The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2012/08/07 Item 08~ur~ :.~:. CITY OF CHULA VISTA Office of the City Attorney Memorandum TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Glen R. Googins, City Attorn~~ DATE: August 2, 2012 RE: Proposition C: City Attorney's Presentation of Outside Counsel Qualifications for Assistance with Preparation of Implementing Ordinance- and Council Action in Connection with Same This memorandum shall serve to advise City Council on the information received from identified potential outside special counsel following a request for information. The memorandum also provides a recommendation for the appropriate next steps towards completion of the process for the implementation of Proposition C. A. Backeround The City Council at its July 10, 2012 meeting confirmed the results of the June 5, 2012 General Election. The results included the Chula Vista voters' approval of Proposition C which amended the City Charter. The three primary changes to the City Charter were to: (1) change the elected City Attorney's salary and compensation; (2) establish term limits for the elected City Attorney; and (3) authorize the City Council to establish the office of Legislative Counsel. The full text of proposition C is attached as Exhibit 1. At the July 10, 2012 Council meeting the City Attorney provided a report regarding the requirements for the implementation of the Charter amendments and an outline of the "next steps'' to assure that all Proposition C changes are formally incorporated. A copy of the City Attorney's July 9, 2012 report in that regard is attached as Exhibit 2 for Council reference. After the July 10, 2012 report to the Council by the City Attorney, direction was provided by a consensus of a majority of the Council that the City Attorney solicit brief responses to a request for information ("RFI") from potential outside counsel that were identified as attorneys that were available and interested in assisting with the process of drafting an implementing ordinance. The Council directed that the information supplied by outside attorneys as a result of the RFI be provided in time to provide the full Council an update at the August 7, 2012 Council meeting. Council also directed that the Charter Review Commission and the Board of Ethics be notified that the City Council is beginning to engage in the process of the steps necessary for the 8-1 implementation of Proposition C, and that the matter will be discussed at the August 7, 2012 City Council meeting. B. Information Supplied in Response to RFI to Outside Potential Special Counsel In response to City Council direction the City Attorney's Office solicited and requested information from potential outside attorneys that were known to have special knowledge and experience to assist in the implementation process Information was provided by four outside attorneys in response to the RFI issued by the City Attorney's Office. Information was supplied by the following outside counsel: (1) Tom Brown, from Burke, Williams and Sorensen in Oakland (who was the lawyer that advised the City Council on the preparation, submittal and related issues involving the drafting of proposition C and properly placing it on the ballot) (see Exhibit 3); (2) Shawn Haggerty, from Best, Best and Krieger in San Diego (who drafted the original Elected City Attorney ordinance) (see Exhibit 4); (3) Jim Lough, of Counsel to Lounsbery, Ferguson, Altona and Peak in San Diego (a public law/elections expert who has advised the City Council on a number of sensitive issues over the years) (see Exhibit 5); and (4) Guillermo Cabrera, from the Cabrera Law Firm in San Diego (a former Chair and Commissioner of the City of San Diego Ethics Commission which monitors and enforces the City of San Diego's campaign finance and ethics laws and proposes new governmental ethics law reforms) (see Exhibit 6). The information supplied as a result of the RFI contains a basic description of the qualifications of each attorney, a general description of the process each would undertake to assist in the drafting of the enabling ordinance, and the proposed billing rate or fee structure for services. The submittals appear to be self-explanatory and are attached as Exhibits 3 through 6. C. Conclusion/Recommendations The approval of Proposition C amended the City Charter to provide City Council with the basic authority to create the office of Legislative Counsel. New Charter Section 503.1 provides, "the Council may establish by ordinance the office of Legislative Counsel." It is recommended that the process of drafting a detailed ordinance which would address numerous policy and legal issues that were not established by the approval of Proposition C should begin with the selection by the City Attorney, after direction from the Council, of one of the special counsel candidates. The selected special counsel would then begin working with City Attorney staff, the City Manager's Office, Council, and with whatever involved City commissions or the public is deemed appropriate, to draft the implementing ordinance. 8-2 EXHIBIT 1 8-3 • ~ ®~FIClAL.•BA1,L®T::r;I~Of~PARTtSAN- °_'' :. ; ..:::°. :.. •. SANDIEWCOUNTY,CALIFDRNIA"': '`:~ ~ '.:' -. ~. ......PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY.ELECTION ~_. fi .