Acosta Pressing Council for Legal Fees, Says Court Action Possible

Pay now, or pay later.

That’s the message that City Councilman John Acosta plans to give his colleagues at their meeting Monday when he asks them to pay $16,760 in legal fees he incurred defending himself against a criminal charge that stemmed from a political fight at City Hall.

Acosta first submitted the bill last month after he was exonerated of charges that he used improper influence to block the hiring of an administrator.

But because his request for reimbursement went ignored, Acosta said he asked that it be placed on the council agenda.

Having been on the losing side of many 5-2 votes, Acosta said he will not be surprised if a council majority votes against him.

“They are probably going to renege on this thing, and my attorney will have to take legal action,” Acosta said. “And I predict that by the time this is over, the amount is going to be twice what it is today and what we are trying to collect.”

The misdemeanor charge against Acosta stemmed from a January, 1989, incident in which he told City Manager David N. Ream that he opposed the hiring of a certain applicant as the city’s building and safety manager. The job offer was later withdrawn.

The charge against Acosta was dismissed by a Superior Court judge and also rejected in two subsequent court appeals filed by the district attorney.

Acosta now maintains that because the allegations stemmed from his duties as a council member, the city should have handled the defense.

According to Acosta’s lawyer, the city attorney’s office did not defend the councilman because it participated in referring the case to the Orange County district attorney’s office for prosecution.

City Atty. Edward J. Cooper has declined to answer why the city did not defend Acosta, indicating that the question is a policy issue that only the council can answer.

At least three other council members, Mayor Daniel H. Young, and Councilmen Miguel A. Pulido Jr., and Robert L. Richardson, said they want to hear from the city attorney and debate the issue Monday in closed session before deciding what to do.

“I need to think about it,” Young said.

Pulido said he previously had been told by the city attorney that “this is John’s own defense and his own situation,” and that he may not be entitled to reimbursement.

The city attorney’s official report to the council does not recommend whether or not the city should pay Acosta.