Journalism won’t die if you donate. Support Voice of San Diego today!

Wednesday, Sept. 10, 2008 | Jan Goldsmith first declared his policy stance on municipal pension at the Retired Employee Association City Attorney Debate on April 8, 2008. When asked if he intended to pursue the pension issue in light of Judge Barton’s ruling, Goldsmith answered no. The one year statute of limitations has run out. Three years does not equal one year. Basic math. The crowd of Retired Employees Association cheered the identical policy stances held by Goldsmith, Scott Peters, and Brian Maienschein, of dropping the pension appeal specifically because of Judge Barton’s ruling without consulting the City Council or Mayor Sanders. Goldsmith, Peters, and Maienschein all implied that they would kill the pension countersuit outright.

Goldsmith did say he wanted the case to come to a resolution by throwing in the towel, declaring the pension case impossible to win, and by stopping paying money to fight.

It is great that Goldsmith is flip-flopping on his answer to the pension questions that he has already answered on the record at numerous public forums. We always knew that Goldsmith’s earlier policy stance was not good for the taxpayers, was irresponsible and reckless. Thank goodness Goldsmith has now taken the same policy stance as Mr. Aguirre, who has already gotten the approval of both the City Council and Mayor Sanders to pursue the pension issue in light of Judge Barton’s ruling.

Now someone should tell the municipal employees, the police, and fire departments that Goldsmith may not be their boy after all the support and endorsement the unions gave him with the knowledge that he would be their city attorney and work in the unions’ interests against the taxpayers.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.