~ .......:' ' ' _ .:.., JUNE S,'2412.. .....:; `:.. k•_ .:>. .. ..^'. .. MEASURES SllBMI7TED , ~ ~. FOCAL PROPOSITIONS ,~~~~ TO THEUO7fRS CITY OFCHULAVISTp:~ .STATE PROPOSITIONS^. ~. ~.' ~ PROP C'_ Shep beCpaneroflhe Cly otChula wsh he ~ .. ' amendedblunit6s eWnwiry eM cofnpensafion oFdte elected: ~~ .. C Alb b' hb45hit ~ Gnih fir Bx:Clry Ammay endb ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ PROP 28 iIh11TS CN LEGISLATORS'7ERM1IS IN OFFICE, INITIATIVE CONS11TU7tONAL AAIENOMEHT.' y mey, es mt e~oltre be Cl Comcfibeshhltsh he oAce o(Legisla6ve b Reduces bfel amowl oltlme apersonmay aetva In fie sbie Cwnsel badvise pie Cil~Couictl atlas legislaivedu6as and on IeglslaNre pom l4yearsbf2yeeis. Albvrs 42yeats'servlrs corAc[otin(erestlssuecT.: . ~n ore house. Applies only blegislaEVS Eistelerded aflet yEg _ I aeasdre b paired ~Flscel Mpact No dimcl fiscal06eclcn shb O w locel8sremmenh. YES i O ND . ... ... ... •a 1'~CE24BE ),O3B '08276 O4 ~ ~ N.So 27o-0ta 8-4 CITY OF CHULA VIST~4 ! (This.proposition will appear on the ballot In fhe foltowing form.) P&2(3P C ~ ~ . ' Shell the Charter of the City of Chula Vista be~ amended to limit the authority and compensaiton of ,the elected Clty Attorney, to establish term limits far the Cpy Attomey, and to authorize the Cify t Council to establish the office of Legislative Cwnsel to advise the City CouncA on Its legislative duties and on coryflict d interest Issues? ' . This proposition requires approval by 50h ~ ' - of the vote, voting on the proposition. '~ ! ~II text of this proposNion follows the arguments and rebuttals. 1 ~ ' i .. ~ .. . CITY ATTQRNEY IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS.. ! This proposition would amend.Section 5D3 and edd Section;503.1 to the Chute Vista City Gharter. - I It would limit the authority end compensation of the Ctty Attorney, establish term Ilmits #or the City ~ ~ ~ : Attorney, and authodze.the Cliy Councl, by ordinance, to establish a new position of Legislative ~~ Counsel.: ' -- i.,•~. The Charter currently ptovldes•for an stetted Ctty Attorney. It provides #hat the Ciiy Atfoney's ~I - compensation may not be less than the median compensation of the CI(y Attorneys of the six .. ... California cities whose populations are closost to Chula Vista's population. The Charter sets the 4 ~ i:Aayor's znnual salary at 6fi%.ot the salary of a Cairfbmia Superior Court Judge. ;: <<. C:...;,:.; ' ~ _ i ~ This proposition would reduce the City Attorney's compensation to that of a Superidr Court Judge i till I Currently, fhe CI[y Attorney's salary is approximately $209,000, while that of a Superor Court ~ .; - Judge Is approXllna[ely $179,00(1. This change would not apply during the curcant term of the ~ r current City Attorney: ~ ' 1 ~ is _: <:~~ ~ _ ! The Gharter currently Imposes term Limits on City Council members, but Imposes no such Iimlt on .~ i •..;;,;:. ~. ?:~;, . the Ctty Attorney. This proposition would Impose on the Clty Attomey tho same term Ilmits Yhat~ r -~~'~ '::': •~ - apply to Council members.. ,~ ~ ' . . ! ~ . The Charter currenly establishes the qualiFlcatlons end duties of the Clty Attorney, Among other G ~ ~ - provisions, the Chartet authorizes the City Attorney to control City legal btislriess and legal . ~.~:; . " proceedings; fo adYse the City Council, other Clty officers and ail City boards and commissions, ~ I .~ . -. - _ - ' and to render written legal opinions when requested.in writing; to employ experts and special I ~,~,:~ ° :_ ~~,:~ ;- :; ,'__,~, ~. ~:.._ f,: ,,,,`___>: "',p.: ,~}.:,;"~.. legal counsel with Council approval when the City Attorney has a cdn0ict of Interest in litigation i i , JA. {nvWving another City officer. I Thls proposition would autbodze the City Counail to provide by ordinance that the City Attorney - r would not adYse on conillct of Inferest Issues involving the Clty Attomey, nocpardclpate fn the ' selection of special legal counsel to advise on such Issues. The proposition would further ordi ante for the establishment o(a new positon of authorize the Council fo provde by n ~ .,~:.` - , i Legislative Counsel to provide legal services end advice on specified matters. I+ ! "` ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; i, ~ 1 pR-09B0=9:. ~ x~snzio.dzs ~ ' II 8-5 CfTY ATTORNEY IMPART6AL ANALXSIS (CONTINUED) ~'ii:. - .. . i :.I .... ~ i i Retired Professor "~` "' ~'~'- PR 0980-2 Specifically, This proposigan would enable the CouncO to provtde by ordinance that Le9fslative Counsel weuld; be seceded 6y and serve et the pleasure of the Council; advise the Council regarding Its legislative duties, while neither opposing nor urging legislation; advise the Council ' Attorne and he er lrln s clal cou s 's regarding conflicts of interest involving the City y, w th h g pe n el i 'therefore wananted; assist the Coundl in the selection and appointment of such special counsel; advise the Coundl or the City's Board of Ethics concerning the City's Cade of Ethics and alleged vlolatiens thereof; assist the Board of Ethics in Investigations or In conducting hearings; and advise the Ciy's, Charter Review Commission. Such ordinance may also provtde for the prevention or resolution of