City Atty. Witt Deserves Reelection : It would be a mistake to let any anti-incumbent fever sweep him from office

For the first time in many years, San Diego City Atty. John Witt faces real opposition. In 1988, he was unopposed, and, in 1984, his opponent was convicted slumlord Michael Schaefer. As Witt seeks his seventh term on June 2, he is being challenged by former City Councilman Bruce Henderson.

In this time of anti-incumbent fever, voters might be tempted to say that 24 years in office is enough. But, in this case, that would be a mistake.

Witt generally keeps politics out of the city attorney’s office and appropriately keeps his focus on the office’s legal role.

During Henderson’s four years on the City Council, he showed himself to be strongly opinionated about the direction of city policy, and he often resorted to rhetoric and grandstanding in the pursuit of his agenda.

While Henderson’s energy might invigorate the city attorney’s office, his approach would be out of place. The city attorney’s main functions are to provide legal advice and representation for city government and the council and to prosecute misdemeanors and violations of city ordinances. The job calls for independence, which is why the city attorney is elected, but it also requires an attorney with a dispassionate approach, who is able to set aside personal ideology.

Henderson claims that the city attorney’s budget has grown too large during Witt’s tenure and that Witt has not done enough to reduce outstanding warrants. Much of the budget increase, Witt responds, is due to the fact that, in the late 1960s the city became self-insured, requiring it to hire more attorneys to handle liability cases. Budgets were also increased to address problems in the department after a critical county grand jury report in 1985.

Much of the warrant problem stems from the lack of jail space, needed to enforce sanctions on those who don’t show up in court or pay fines.

Using convoluted reasoning, Henderson also tries to blame Witt for some of the problems of the county’s Child Protective Services. Rather, Witt deserves credit for aggressively prosecuting domestic violence and child abuse cases in the city; San Diego’s program is considered a model for other agencies.

Where we fault Witt is in his handling of the sexual harassment claim against former city Planning Director Robert Spaulding. Witt reviewed the legality of the secret settlement of nearly $100,000 for planner Susan Bray, yet he did not inform the mayor or the City Council of the accusations against a department head. He says he assumed former City Manager John Lockwood would do that. That’s an implausible-sounding explanation, more indicative of old-boy networking than the independence called for by an elected city attorney.

On the whole, however, John Witt is the better candidate for city attorney.