HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 03-15-1993 Special 2MINUTES
STUDY SESSION
MARCH 15, 1993
A special meeting study session of the Plymouth City Council was called to order by
Mayor Bergman at 5:20 p.m. in the Council Conference Room of the City Center,
3400 Plymouth Blvd., on March 15, 1993.
PRESENT: Mayor Bergman, Councilmembers Edson, Helliwell, and Tierney
ABSENT: Councilmember Vasiliou
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Johnson. Community Development Director
Dillerud, Public Works Director Moore, Public Safety Director Gerdes, Park Director
Blank, and City Clerk Rauenhorst
City Manager Johnson stated the purpose of the study session is to discuss various
aspects of the City Attorney services. He distributed evaluation forms for
Councilmembers to complete and return. He stated summary results will be shared
with the Council. Staff members will also complete the evaluation.
Manager Johnson stated he spoke with City Attorney Meller regarding the current
billing system and the possibility of a retainer system. Mr. Meller is willing to change
to a retainer system with litigation, prosecution, and special projects exempted. He
believes it would be initially similar to the retainer with the previous legal firm in
1991, which was $7,000 per month.
Mayor Bergman referenced from the staff report that Minnetonka spent about $262,000
for in-house legal expenses last year and Coon Rapids spent about $426,015. Coon
Rapids has a mixed system of in-house attorneys and contract attorneys. Plymouth has
spent $413,883 from March 1992 through February 1993, but Plymouth has greater
costs than Minnetonka or Coon Rapids with respect to development.
The Council discussed the issue of in-house versus contract attorneys, and reviewed the
last several months' billings. Councilmember Edson stated that those items which
would likely be covered by retainer totaled $6,697.50 for the month of January.
Councilmember Helliwell stated the City Attorney should propose exactly what would
be covered under a retainer so the City can compare past months to determine if there
is a cost advantage. She asked if the items covered by Holmes and Graven under the
retainer were identical to those proposed by Mr. Meller.
Study Session
March 15, 1993
Page 2
Finance Director Hahn believed that Holmes and Graven also included codification and
labor/employment under the retainer.
Mayor Bergman stated he would like to know what portion of the legal fees is
reimbursed to the City by developers.
Finance Director Hahn noted that very little is reimbursed by developers. Most of the
fees are billed directly to the developer by the attorney. In response to a question by
Councilmember Edson, he stated the City currently does not charge developers for plat
opinions.
Councilmember Edson stated it would be helpful to compare the retainer proposed by
Meller with that previously used with Holmes and Graven. He would also like the total
legal fees broken down as charged to the General Fund, Other Funds, Capital Projects,
and Development.
Councilmember Tierney stated she would lean toward an in-house attorney in order to
give the City greater control over what work is performed and at what cost.
Manager Johnson stated the majority of Mr. Metter's time is spent on managing the
other attorneys and managing the work. Any change to an in-house attorney could be
phased in. For example, an in-house attorney(s) could be hired to handle the type of
items covered under the retainer. The in-house attorney would coordinate all
contracted attorney work. He stated that most cities do not have in-house attorneys;
however, Plymouth is only one of two cities over 50,000 population that do not have
in-house attorneys.
Councilmember Helliwell stated the Council needs to consider the additional costs of
using an in-house attorney such as space, library, secretary, etc.
Councilmember Edson stated he is not opposed to considering an in-house attorney but
there could be significant start-up costs.
Manager Johnson stated there are some cost saving issues that could be considered.
Plymouth could share a law library with another city, or other cities may wish to
contract with Plymouth's attorney for certain services. He estimated that Plymouth
would initially need three full-time attorneys: City Attorney, Associate Attorney, and
Prosecutor.
Councilmember Edson stated some neighboring communities may be interested in
Plymouth's attorney providing prosecution services if Plymouth cannot justify a full-
time prosecutor.
Study Session
March 15, 1993
Page 3
Mayor Bergman stated he has two concerns with the concept of an in-house attorney.