conflicts between tho City Attorney end Legidedve Counsel. . ARGUttIIEtJY 1N FAVOR OF PROPOS1710N G By all accounts, an elected cfty attorney should be a pesltion of public service sacrificing personal gain for Uie puhlle good. Yet this office with a staff of S pays moro than the Callfornla Attorney General and the Attorney ~Generel of the United States. And ff anothor city wants to pay their attorney more, our Cily .Attorney receives an automegc raise, whether you agree or not. Proposition C reduces and stahigzes the salary of the city attorney to that of a superior court Judge. It saves taxpayers over $30,000 each year. When Chula Vista voters opted to elect their city attorney they believed that an elected attorney would bemore responslve.lo the people. Whfie it remains tobe seen whetheran elected attorney Is more or less indepehdent, the Initiative did create a lifetime pollticai post vritFi no limit or accountablity on compensation and government funded beneflfs. And when the city attorney has a conflictot interest, It lacks provision"s to ssleda truly indapandenteutskte attorney. Chula Vista voters have passed term limits for the Mayor and City Councli. Why should the City Attorney bo different? The City Attorneyshouid be sub]ed to those same rules. This proposition will Ilmit the city attorney to two four-Year terms, the same as every other elected official In Cnula Vista. Then there's the quostlon of what to do vfien the cRy atorhey has a congid of Interest. Under current law, iha city attorney selects and hires en attorneywhen they have a conflict of Interest or are the subject of an (nvest(gatlon. This proposigon permits the Clty Council to indepandentfy hire an attorney when the dty attorney has a congtct of interest , Proposfllon C insures that your City Attorney Is responsive to you at a price we can afford. YE9 on Prap G! GERALD SCOTF GABRIEL ARCS VetemnlRet Business Ownsr Retired (HMO CEO) LUIS A. MOtVGE PETER J. WATRYJR. ' N So 21DA3D RESUTYAL TO THE ARGUMENT @N FAV082 OF P&20POSITION C Prop C supporters claim it wilt save taxpayers n7oney._.Falset _.... _.. Any salary savings generated by cutting the City Attorney salary will be far outweighed by the provision that gNes Councilmembere lttelr own lawyer. This addilianal, unnecessary attorney would likely cost taxpayers $1.5D,ODOt annuallyt Th money w tod by Pion G should Instead be Dent on ooilce Darks libraries or roads. You voted just four years ago fo set your Ciry~Attorney's salary based on what other city attorneys make in similar cities. This Insures Chula Vista can attract the best qualtfied attorneys to a position that's yltal to the. Ciry's best In[eresLS. Term limits ere appealing to many. But because IE Is a professional position-not a politkal ne-only2 of the 12 elected ctfy attorneys in California have tens limits.. malty, Prop C's claims about conflicts of interest are false, The Clty Attomey has already ,dvised that In any case involving a claim against him, another pedy could hire outside counsel. But don't be tooted. Ultimately, Pmp C is not about salary savings, term limits, or conNcis of interest IYs a blatant attempt to undermine fhe Independence and authority of your eiecfed City Attomey, with no regard for the added costs and dysfunction this wDl create at City Han, end for clt¢ens trying to get City services. , Please join community loaders from both parties, the.Chula Vlsta~Chamber of Commerce-and many others~nd Vote NO on Proposition C. KEVIN O'NEILL ~ - BILL HALL f=ormer Chula Vista Planning Commissioner Commercafiocal Resident Ista Chamber of end Loca(Buslnessman ~PR-0960-3 I 8-7 N S0~2te-0af ARG61PAEfi1T AGA1tVST pROP051T{ON C Proposition C is an assaut4 on the inclependsnce of your elected CltyAttorney. If creates a new "legal advisoP beholden to city potiticiaru-not the public Interest. It will cause confusidn and uncertainty, and could cost taxpayers hundreds of lhousends annualty. Vote NO on Proposition C. ~ " Chula Vista clfizens voted for an elected City Attomev to assure the Clty received {ndependent unbjased legal advice Immune from Cltv ~mcit politics. Without the threat of being fired or penalized, your elected City Attomay advises the Council about their obligations to make declsidns In publiq limits on their auihorily, risks to taxpayers, and the need to respect indivltlual rights. This is the independ¢nco you voted for, and Is what you are currently roceiving. Proposition C would change ali'that by atlowfng Councllmembers to use taxpayer money to buy advice Ihaf supports their political agendas, while disregarding your elec{ed City Attorney's advice. ~ . . Wtth Proposition C, the Ciiy }viii be plagued wilh competing Iegai opinions. City Council wiVl have one legal opinion, Clty staff, or a Clty Commission, another. Residents and taxpayers tryU'tg to get Clty services or permits win 6e caught (n the middle, and loft fonting the bill. proposition C was raihoaded onto the 6ailot, with no Input from the Charter Review ' Commission-or Board of Elhics,antl Iittleapportunityfior puhilc scrutiny.