Comments so far on this story:

1. Seagull 1 wrote on October 16, 2007 9:15 PM:
"That was a very poignant commentary on the war being waged in City Hall in the last few months. I think your juxtaposition of Aguirre v. Fred Sainz was interesting. In case it was lost on the general readership; in my opinion, this was the voice editorial staff’s way of illustrating subtly their belief that the PR staff of the mayor has great sway (perhaps too much) over the tactical course of this administration. This point has been echoed time and again subtly by every senior manager who has left this administration. It is not news, and is widely recognized by those who follow city politics and in that regard, it is a fair criticism of Sainz that he has allowed his humongous personality to overshadow that of his political master."

2. Seagull 2 wrote on October 16, 2007 9:15 PM:
"This speaks volumes about a mayor who openly admits he is not a politician and one who prefers to manage outside of the limelight. It exposes the mayor’s inability to enforce his will, his personality and his worldview on the City in this time of need. The mayor is a good man but a leader he is not. Perhaps the Mayor should recognize this short coming and equally important, perhaps Sainz should recognize his failure as a PR person and his true inner desire to come out of the closet as the aspiring politician that he is. However, what is fundamentally lost in this commentary is that it misses what is truly being presented to the voters in this election cycle."

3. Seagull 3 wrote on October 16, 2007 9:16 PM:
"The voters in a sense are being forced to write the last chapter of a sordid multi-year affair that began with the second to last scandal in the late 1970’s, and resulted in a culture of expedience installed by Pete Wilson that culminated in a culture of incompetence under Dick Murphy. Today the voters are faced with a decision. Barring a viable third candidate, the voters decision is between, Mike Aguirre and the Mayor. Mike Aguirre is a brash, megalomaniac unable to cope with the fact that he may not be the answer to all things wrong in the City. Mr. Aguirre can not accept that he may not be able to write the final chapter in his words, according to his doctrine and condemning people that he has tried and convicted in his own beautiful mind."

4. Seagull 4 wrote on October 16, 2007 9:16 PM:
"Conversely, the Mayor has proven to be a shy unassuming man afraid to say what he really thinks and follow his heart. Unfortunately, there is currently no good solution, and only a choice between hope and a fait accompli. Right now, I can only pray that the voters will choose hope over what certainly will be a disaster."

5. Posted wrote on October 16, 2007 10:49 PM:
"Mr. Aguirre is not acting as the City Attorney. He is acting as a Plaintiff's attorney (please see his October 10 press conference for verification). He is incredibly conflicted by insisting on both providing (alleged) legal advice to City Departments, while also accusing those departments of being corrupt on the items he/they claim to be advising on. This is unacceptable. If the role is to investigate City Departments, then those Departments need their own counsel."

6. Joe wrote on October 16, 2007 11:06 PM:
"Is there anyone out there who can save us? Golding/Mcgrory, then Murphy/Uberuaga and now Sanders/Aguirre. Just when we think we've hit rock bottom, a couple more genius' come along and lower the bar another couple of notches. How much must we endure? If the citizens, city employees and the bond markets (among many others)are angry and full of disbelief, who are these people working for?"

7. Kevin wrote on October 16, 2007 11:10 PM:
"Sorry, I'm choosing sides. Your editorial carries the journalistic conceit of "both sides" of an issue to a woefully misleading conclusion. Mayor Sanders has proven to be dishonest and incompetent. He doesn't remember signing the letter to Bersin asking for help on Sunroad. Right. Before that he didn't remember going to a fundraiser sponsored by the owner of Sunroad. Right. With a memory like that maybe he can replace Bill Kolender as sheriff. One final thought, Ron Saathoff is still head of the firefighters union. Who will be his candidate for city attorney? It won't be Mike Aguirre. His candidate for mayor? Probably good ole' Jer. Nough said."

8. kevin wrote on October 17, 2007 4:20 AM:
"Who elected Fred Sainz? And why is he so easily substituted for the Mayor? I don't recall his name on the ballot and the fact that Sanders continues to subject SD to his rhetoric is offensive. The people elected Mike Aguirre, not Fred Sainz...this editorial is insulting to the democratic process."

9. Kathi Ward wrote on October 17, 2007 4:41 AM:
"The Mayor has finally realized that there is no normality dealing with a bipolar meglomaniac. Just none at all. Hopefully Aguirre will never be elected anywhere for any position. He is much too conflicted regarding his duties. No good comes from that and the citizens continue to pay the price."

10. Kevin wrote on October 17, 2007 7:45 AM:
"Seagull, I suppose in your lights looney Bob Filner (and HE IS A fairly certifiable loon) is no better than Duke Cunningham? Well for all his many faults, Bob hasn't ripped off the treasury or been bought off. The inability of the editorial writers and readers like you to apprehend the material differences between dishonest and deceitful politicians and the damage they do -- public officials like Sanders, Saathoff, Inzunza, and Zucchet and the genuine maddogs who try to enforce the law -- aka Aguirre, Eliot Sptizer -- is baffling. Equating Aguirre's deficiencies with Sanders, Sainz & Saathoff's fundamental dishonesty, is like telling a firefighter to go away because he has bad table manners."

