Model City Charter Revision Project - Eighth Edition
Option Memo
Issue: City Attorney
Seventh Edition: Section 4.03 states three alternatives for
appointment of the city attorney. The first alternative provides for
appointment "by the city manager as provided in §4.01(b)."
The second, "by the city manager subject to confirmation by the
city council." The third, "by the city council."
The current language covering appointment adequately covers the needs
of many cities, however some fractious or complicated issues may present
conflicts that require separate advocates for city council and for the
city manager and staff. The meeting summary from the first meeting asks
whether the city attorney works for the manager or for the council.
Some communities have a separate attorney for both.
Pros of Providing an Option for Separate Legal Officers for the
Council and the City: Conflicts of interest may arise for attorneys
if they represent both the executive and legislative branches of mayor-council
local government. In practice, such conflicts may also arise in a council-manager
form when the attorney represents the manager, city departments, the
mayor, and the council. Disputes between governmental entities can not
be resolved by an attorney with divided loyalties. The best interests
of the city are served when governmental entities with separate interests
have separate representation.
Cons of Providing an Option for Separate Legal Officers for the
Council and the City: The problem of conflict of interest arises
in the context of separation of powers, i.e., mayor-council cities.
There is no conflict when legislative and executive powers are unified
under the council-manager plan. Efficiently run cities require cooperation,
not competition. The city needs an attorney that serves the best interests
of the city as a whole, not two or more attorneys representing and furthering
the interests of particular governmental entities. Finally, a question
arises about who would adjudicate disputes between attorneys with different
interpretations of the law.
Two Options: The Committee should adopt one of the following
positions by the end of the March 22 meeting:
- The Model should provide an option for a separate legal officer
for the council.
- The Model should continue to provide for only one legal officer
for the city.
|