- li'sa transparent power 'grab by certain Cily Councilmembers.ahd their political supporter, Earl Jentr. Jontz has spent over $9,OOO,OOD seaktng control over City government while costing taxpayers $500,000 defending agahrst his felted lawsuits against the city. Demand the in4egrtty, professionalism, and Independence. provided by your elected Ctly Attorney. Roject this cynical attempt to place pollfics above the law. Join Mayor Choryl Cox, .former Mayor Shirley Horton, endmany others, In voting NO on Proposition C. JOHN M. KAHENY Retired Chula Vista City attorney JOHN MOOT Former Chula Vista City Gounciimember PATTY~DAVIS Former Chula Vista City Gounciimember RICK EMERSON Renred Chula Visla Police Chief GREG COX Vice Chair, San Diego County Board of Supervisprs and Former Mayor of Chula Vista PR-098!)-0 N SD 210-032 .. : .. :.. ... .:...:. .. ~~ ". .. REBUTTAL TO THE ARGUMEP7T AGAlPJST PROPOS9TION C The'people who signed the argument against Prop C fepresent Chula Vista's old guaM pblltical establishment; These special Interests have dominated Cfiuia Vista for decades now, antl they are still trying to hold on to power by doing what they always do when they feel threatened. They launch personal attacks, ibis time an attack against respected community lender Earl.Jentz Let them know ihelr slash and burn tactics vrili not work in Chula Visla. Yes on GI The reasons for this inlgative are clear. _ 1) PrapCsets fair salary and term limits forthe city attorney. ' 2) Prop C ends the special'Interests' ability to spend your money to chase,their schemes, ~~~sf last year the city attorney, along with the Mayor and Councilmember Bensoussan, spent 0,000 of your money to hips private attorneys to help them Secretly takeover demolition of the nth Bay power plant. When the truth became known, the full city council acted in public to end I noney grab. Prop C vroultl have stopped thlg waste and would have requiretl the full city w..ncll to be involved item fhe 6eginniny. ' 3). Prop C allows the ful! city councll~to appoini a lawyer when the city attorney is conflicted or the suhjecE of an investigation. Independent counsel ptovlsiona were created in the aftermath of the Watergate scandal and exist ai every level of government. Read the impadlal Analysis. Stop the fax from watching the ban house. Yes on C! CARLOS F. LOPEZ BILL WINTERS Retired Teacher Retired CV.PD Chief GUS CHAVEZ ~ PETER J. WATRY ilR. Retired Educator Retired Rroiessor , DAVID P. DANCIU Retired Carpenter . ... .i~..:.'':'.-4 is : , .. .. ~., L::'Y:F'3jt. - . :?~.. .. ' j ~.,i . .. . :•~ i' ; ' ..... . '~ ; .;.. :..' PR-0960,5 ~ N 5o zto•aas ~ 8-9 ' PR®POSED CHARTER AIIAENDMENT PROPOSITION C L(MITINO THE AUTHORITY AND COMPENSATION OF THE CITY A7TORNEY, ESTABLISHING 7ERM LIMITS FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY, ANO AUTHORIZING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL Section 1. Purnose. This charter"amendment Is intended to limit the authority and compansalion of the Cliy Attorney, es spociged herein, to establish term limits for the City Attorney, and to authorize [he City Council to establish the office of Legislative Counsel. These amendments to the City Charter are Intended to aohleve these.goals. Section 2 Amendment of the Charter ' p. ~ Section 503 of the Charter of the Clty of Ghula Vista is hereby amended io read as follows: Section 503 City At[ornev' Election. Powers and Duties {a) Designation as Ofttcer. The City Attorney shall be sn officer of the Cily, in addlfion to any ottierOmcersdestgnatedpursuant to ihisCharler. Except-as-otherwise-prodded. byahts .. _. Charter, Il Is the Intent of the voters that the City Attorney shall be sufrlciently Independent of the City Council and other city officials to etlvise the Cify while also ading In the best Interests of the public, - .. (b) Powers of the City Attorney. Except as otherwise provided by this Charter, [he City Attorneyshall: (i) Reprosent and advise the City Council and ail c{ty oTficers In all matters of law pertaining io their ofgces-and advise all hoards, commissions, and other agencies of the City on legal matters referred to him or her, and render written legal opinions when the same are requested In writing by the Mayor or a mernbar of the Council of fhe City Manager or any other officer, hoard or commission of the City; provided, however, that the City Council may provide by , ordinance that the City Attorney shall neither advise, nor participate In the selection of special legal counsai to advise, on conillct of Interest issues involNng the Cily Attorney; (2y "Represent and appear for the City and any city otgcer or employee, or former City officer or employee, in any or all acdons and proceedings In wfikh the City or any such officer or employee In or by reasons of his or her official capacity, is concerned oris a party, (3) Attend all regular meetings of the Ciry Council and g(ve his or her opinion in wdting whenever requested to do so by the Ciry Council or by arty of the boards or aff~ere of the City; (p) Approve the form of ell contracts made by and all bonds given to the CKy, entlorsing approval thereon in wrldng; (5) Prepare any and alt proposed ordinances or resolutions for the Citg and amendments fhereto; PR•0980.8 ~ N so zto•osa .:... . ~'::~~'_~~y i:;;C?i.':is:i'i:c:':,`iil:`.:',:;,-1::: :: `P{.>: :>~: ,.. ...::.. .':. ^.o . ... ..:: :: ....: .~.. ::... .. .~. :.. ..:.": ..:. .. ,..:: ~-~. -.: .::•'.