That last post didn’t please Scott Peters much. His spokeswoman Pam Hardy called. She said Peters has been as opposed to spending money on attorneys as anyone in city government.
She said Peters was the “loudest opponent” of using outside attorneys to represent city officials charged in pension litigation – the city attorney should have represented them.
“Every dollar that’s spent on outside attorneys is a dollar not spent on vital city services,” she said.
She said the city doesn’t feel it violated the law by underfunding its pension system and that’s why it wants to fight the McGuigan case.
McGuigan, of course, and his attorney Mike Conger argue the city should pay back what it shorted its pension system since 1996. Let’s remember, nobody denies that the city failed to invest in its pension system at the rate it should have since that year. McGuigan and Conger say it’s time to make things right.
The only problem with that, I argued yesterday, was that if successful, Conger would get a chunk of that settlement. He may be a great guy and all, but the city shouldn’t be in a position of giving him any money – especially the millions that he may get.