skip to main content









Donation Heart Ribbon

Council Votes To Accept San Diego Mayor Bob Filner’s Resignation

Above: Public speaker Mike Slater speaks to the City Council about their potential deal with Mayor Bob Filner.

Special Feature Read the Backstory

All of the accusations, statements and apologies from the key players in the developing story about allegations of sexual harassment in Mayor Bob Filner's office and calls from former mayoral supporters for his resignation.

City council members voted 7 to 0 this afternoon to accept a deal that involves the resignation of San Diego Mayor Bob Filner.

The agreement includes the city dismissing its cross-complaint against Filner and providing a joint legal defense from the City Attorney's office for both the city of San Diego and Filner, City Attorney Jan Goldsmith said.

Filner can also hire his own lawyers, but there will be a $98,000 cap on the amount the city will spend defending Filner. In addition, if the city is found liable for Filner's behavior, the city can sue Filner for reimbursement.

The City Council heard public comment on the agreement at 1 p.m. Friday before their closed session meeting. Response was mixed between people who support Filner, people asking the council to not approve an agreement that involves taxpayer money and people who said the city should pay for Filner's legal fees in exchange for him resigning.

Two councilmembers, Myrtle Cole of District 4 and Scott Sherman of District 7, are absent from today's meeting and will not vote. Sherman is out of the country because of a "long standing family obligation that couldn't be rescheduled," said his chief of staff, Barrett Tetlow.

Cole is in Washington DC at a national education conference convened by the A. Phillip Randolph Institute, her chief of staff Jimmie Slack wrote in an email.

Laura Fink, one of the first women to come forward publicly and accuse Filner of unwanted sexual advances, told the council she hoped they would bear in mind the 18 women who have come forward.

"Ask yourselves not only the cost of resignation, but the cost of enabling the mayor to be in office indefinitely," Fink said.

But Enrique Morones, a Filner supporter who has stood by the mayor throughout the harassment scandal, said he demands due process for Filner.

"We're tired of public execution that's taking place," he said.

An effort to recall the mayor also officially kicked off on Sunday. Organizers would have 39 days to collect more than 101,000 signatures to get recall on the ballot.

One of the recall organizers, Stampp Corbin, told the council, "please do not strike a deal with Mayor Filner."

"We have this process set up and he will be recalled," he said.

But Rachel Laing, a spokeswoman for the recall campaign, said while the recall effort has collected more than 20,000 signatures in five days, the mayor's resignation would accomplish their goal.

"The cost of keeping him in office through a recall is incredibly high," she said. "Every day he's in office is a day the city remains in paralysis."

After public comment, the council will adjourn to a closed-door session. They will then reconvene in a public session, invite comment from the public again, share their comments and then hold the vote on the deal.

Attorney Gloria Allred raised questions about the proposed deal.

Allred, who represents the mayor’s former communications officer, Irene McCormack Jackson said during a press conference yesterday that the settlement of her lawsuit is not part of the proposed agreement and that she and her client are in the dark about its details. Allred was joined by former fiancée, Bronwyn Ingram.

Allred said it would be reprehensible if the city council signed off on a deal in which public funds were paid to Filner in exchange for his agreement to resign. She noted that must be the case, otherwise the council would not have to meet to approve the deal; the mayor could simply resign on his own.

To view PDF documents, Download Acrobat Reader.


Avatar for user 'muckapoo1'

muckapoo1 | August 23, 2013 at 12:07 p.m. ― 3 years, 7 months ago

Perhaps ex-Mayor Clown can seek future employment with the local "Grab and Go". Oh wait, that's what he thought the mayor's office was supposed to be. I hope he has enough sense to just fade into the horizon. We need to be done with him forever. Bobby, maybe a return to Pittsburgh would be a great choice for you.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'thompsonrichard'

thompsonrichard | August 23, 2013 at 12:07 p.m. ― 3 years, 7 months ago

Defending "the 70-year-old mayor accused of groping and forcibly kissing at least 17 women." Why not say 25? 100? Newspapers sell sensational stories-- that's why accounts given in newspaper carry no weight in court. The story says he's "signed" the resignation, which leads commentators to suppose it would be criminal folly for the Council to reverse themselves and spend funds on his defense. But here the City Attorney obviously favors that approach. Don't you think that the mediator is "holding the resignation" until the City Attorney convinces the Council to agree? The City Attorney participated in the negotiation as much as did the mayor. My own view is way, way out. I agree with the trolls who say "not a penny for tribute." I WANT the Mayor to continue in office. He can beat the recall. I'm so fed up with the establishment that I'd accept what the City Attorney sees as THE POISON PILL. If the Mayor should happen to be recalled, the next mayor is elected immediately from that same election. That person would have a tiny percentage of the quarter-million votes Bob Filner got six months ago. It could be me!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'CarlosDangler'

