to the premise of Mr. Toscano's commentary (7.30.08 Voice of San Diego.Org), the San Diego City Attorney's Office is not seeking to create a foreclosure sanctuary for all subprime mortgage borrowers. Instead, we are aiming to assist only those persons who were the victims of predatory lending practices. Our lawsuit will create a forum in which both the lender and borrower will be given the opportunity to negotiate a mutually agreeable loan workout program based in equity and fairness. -- Mike Aguirre, 7.31.08 Voice of San Diego.Org.
To read the remainder of this Voice of San Diego article click HERE
David Washburn, Voice of San Diego
July 29, 2008
Aguirre Nets Another Pension-Related Settlement
San Diego City Attorney Michael Aguirre has settled another of his lawsuits against firms retained by the city before and during the pension meltdown.
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, the city's former bond counsel, has agreed to pay $2.88 million to settle a case filed by Aguirre in 2005, which alleged that the San Francisco-based firm failed the city by not discovering problems with the pension fund sooner.
To date, Aguirre said he has recovered a net of more than $9 million from outside lawyers, accountants and consultants somehow involved in the pension crisis. -- David Washburn, 7.29.08 Voice of San Diego.Org.
To read the remainder of this Voice of San Diego article click HERE.