11. LCb wrote on October 17, 2007 8:06 AM:
"There's more than one LC, thus LCb. Aguirre on KUSI this morning again accused the city of guilt in the La Jolla landslide issue, calling the mayor corrupt here as with Sunroad, (before giving a list of things he says city govt is guilty of). The city may have some percentage of guilt, but I expect those affected to prove it in court (or settle); I don't want the city atty feeding them their case. Aguirre never changed sides when he became city atty; he is still the trial atty battling city govt - from within."

12. Larry wrote on October 17, 2007 8:28 AM:
"The city is in a tunnel with no end in sight. Fred Sainz has Jerry Sanders wrapped around his little pinkie. Sanders is too weak to take charge and fire the guy and Sainz has too much ego and ambition to do the right thing and quit. Steve Francis? The city is not a company and a CEO is not a mayor. He'd be a disaster. Donna Frye? Her history proves that she would be unable to rally people and lead them. Denise Ducheny has the experience and ability, but so far no word if she's willing to take on the challenge."

13. lee wrote on October 17, 2007 9:01 AM:
"We have had a number of years of disapointment from our city leaders. It continues still today with the currant set of clowns. Next June neither will get my vote. I'm to the point of any body but Mike or Jerry, they have failed to meet our expectations. We could have a new Council, new Mayor, new City Attorney. We need to pick carefully to get all this incompetence behind us."

14. Seagull wrote on October 17, 2007 9:13 AM:
"Kevin, I will just say that I think I was equally critical of the two. Criticizing a Mayor for being unable to lead strikes at the core of his responsibility. As does questioning the objectiveness of an Attorney. The point of my comments was to illustrate that the citizens are faced with no good choice. (In my mind Francis lacks both the charisma and knowledge to do the job). Your feelings about the corruptness of the Mayor are the result of the City Attorney's and Donna Frye's political machinations and nothing else, otherwise, a higher authority (eg. district attorney, or attorney general would be prosecuting them). My point was to say that the Mayor's character flaw is far easier to overcome then the City Attorney's. This is evidenced by the Mayor's ability to recognize his failures and Aguirre's ability to recognize only see corruption when someone disagrees with him."

15. TY wrote on October 17, 2007 9:17 AM:
"Who wrote this editorial -- some lobbyist? Is the "burden" of airport safety really the top conflict in this city? Does the cellar-dwelling author live in Mission Hills? Is it coincidental that this rant was juxtaposed next to a story that airport czar (and Jerry's Sunroad enabler) Alan Bersin is "considering" a run for Aguirre's seat now that his salary's been slashed? A skunk I smell...."

16. Seagull wrote on October 17, 2007 9:22 AM:
"I agree larry, unfortunately, with our current crop of electeds, that light is the train not the exit."

17. JF wrote on October 17, 2007 10:03 AM:
"Um, Kevin?In his role as union president, Saathoff is hardly an elected public official."

18. Steve K wrote on October 17, 2007 10:03 AM:
"Lets keep in mind that Agguire's predecessor represented the city government and ended up colluding with the mayor, council, retirement board, U/T, etc. to underfund the retirement system, neglect infrastructure maintenance and deceive bond investors and the citizens of San Diego, so they could while away our funds on a political convention and professional sports teams. In other words, we could do a lot worse than Mike Agguire for city attorney, particularly if it's a choice between Agguire and Sanders/Sainz, or whatever hired hand the mayor has doing his business, by election time."

19. Mockingbird wrote on October 17, 2007 1:35 PM:
"Seagulls are birds that fly in from long distances, make loud noises, foul everything and then leave. Take the hint."

20. Cheeky wrote on October 17, 2007 1:57 PM:
"The "city" is represented by elected officials put into office to look out for the citizens who elected them. The best interests of the "city" are achieved when mayor, councilmembers, city attorney and employees work together to succeed in providing the best service efficiently. This hasn't happened in a LONG TIME. Consequence: the city is falling apart at the seams. The city attorney has chosen to represent "the people" by being an adversary to the mayor and council, which actually hurts the very people who elected him. The mayor and council need legal advice to do their jobs; if Aguirre can't or won't provide he, he should step down and let someone take over the reins at the city attorney's office. Instead, the mayor and council must spend MILLIONS on outside counsel because of Aguirre's interpretation of a 1931 political pamphlet. Crazy!"