Under a Plan B form of government, the Council can directly affect only the City
Manager and City Attorney. If the attorney is in-house, s/he may be responsive to the
Council, but only through the Manager. The Council may have less direct access to the
Attorney. Secondly, he feels the fewest possible employees should be added. Better
management of contract attorneys may be more appropriate.
Manager Johnson stated that the Council's legal authority with respect to the City
Attorney would remain the same whether an in-house or contract attorney was selected.
Councihnember Tierney stated one advantage of an in-house attorney is s/he could
serve as the attorney to the Charter Commission as well.
Mayor Bergman stated the City will soon have a seven member Council. He believes
this issue should be delayed until that time.
Manager Johnson suggested that both in-house and contract attorney scenarios could be
evaluated during budget sessions.
Mayor Bergman stated he would like staff to compare legal expenses of other
developing communities (Eden Prairie, Eagan) to Plymouth. Councihnember Edson
stated he would like to see the legal budget for those cities with in-house attorneys.
Councihnember Edson stated the Council should also consider what it wants in an
attorney - real estate background? management skills?
Councihnember Helliwell stated they should be able to do all general items, with
prosecution and litigation contracted.
The City Council next discussed City Council access to the City Attorney. Manager
Johnson stated that neither he or Mr. Meller see any inherent problem with individual
Councilmembers having access to the attorney.
Councihnember Edson stated it may be advisable for the City to negotiate a maximum
fee with the attorney before starting special projects, similar to the codification project.
This provides good accountability.
Councilmember Helliwell stated that last spring a member of the Council called the
City Attorney and asked him to research gifting of public land to the county. The cost
for the research and the resulting two page memo was nearly $1,000. She would
support some limit on access to the Attorney related to cost.
Study Session
March 15, 1993
Page 4
Councilmember Tierney stated the costs of some contacts with the Attorney accumulate
over time and are not a single question.
Councilmember Edson stated he believes it is no problem when Councihnembers call
the City Attorney and receive answers to questions on the phone. He suggested a
policy that if the question requires research or more than one hour or one-half hour of
his time, the City Manager should be informed because of budget ramifications.
Councilmember Tierney stated she was denied access to the City Attorney, and
therefore, cannot support Best and Flanagan. She stated Mr. Meller has refused to
communicate with all members of the Council, and she feels this may not occur with an
in-house attorney.
Manager Johnson stated this could occur whether or not the attorney is in-house. He
stated he was not employed by Plymouth in 1992, but he supports a policy that
information from the Attorney should be supplied to all Council members.
Mayor Bergman stated it is not a problem to supply information to all Councihnembers
unless they are providing the information to a party that the City could have a lawsuit
with.
Manager Johnson stated the Council needs to start with the premise that all information
from the attorney will be shared with all members of the Council. Each
Councilmember is legally responsible for not releasing private or confidential
information.
Mayor Bergman stated the legal responsibility issue is also true if Councihnembers
divulge information from Executive Sessions.
Councilmember Edson suggested that the City Manager could notify the City Attorney
and the Council that if research of more than one-half hour is required to answer a
Council question, the Manager is to be advised.
Councilmember Helliwell stated the last time she spoke with Mr. Meller, he stated he
would provide information only by the majority vote of the Council.
Manager Johnson stated that from this point on, he should be advised if this occurs.
Manager Johnson suggested that the Council consider the issue of whether the City
Attorney should attend all Council meetings.
Councilmember Helliwell stated that Mr. Meller is rarely asked a question at a Council
meeting. Perhaps he should be asked to attend only when a controversial issue will be
Study Session
March 15, 1993
Page 5
heard, i.e. train whistle restriction ordinance. She stated she would support having the
Attorney at every meeting if more questions were asked of him by the Council.
Mayor Bergman stated the Attorney should feel comfortable interrupting the Council if
something is said that could hurt the City from a legal perspective or in order to
provide the correct legal rationale for a decision.
Councilmember Edson believes the City Attorney should attend all meetings. On some
issues that may have legal ramifications, there is an advantage to the Attorney having
heard the discussion and the reasons for the Council's decisions. He would also like
the Attorney to more often remind Councilmembers of the legal criteria they should
consider when making decisions to avoid potential litigation.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m.
City Clerk