1989-01-31 Special CC MinutesSPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ALAMEDA
Tuesday January 31, 1989
The meeting convened at 2:16 p.m. with President Corica presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia, Monsef, Thomas and
President Corica - 5.
Absent: None.
89 -070 President Corica adjourned the Special Meeting to Closed
Session to consider labor relations regarding negotiations pursuant to
Section 54957.6 of the personnel section of the Brown Act.
Following the Closed Session, President Corica adjourned to open
session.
RESOLUTIONS
89 -071 Resolution No. 11643, "Authorizing execution of an agreement
for Legal Services." Adopted.
President Corica explained the background of the Meyer & Mitchell
proposal and commented on the need for a strong trial lawyer.
Richard Sherratt, Alameda, questioned various aspects of the procedure
used to select Meyer & Mitchell, and voiced concern there may have
been a conflict of interest involved in the process.
President Corica stated seven different law firms were contacted, and
Meyer & Mitchell is Council's recommendation.
Councilman Arnerich noted that the firms contacted were either not
interested or did not qualify.
Mr. Sherratt further discussed with Council the Agreement and City
Attorney Department's Budget.
President Corica stressed that litigation costs have increased
substantially, and the current City Attorney's budget is approximately
$392,000., compared to the original budget figure of $292,000.
Edward Murphy, Alameda, inquired if there was any down side to the
matter, to which President Corica responded lawsuits have increased
and the City no longer has the manpower nor the resources to continue
as in the past.
January 31, 1989
The Assistant City Manager stated the one down side that staff has
heard is a perceptual one, specifically, that the City Attorney will
not be at City Hall every day, and which is not the case.
Councilmember Camicia stated the down side is that the City is not
getting a good deal; the concept is a good one, it gives cities
flexibility, but the City handled it [the matter] wrong.
Councilman Arnerich responded it was regrettable that Councilmember
Camicia was unable to attend the previous meeting at which time he
could have made his concerns known to Council.
A detailed discussion followed regarding the selection process,
Special Meeting times, conflict-of-interest issue, and merit of the
"contract" concept.
Vice Mayor Thomas stated she reviewed Mr. Mitchell's work and he is a
competent litigator; the City needs litigation support which might
not be found in a Municipal law firm; and moved adoption of the
resolution.
Councilmember Monsef stated a change is necessary because the City is
buried in litigation; the Contract, as presented, is financially in
the City's best interest; and seconded the motion.
Councilman Arnerich commented that a year ago there was discussion
about updating the three [appointed] positions and that this is the
first step in reviewing one of those offices; he is comfortable with
the Contract; Mr. Mitchell is a very fine trial lawyer; the City
Attorney will continue to serve the City in Municipal Law; and
supported the motion.
President Corica stated that the merits and deficits of the program
have been analyzed; it is a way to update the City's legal function;
to save money; and win cases rather than settle them.
The motion to adopt the resolution carried by the following voice
vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Arnerich, Monsef, Thomas and President
Corica - 4. Noes: Councilmember Camicia - 1. Absent: None.
President Corica adjourned the Special Council Meeting at 3:43 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Diane B. Felsch
City Clerk, CMC
The agenda for the meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
January 31, 1989