21. Christopher Hall wrote on October 17, 2007 4:09 PM:
"I think the city attorney sees Sanders as trying to fix the city coming from the traditional side of the special interests, and Aguirre sees himself as trying to fix the city coming from a new perspective, that being of the people. The special interests always collide with the greater interests of the people, and that's what we're witnessing. It may be true the city attorney position is not the place to shake down the establishment, and it definitely is true the mayor should not be supplicating to the special interests/ establishment, rather he should be working for the interests of the people. For my part, I'd rather have Aguirre representing the people than Sanders, even if the concept of mayor and city attorney get inextricably mixed up and no one knows who's doing what job. I don't think this is a good situation, though..."

22. Kevin wrote on October 17, 2007 4:19 PM:
"Seagull gives us this beaut: 'Your feelings about the corruptness of the Mayor are the result of the City Attorney's and Donna Frye's political machinations and nothing else, otherwise, a higher authority (eg. district attorney, or attorney general would be prosecuting them).' Yikes. First of all tell me, when in her now 5 years in office Donna has ever been caught lieing the way Sanders has been caught repeatedly lieing about Sunroad. Second, you seem to have adopted the Scott Peters standard of ethics: if we have't been indicted its ok. Call me a priss, but I kind have higher expectations of elected officials. Tell me the truth about what you have done and why you have done it. Its really not that high a bar. One Donna has gotten over quite easily."

23. Sunny wrote on October 17, 2007 4:22 PM:
"If Mikey Nifong Jr did his job in advising his client - the City - none of this chaos would be happening. Since he has abandoned his client, the Council should slash his budget and use that money to pay for outside counsel, so they can start getting competent legal advice. With his latest 1090 conflict re: taking campaign contributions from his top earning staff members, sloppy or late or non legal advice, continuous losing lawsuits, contentious personality, who in the hell would want to take advice from him? It's time for him to go; he shouldn't even run for City Atty."

24. TY wrote on October 17, 2007 4:40 PM:
"And the DA's too busy with cockfighting. I'll leave the analogies to others....."

25. Posted wrote on October 17, 2007 6:44 PM:
"Steve K - it's not a choice between Sanders and Aguirre; they hold different jobs. It really is possible to vote both out of office, or keep them both, or keep one or the other. The mayor may not be doing his job effectively, but at least he's not trying to be the City Attorney, while the City Attorney is trying to be the mayor, the water department, chief geolgist, director of public safety, the council, planning and development director, television programmer, and judge of all that is eeeevil in this region."

26. Mary wrote on October 20, 2007 9:46 AM:
"It has long been my view that we pretty much get the government that we deserve. I see nothing in any of these issues that disabuses me of this notion. As a community we don't want to bother understanding what's happening, and for sure we don't want to pay for anything. . .so what do we expect, the magic government fairy?"

27. Billy Bob Henry wrote on October 20, 2007 12:59 PM:
"That's right Gloomy-Mike is the attorney for the City-NOT THE WELFARE QUEEN UNION WORKERS SCAMMING US TAXPAYERS. Now put a sock in your unsupported, certifiably false, slanderous accusations. City Hall is upside down for ONE REASON, dirty politicians (aka Jack McGrory) and dirty union representatives /pension board directors ( aka Ron Saathoff, Ann Smith) went along with a scam (under funding the pension) for increased benefits-to build that stupid Petco Park. San Diego did not/does not need a $500 million ballpark (corporate welfare) for Billionaires like Moores. Same goes for Spanos! Same goes for the scam public unions. Taxpayers are tired of getting hosed down so the connected few can live high on the hog at taxpayer’s expense."

28. Billy Bob Henry wrote on October 20, 2007 12:59 PM:
"Gloomy-San Diego taxpayers are Mike's clients, not you and the welfare queen City workers. I know you are mad because Mike is tearign down your little scams yoi have had in place the last 8 years, but thems the breaks sweety."

29. Juvenal wrote on October 20, 2007 3:25 PM:
"One would think that a city which is the 8th largest in the country would have a more mature political class to lead and a more pragmatic political culture on the part of its residents to deal with the problems that threaten the city and subsequently, the region long-term. More importantly, I think the people of this city need to finally answer whether they want to act like a big city and solve its problems together or instead, watch as the dysfunction drives down our very quality of life and makes it increasingly unattractive to live and work here. While the infighting between the Mayor and the City Attorney has become more depressing, the day-to-day reality for everyone living here is that our city is quite literally falling apart."

30. Fuzzy Bunny wrote on October 21, 2007 6:31 PM:
"Hey BBH, how do you feel about giving your hard earned tax dollars to REAL welfare queens? They take your hard earned dollars without providing any service whatsoever and THEY are reproducing at "muy rapido, chingon" rates. How are you gonna' stop THAT SCAM? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm?"

31. FuzzBucket wrote on December 17, 2007 2:53 PM:
"The topic is SD City politics. Go post your tired borderwatching rant elsewhere. You may even want to take the time to look into the state of the welfare system & the demographics of the recipients before you do."