Item C: City Legal Services - Who's the Client?

Home Browse Search

ATTACHMENT A Councilor Bettman’s comments during the December 13, 2006, council meeting “I wanted to bring up an issue because we have slated a work session early next year regarding the role of the city attorney and I, since the memo was brought up and discussed and you talked about it, the underlying assumption of the memo, I feel like I can address it now and I wanted to remark on the fact that the city attorney wrote a memo for the City Council based on the opinion of the city manager after City Council adopted a resolution saying, taking the charter language and saying ok City Council has ultimate authority if there is any ambiguity in the charter, the City Council’s authority is such that we can determine what that interpretation is which we did via resolution and then city attorneys went ahead and adopted an opinion based on the opposite opinion. So, if the city attorneys were representing the city, which includes city policy, then it seemed to me that the underlying assumption of that memo should have been that the Council has the authority to delegate the hiring of staff, hiring and firing of staff to the police auditor. So, I see that as a major breach. I see that as basically reinforcing my opinion that the city attorneys represent the city manager and not the city as a whole because when those interests bifurcate what the attorneys chose to do, is represent the city manager and not the city as a whole. It’s adopted city policy that the charter interpretation is that Council has that authority and you took an opposite stance and I wanted it on the record and so that when I bring it up at the process session regarding who the attorneys work for, I’ve already brought up if people say well you didn’t bring it up at the time. Well, I’ve brought it up. It’s on the record. Thank you.” L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070409\S070409C.doc