% PROPOSED CHARTER AME~iDMENT ~CONTitVUE®J " r - '.: - ~ (6) ---Pfosecute, ifsadirectedby ordinance of the City CouncQ;ell offenses against the -- ~ ' - "' ----- ordinances of the City and for such oiFenses against the laws of fire State as may be required by ~ ~ ~ ~ . • ~. law, and shall have concurrent Jurisdiction with the DistrlG Attorney of the County bf San Diego to .. _ - - prosecutepersons charged with or gtitlty ofthe violation of the Slate laws occurring withn the City ~ ' - ~ ' limits of the City of Chula Vista for offenses constituting misdemeanors; .. (7} Whenever a cause of echon exists In favor of the Clty, exercise discretion as to ~ ~ ~ , . ~~ ~ , when to commence or maintain legal proceedings, subject to the approval or ratification by the _ ~ , City Council, when the basis for such action Is within the knowledge of the City Attorney, or, he or - she shall commence or maintain legal pmceedings as directed 6y fhe Clty Council; and (8) Surrender to his or her successor all (woks, ~papors, .files and documenks ~ ~ '~ ~ertalntng to the City's affairs. ~ - ~~- .. The Counctl may empower the City' Attorney, at his or her request, to employ special .gal counsel on a particular matter, and fra orshe shall have the power to appoint appraisers, - engineers and other technical and expert services necessary for fhe handlln9 of any pending or .. ~~ proposed Iiggetion, proc9ading or other legal matter, all witbiq the specific budgetary authority established by the City Council. Upon the approval of the Council, when the City Attorney has a conflict of interest In Iltigation involving another officer of the Ci(y in his or her official ppacl(y, such other officer may retaln~speciai legal counsel at Clty expense, subject to the specific budgetary authodty of the Clty Council. Nothing In this section 503 shall bo construed to prevent ~ - the City_Attomey from giving confidential adviceto the Clty when otherwise allowed by law. - . ~ ~ .- ~ . (c} Electloh; Compensation of City Attorney. The City Attorney shall be nominated and - elected in the same manner and al the same election as a member of the City Council, except as .. ' - ' oihenwise provided in this settles. The annual salary of the elected .City Attorney shall be ~ - _ equtvalent ro the salary of a Judge of the Superior Court of the State of California. The Cily Altomey sha)i also receive ralmbursement on.the order of fhe Counctl for Councll•authorized ~ .. travel and other expenses when .on ofgclai duty out of the City.. The City Counctl may also .. ~ - provide, by rasolugon, for lh'e payment of an allowance of a sum certain per month, es ~ ~ ~ , reimbursement for She addttl'onal dsmands and expenses made upon and Incurred by the Cgy Attorney. The City Attorney`s salary may not be reduced during thg City R¢omeys term of~offlce, ' ;:.:.~~,:~ ::' ~. E~ i - =~:',,' _ '. - - except as part of a general reduction of salaries of all City officers and employees In the same +.~, ~; 2•' <% ~,~ ~' ti ~ ~ ~- ~ • : ~- ~ -. amount or proportion. In addition, the Gity Attorney shall be emitted to sudh benefits as are . ~,.f: ~; , ; ~ ~:: .. grahted to other management employees of the City, es,established by the CI(y Council from time : i:, _; :: ,;, ; ; .. - , to time. The Clly Attorney shall be In the Unclassifed Service. ~~ (d} qualifications of Clty Attorney. No person shall be ejfgibie for or continuo to hold the ,a;;c~ ";.,_ .; ' ~ ~~ _ ' bffce of City Attorney, either by election or eppolniment, unless he or she Is a citizen of the ~'E; ~„ United States, a qualified elector, antl a Califomla resident, lidansad to practice law in a[Lcquds of `>' ' ""' .. . the State of Califomla end so licensed for at least seven years preceding his or bar assumption of .' ~ ~ _~ ~ :.. -- -- ofgcefollowingelactlonunderthischarter. `i _ , ,r'O: ~ - (e) Term of office of the City Altomey. Tha City Attorney shall be elected to a nominal ; ~tt~~: ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ '- ~ ~ ~ `~' ~ ' ~ ' tone of four years entl shall commence on fhe first Tuesday of December of the year of the ~ r.~~` , ~ -~.`...'"•' ~. -'="',.'.•=~~` ~'!: ~~~"` ~_~.'!, ~' ~,~ ~~• election, and shall continue until a successor uellfies. The Cit Attorne shell be sub act to the r ' " ~"' ~ _ ~ .~ same limits on terms of service as are applicable to Ehe Mayor and City CouncIl under Section • ~ '.', ; ~, ~,~- ~ ~ ~ •'.`' '' PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) (f) Vacancy, Fllin9 of. Upon the declaradon of vacancy In the office of the Cliy Attorney, the office of the City Attorney shad be filled by appointment by the majodty vote of the members of the Council; provided, that N the Gouncil shall fall to fid a vacancy by appointment within silly days after such office shall become vacant, w If the unexpired form of the Ci{y Attorney shall exceed 24 months at the lime of the appointment, the City Gouncil shall cause a special election to be held to till such vacancy. An appointee or the person elected to the office of Ci(y Attorney for the balance of an,unexplred term shall hold offtce until the next general election for the office of the Cdy Attorney. ~ _ {g) Vacancy, What Constitutes. The office of City Attorney shall be declared vacant by the Councl when the person elected or appointed thereto fails to quality vrithin ten days after his or her term Is to begin, dies, resigns, ceases to be a resident of the State or absents himself or herself continuously from the State for a period of more than thirty days vAthout permission from . the Council, absents himself or herself from any seven consecutive regular meetings ezcepi on exeunt of own IlNess or when absent from the Clty by permisskn of the CeuncVl, Is convicted of afeiony, Is Judicially detarmirrQd to be an Incompetent, Is permanently so disabled as to be unadla to perform the duties bf his or her office, farfelis h[s or her office under any provision of this Charter, or is removed from office byjudicial procedure. Aflnding of disability shall require file affirmative vote of et least two-thlfds of the members of /ha Council after considering competent medical evidence bearing on the physical or mental capabllliyofthe Ciry Attorney. ' B. ---- --Section 503A-Ishwebyadtled to the Gharterfo read as follows:...-- ~~ -- Section 503.1. Office of Legislative Counsel; Duties. - Notwithatanding any other provision of this Charter, the Council ttjay establish by ordinance the ofllce of Legislative Counsel, as tlescdbeiJ In this section: (a) Legislative Counsel may be selected by the Council and servo at the pleasure of the Council, on terms and conditions prescribed by the Council. Appointment or dismissal of the Legislative Counsel shall be approved by a maJorlly vote of the Council. (b) Leglslatlve Counsel may advise the Council regarding Its legislative duties, Leglslatlve Counsell shall neitireroppose nor urge enactment of any legtslatfon.~ ~' (e) Leglslatlve Counsel may etso advise the Councft regarding conflicts of Interest InvoNing the City Attorney, and whether the hiring of special wunsel in therefore warranted. If the Council approves the hiring of special counsel, Legislative Counsel may assist the Council fn the setectwn end appointmsnt of special counsel. ' (d) Legislative Counsel may turthw advise the Councl or the City's board of Ethics concerning the City's Code of Ethles and alleged violations thereof, and tuither may adv)sa the City's Charter Review Commission. Legtslatlve Counsel may also provide such other assistance to the Board of Ethics in Investigatln9 or assisting the Board In the conduct of hearings, Including the hiring of spesial counsel to the Board: (o) The'Council may further provide by ordinance that the advice of the Legislative Counsel on the mallets set forth in this section 503.E shell ha In Ileu of that of the Clly Attorney'. The Gouncil may addtgonally ar alternarively provide by ordinance for the prevention w tesolulion of conficts and(or disputes between the City Attorney and Leglslatlve Counsel. ' PR•D9B0-6 N SD 210-036 . .. , , ..' ~ ~ ~ .a, ~.,..- :. .. pl2OF°OSED CH/aE?TEft A11~ENDMENT (CONTINUED) Section e. Imolementatio Upon the effective date of this inltiafive, the provisions of fhls initiative shall be inserted .into the Charter as amendments thereto. Any provisions of City~Charter, state law or city ordinances inconsistent with these amendments shag be unenforceable to the extent of the Inconsistency, Secflon 4 Severabilitv. If any word, sentence, paragraph, subparagraph; section or portion of this Initiative Is declared to be Invalid by a toad, the remaining words, sentences, paragraphs, subparagraphs, sections and podions ere to remain valid and enforceable. . Section 5. Amendment or Repeal. This Inillallve may be amended or repealed only by the voters at a City election. Secflon 6 Effective Date. If a malodty of the voters voting on the proposed chertAr amendment vote in is favor, the charter amendment shall become valid and bindfng upon filing by the Califomfa Secretary of State. I I I PR-ggB0-9 N SD 270A37 5-13 EXHIBIT 2 8-14 ~~{!~ ~~~ cm' of CHULA VISfA ®ffice of #lae pity Attorney 1VIemorandum TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM:..... Glen R. Googihs, City Attorney~SC`~-~~ _. DATE: Jrrly 9, 2012 RE: Proposition C: City Attorney's Report on Requirements for Implementation and Next Steps The purpose of this memorandmn is to outline the requirements for implementation of Proposition C and to identify the appropriate next steps towards completion of this process. A. LecalStatus The San Diego County Registrar has now certified that Chula Vista voters approved Proposition C at the City's June 5th 2012 General Election. The City Council is scheduled to confirm this elecfion result at its July 100` City Council meeting. Thereafter, the City Clerk will submit this result to the California Secretary of State. Upon "filing" by the Secretary of State, the Charter revisions contained in Proposition C will become "valid and binding."t The City Attorney will then work with the City Clerk to assure that all Prop. C changes have been formally incorporated into the City's official Charter document. B. Timinc for Auulication and Effectiveness of Various Prop C Chances Proposition C contains three primacy changes to the City Charter: (1) it changes the amount and form of the City Attorney's salary and compensation;2 (2) it subjects the City Attorney to term limits;3and (3) it authorizes the City Council to establish the office 1 Government Code Section 34459 and Proposition C Section 6 z Revised Chartea• Section 503 (c) s Revised Charter Section 503(e) 8-15 of Legislative Counsel.4 A copy of the full text of Proposition C is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Per attorney Tom Brown there is different timing for the application and effectiveness of these three changes 1. Adjustments to Compensation. According to Mr. Brown, the changes in Proposition C regarding City Attorney compensation would not apply during the current City Attorney's four year term. Instead, this change would apply to the City Attorney's four year term beginning December 2014.6 2. Tenn Limits. Mz•. Brown did not formally advise on the application of the term limits provision. He has since advised that further research on this question would be appxopriate.7 _ _, 3. Legislative Counsel. Mr. Brown advised (and I concur) that changes contained in Proposition C giving authority to the City Council to create the office of Legislative Counsel would apply immediately. C. Legislative Counsel: Requirements for Imnlementation Proposition C's new Charter Section 503.1 provides that its provisions be implemented by the City Council through an ordinances As you will recall, this was done on purpose. The idea was to create a Charter amendment that was "enabling"- giving the City Council the basic authority to have their own Legislative Counsel-with any unresolved legal and policy issues, including implementation and drafting details, deferred until after the election. 1. Primar~ssues to be Addressed. Mr. Brown identified a number of basic issues that would need to be addressed in any implementing ordinance or Council policy. We have added a few others. Collectively, these include the following: New Charter Section 503.1 s As you will recall, Tom Brown, from the law firm of Burke, Williams and Sorenson, was the lawyer that advised the CiTy Council on the preparation, submittal and related issues involving Proposition C. s This advice was given verbally by Mr. Brown at the City Council meeting of Februuy 28a' and is a]so contained in the "City Attorney Impartial Analysis" for Proposition C that was subsequently prepared by Mr. Brown. ~ Analysis provided by San Diego's County Counsel in 2010 regarding the application of new term limits rules to sitting County Supervisors suggests that-at least in that case-term limits wonld apply prospectively only, and would not include an axisting Supervisor's teem in the "two term limit" calculation. [See County Council's impartial analysis for San Diego County's Proposition B (approved by the voters on June 8, 2010.] s The fast paragraph of this Section reads as follows: "Notwithstanding any other provision of this Charter, the Council may establish by ordinance the office of Legislative Counsel, as described in this Section." [emphasis added]; See also the first sentence of the last patzg'aph of the City Attorney's Impartial Analysis 8-16 a. Nature and Terms of Emplovment. Will Legislative Counsel be a City employee or will the role be served by one ox more contract attorneys? Who will oversee the hiring process? What wi[1 be the terms and conditions of employment? b. Definition of "Legislative Duties". Section 503.1(b) indicates that Legislative Counsel "may advise the Council regarding its legislative duties." Does the City Council desire to implement this provision? If so, what are the City Council's "legislative duties"? Would Legislative Counsel only advise in this area where the City Attorney's office has a "conflict of interest"? (See discussion in Subsection c., below.) Reference to common definitions for the term "legislative duties" (if any), and the record of City Council proceedings on Proposition C would be appropriate. Since the proposal was based upon the model of "Legislative Counsel" to the California State Legislature, reference to the scope and focus of that office's duties would also be informative. _ _.. c. Defmition of "Conflict of Interest". Section 503.1(c) indicates that Legislative Counsel "may also advise the Council regarding conflicts of interest involving the City Attorney, and whether the hiring of special counsel is therefore watTanted." Does the City Council deshe to implement this provision? If so, how will "conflicts of interest" be determined, and by whom? An examination of the California Rules of Professional Conduct would be informafive, among other sources. d. Advice to the Boazd of Ethics and/or Chatter Review Commission. Section 503.1(d) indicates that Legislative Counsel "may advise the Council or the City's Board of Ethics concerning the City's Code of Ethics and alleged violations thereof, and further may advise the City's Charter Review Commission." Does the City Council desire to implement this provision, for either or both these groups? Would Legislative Counsel only advise in these areas where the City Attorney's office has a "conflict of interest"? (See discussion in Subsection c., above.) To what extent can Legislative Counsel advise individual Councll members on ethics issues? e. Resolution of Conflicts and/or Disputes. Section 503.1(e) provides that the City Council may also provide by ordinance for the Legislative Counsel's advice to be "in lieu of that of the City Attorney" in the matters described above, and/or for "resolution of conflicts and/or disputes" between the two. This is a complex area that raises many issues, with many possible responses and options. The basic question is: how should the relationship between the City Attorney and Legislative Counsel (and their respective roles and functions), be structured in order to minimize potential conflicts, risks and uncertainty? 