CarlosDangler | August 23, 2013 at 12:56 p.m. ― 3 years, 7 months ago

thompsonrichard you are playing music while going down with a sinking ship that once captured hearts...... playing to an empty crowd....while most abandoned the sinking ship ....richard played on... a sorrowful tune... to an ever waning crowd........ so sad :(

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'cbells5'

cbells5 | August 23, 2013 at 2:39 p.m. ― 3 years, 7 months ago

I truly cannot believe that there are people out there so narrow-minded that they cannot admit that the Filner situation is NOT a partisan issue. The Republicans did not reveal Filner's egotistical sexual harassment behaviors - his own party leaders were tired of him mis-representing them. I applaud Donna Frye for opening the can of worms - she has guts. She did what she knew she needed to do for the sake of San Diego. The Republicans did not make him take a city-paid vacation to Paris. He did that on his own and lied about it. The Republicans did not make him take $100,000 in bribery money from a developer. He did that all by himself. Why did his all his aides quit? They knew he was lying and was out of control with his behavior. Maybe he started out his political career working for the forgotten and less-fortunate, but he is ending his career only caring about his own political status. Wake up, people. This is not a Democratic-Republican issue. It's a Bob Filner issue and he needs to be stopped.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'maggiepie'

maggiepie | August 23, 2013 at 4:01 p.m. ― 3 years, 7 months ago

It's appalling to hear speaker after speaker decry a lack of due process, characterize the allegations against Bob Filner as unsubstantiated, blame the victims and otherwise apologize for his behavior. I admire Bob Filner's political record, but his public behavior and its negative impact on city governance cannot be tolerated, for at least these reasons:

1. Filner participated in a mediation and agreed to a settlement. If he wanted to go to trial, he could do so. He chose to settle instead. Nothing more is required for due process to be served.

2. He has admitted to the allegations made by the plaintiffs and other women. There is no better substantiation of their claims than that.

3. Yes, people such as the women complainants can and should defend themselves and stand up for their rights. However, whether or when they do so in no way excuses the actions they suffered. Nor are their motivations for bringing Filner's misbehavior to light pertinent in deciding the consequences Filner should suffer for it.

4. Whatever Filner's political accomplishments have been--and they have been many--this is clearly a man with an unhealthy and completely inappropriate compulsion whose practice demonstrates disregard for women and the rule of law. This isn't a lynching, it's an evaluation of admitted misbehavior and Filner's character. San Diegans have the right to decide if they want him in a position of power under those circumstances.

5. Since he has apparently already agreed to resign, he should be allowed to do so and the city allowed to put this ugliness behind it.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'ConcernedCitizen2'

ConcernedCitizen2 | August 23, 2013 at 4:42 p.m. ― 3 years, 7 months ago

He had a chance to resolve this before it hit the fan when these two lawyers and Frye went to address it with him. He was arrogant and decided to allow them to do their presser and get the ball rolling. He created this by his behavior and then by being in denial as one after another came forward. The standards and education level in San Diego is low enough, we don't need an abusive, self absorbed man to be our mayor. He could have avoided the national circus. He must have liked or wanted the attention in some way.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Peking_Duck_SD'

Peking_Duck_SD | August 23, 2013 at 7:47 p.m. ― 3 years, 7 months ago

ConcernedCitizen, he wasn't arrogant - he was smart and did hat his lawyers told him.

Did you really think he would just step-down when this was hearsay and not consult a legal team to sort out the best way to step down?

He and his lawyers knew from day 1 he would resign, but he had to play the part of someone refusing for several weeks so the details of a resignation could be haggled and worked -out.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'MarineRoom'

MarineRoom | August 29, 2013 at 12:20 a.m. ― 3 years, 7 months ago


You've got my vote! Now that several days have shown us what you are up against, I think you're a shoe-in.

( | suggest removal )