pages: CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf, 35
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2010-07-27 | 35 | Vice Mayor deHaan noted transportation is missing. The motion carried by consensus. (10-396 CC) Discuss/Take Action on the City Attorney Policy of Not Providing Legal Opinions to Councilmembers in Advance of Meetings. Councilmember Gilmore gave a brief presentation. Mayor Johnson inquired what Section 8-2 of the Charter states. The City Attorney responded the last phrase of the last sentence of Section 8-2 states "The City Attorney shall be the legal advisor of and attorney and counsel for the City and for all officers and boards thereof in all matters relating to their official duties, and whenever requested in writing by any of them, he shall give his or her legal advice in writing"; a legal opinion was given in writing; that she advised each individual Councilmember that the legal opinion would be handed out in Closed Session which has been done many times before; that she needs to have some discretion as to how best to do her job to protect Council and the City; she made it clear that the opinion was going to be provided in Closed Session, but that any Councilmember could come to her office to read the opinion in advance; the opinion was to be collected at the end of the Closed Session as has often been done which is not a violation of the City Attorney's duties under the Charter. Councilmember Gilmore stated the opinion was particularly lengthy as well as the staff report; she went to the City Attorney's office to read the opinion within an hour before the meeting started; the lengthy opinion was hard to digest; the City Attorney's procedure assumes that she would only read the opinion once; the City Attorney made some vague comments regarding concerns with leaks coming out of Closed Session; that she has not been accused of a leak; she does not understand why she could not have a copy of the opinion to read at her leisure; that she advised the City Attorney that she had no problems with giving the opinion back; she has no interest in keeping confidential materials; the City Attorney is making it hard for her to do her job; the Charter does not state that a Councilmember needs to go to the City Attorney's office to read an opinion. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Councilmember Gilmore's intent is to put the matter on an agenda for discussion, to which Councilmember Gilmore responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson stated the matter is hard to discuss at 1:45 a.m.; that she does not think that the City Attorney has violated the terms of the Charter; perhaps Councilmember Gilmore is looking for clarification on document handling. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 35 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission July 27, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf |