Loading...
08/01/1988 CITY COMMISSION SPECIAL WORK SESSION City Attorney Evaluation August 1, 1988 The City Commission of the City of Clearwater met at City Hall, Monday, August 1, 1988, at 11:24 A.M., with the following members present: Rita Garvey Mayor/Commissioner James L. Berfield Vice-Mayor/Commissioner Lee Regulski Commissioner Don Winner Commissioner William Nunamaker Commissioner Also present were: M. A. Galbraith, Jr. City Attorney Cynthia E. Goudeau City Clerk Concerns were expressed regarding the relationship between the City Attorney and Administration and the manner in which legal opinions are given. It was suggested that there needs to be a better definition of the relationship between the City Attorney and other Administrative staff. Discussion ensued regarding how opinions should be obtained from the City Attorney and suggestions were made that it be done in writing through the Department Directors. It was also suggested that meetings with the City Manager should be more frequent. A concern was raised regarding a perception that one of the Assistant City Attorneys is not winning cases that should have been. The City Attorney stated he has evaluated the situation and it is his perception that this is a question of personality and not necessarily competence. A concern was also expressed that the City Attorney has stated in a particular case he would not defend certain City employees. The City Attorney stated that in some situations where the City and an employee as an individual are both being sued he has to defend the City and cannot defend the employee. In response to a question, he indicated that he has responsibility to decide when an employee has been willfully wrong in the function of their duties. Some concern was expressed regarding his attitude in the Fred Thomas Case. Discussion returned to providing legal advice to City employees, and the City Attorney indicated he did not wish to limit contact with the various levels of employees; however, he felt that making these requests in writing would solve some of the problems. It was requested that there be some refinement regarding the cost versus the benefit information to the City Commission in regard to pending lawsuits. Further discussion ensued regarding this and the difficulties caused by the Sunshine Law, and it was indicated that the City Attorney would try to provide this information to the Commission. In response to questions regarding how to improve the function of his office, the City Attorney responded that he has no complaints regarding the physical layout; however, consolidation of a City Hall Complex would substantially increase efficiency. Concerns were expressed regarding the speed at which ordinances are prepared and that there continues to be some negative reactions regarding the City Attorney's attitude. It was also expressed that the City Attorney has improved his frankness with the Commission. In response to questions regarding the goals set last year, the City Attorney indicated that preparation of ordinances has always been frustrating; however, he prefers to spend the time in writing them so that they do not have to be amended. Concerns were expressed regarding the City Attorney coming and going at meetings and doing other work. It was stated this should not happen at official meetings. A question was raised regarding whether or not the abundance or the proliferation of "slip and fall" cases is unique to Clearwater or if it is happening in other cities. The City Attorney responded that he felt this was universal; however, he would do some further investigation. In response to a question regarding what improvements the City Attorney needs to make, he stated he will try to keep up, work on making requests for opinions more systematic, and do personal evaluations on time. It was stated that overall the City Attorney is doing an adequate job that ordinance preparation and reports regarding litigation has improved since last year; however, the tendency to get involved in Administrative functions is a negative. It was the consensus of the Commission to schedule consideration of a salary adjustment at the Commission meeting of September 1st. The meeting adjourned at 12:40 P.M.