pages: CityCouncil/2005-08-02.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2005-08-02 | 7 | immediate need and the Council did not meet for two weeks the reporting [approval of hiring outside counsel] would occur at the next regular City Council meeting; a special meeting could be called if the matter was extremely urgent. Mayor Johnson stated the language in the resolution should be clarified to reflect Councilmember Matarrese's comments. The City Attorney stated that she would have to retain outside counsel in order to start litigation. Mayor Johnson stated the Council understands said issue, which is the reason for the $35,000. Councilmember Matarrese concurred; stated the $35,000 threshold allows the City Attorney to do so [retain outside counsel]. ; inquired whether $35,000 was a reasonable amount to get the ball rolling on a big case. The City Attorney responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Daysog stated that he is interpreting the exercise of the City Attorney's responsibilities within the $35,000 threshold in two ways: 1) the Council is trusting the City Attorney to exercise professional responsibility in evaluating the cost ahead of time if said evaluation deems that the matter would be less than $35,000, the City Attorney has the authority to move forward; 2) the Council is trusting the City Attorney to use her professional background and experience to make the decision to bring the matter to the Council when the cost would be more than $35,000. Mayor Johnson stated that there is an accountability issue; Council would have questions if a case were estimated to cost $5,000 and it ended up costing $80,000; there is a check and a balance; the reporting requirements, limitations on hiring outside counsel, and the Public Utilities Board delegation should be addressed separate; the resolution should not read: "limitations on spending outside counsel budget; limiting spending is not the intention the City will have to spend whatever amount needs to be spent; the delegation or approval of the hiring of outside counsel under certain circumstance is what is being addressed; requested that the matter be brought back to Council; stated the CIC, ARRA and AP&T issues also need to be discussed later. Councilmember Matarrese stated once the questions that were raised are resolved with the next draft, the Council could move forward to extrapolate the same approach to ensure the language is correct in Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 7 August 2, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-08-02.pdf |