Negrete Says a Settlement Offer Is on the Table

Now that it seems the house of cards is collapsing, we should regroup and start a new era in San Juan Capistrano.

The record is very clear. We had offered to settle the taxpayer lawsuit even before it was filed, and numerous other times. (Editor’s note: Attorney Carlos Negrete sued the city of San Juan Capistrano and several city officials, alleging that some benefits in City Manager Stephen Julian’s contract with the city constituted an abuse of public funds.)

Before I filed the taxpayer lawsuit, we asked that the city conduct an audit and disclose all information and documents concerning the matters in question. We were stonewalled. As of this date, the city has refused to have an independent audit. Why are they afraid to have one conducted?

The difference between the defendants in the taxpayer lawsuit and myself was that they were using taxpayer money to pay for the armies of lawyers that they hired, while I paid for most of my legal expenses out of my own resources.

For the record, it has been reported that the taxpayer lawsuit was dismissed. This is not accurate. Indeed, the case is now set for trial on March 23, 1993.

The judge in the case reversed his prior tentative decision dismissing the balance of the taxpayer claims. Moreover, the judge has not yet signed a judgment as to the Julian issues and that decision is still pending and subject to modification by the judge. If the judge does sign a judgment ruling in favor of Julian, you can be assured that it will be appealed and we will be seeking a new trial, hopefully with another judge.

The city is undoubtedly willing to spend hundreds of thousands more of taxpayer dollars on the balance of the trial and the appeal. This is unfortunate.

It has been suggested that I have a personal agenda of some sort. These assertions are misguided. One need only to read the ballot--I am not running for City Council, or any other office for that matter.

To be clear, my only personal agenda is that our elected officials are held accountable. I have a 1st Amendment right to challenge governmental actions and expenditures. I have exercised this right. I believe as Abraham Lincoln in that it is a sin to be silent when you have a duty to speak out. Change is needed and legislation is required in Sacramento to limit governmental waste. I intend to advocate for such change. In this case, I have been threatened, sued and publicly chastised. It has cost my side of the lawsuit hundreds of thousands of dollars. I have risked everything. Fighting City Hall is not cheap and a David (such as the one that I feel I am) needs more than just a small pebble to take on Goliath.

The inference that I required the city, or any of the defendants, to “confess to being liars, stealers, embezzlers, cheaters, dog beaters and horse thieves” is simply not true. In fact, my settlement proposals (which were made public) sought nothing more than public disclosures of facts that the public had a right to know.

What has been gained by all the money spent by the city? Is it principle, ego protection or just preservation of power?

What I ask now is no different than before--that an independent audit be conducted. It is still not too late. This madness should come to a halt and the right thing should be done.

CARLOS NEGRETE, San Juan Capistrano