2. Options for Drafting the Implementing Ordinance. City Attorney staff could draft the implementing ordinance for the Legislative Counsel position, either on its own or working with special outside counsel. Good options for special outside counsel include: Tom Brown, from Burke Williams in Sacramento (who is obviously familiar with the measure and the relevant issues), Shawn Hagerty, from BB&K in San Diego (who drafted the original Elected City Attorney 8-17 ordinance), or Sim Lough, with Lounsbery Ferguson in San Diego, a public law/elections expert who has advised the City Council on a number of sensitive issues over the years. We have talked with all three of these lawyers, and each is available and interested in providing assistance. If City Council does desire outside counsel, it is important that City Attorney's office and the City Manager continue to be engaged and involved in the process irr order to assure, as much as possible, a relationship and structure that maximizes efficiency and minimizes ambiguity and conflicts that might otherwise arise from competing opinions and/or overlapping duties. D. Implementation of Compensation Changes and Ternr Limits. Proposifion C's changes. in the terms_for_compensation of the City Attorney will ultimately need to be implemented through modifications to Chapter 2.11 of the City's Municipal Code which governs the Elected City Attorney position. While this need not occur immediately, changes should be made and adopted by no later Than December 2014, the commencement date of the first Elected City Attorney term to which this provision is applicable. Adoption prior to March 2014, or sooner, maybe preferable as any party running for this position would then have advance notice regarding the details ofthe position's compensation and benefits, Proposition C's addition of term limits does not, on its face, appear to require any implementing ordinance. Revised Charter Section 503(e) refers for details to the term limit provisions governing City Council members provided for in Charter Section 300(d). Further research on the applicability of this provision to existing and future terms maybe appropriate. E. Conclusion/Next Steps Proposition C has been approved by the voters. After some minor administrative steps, it will soon Ue "valid and binding." Now that the measure has been approved, the City Attorney's office is committed to facilitating its implementation consistent with its terms. The provision of Proposition C that is effective "immediately" is the provision for Legislative Counsel. The next step in this is to draft the required ordinance. The City Attorney's office recommends that the City Attorney's oflice initiate the. drafting of this ordinance with the assistance of special outside counsel. Special consideration should be given to the issues raised in this memorandum in the drafting of the ordinance. 4 8-18 EXHIBIT 3 $-19 • ~~ 1901 Harrison Street -Suite 900 Oakland, California 94612-3501 voice 51 D.273.8780 -fax 510.839 ~_ i. :~r i inpn .~ e: ^liCV. ~ i. r, www.bwslaw.com August I, 2012 .9104 Bart Miesfeld Office of the City Attorney City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, California 91910 Direct No.: 510.903.8640 tbrown~bwslaw.eom Re: Proposal to Provide Special Counsel Services to the Ci[y of Chula Vista To Assist In The .Adoption Of An nrdinanre Implementing Measure C Dear Mr. Miesfeld: On behalf of Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP ("Burke"J, I am pleased to submit [his proposal [o provide special counsel services to the City of Chula Vista for the implementation of the City's recent ballot measure (Measure CJ amending the City charter to establish the City Council appointed position of "legislative counsel" in addition to the elected City Attorney. Burke was founded in 1927, and is a diverse, dynamic, and preeminent public law firm. For nearly 80 years, the representation of public agencies has been the cornerstone of Burke's legal practice. The firm currently serves the legal needs of nearly 200 local governmental entities, including cities, Jotnt powers authorities, counties, and water and school districts. We take pride in our long-standing tradition of providing excellent legal services at reasonable rates, and believe our team at Burke offers the depth, expertise, and commitment that the City seeks from its counsel. Ours is a rich tradition of providing high quality advice and services to public agencies. We are prepared to work closely with you In budgeting, performing, reporting on, and updating the legal services you need. We have developed significant experience and expertise in representing charter cities such as Chula Vista, and to assisting in the development of their municipal ordinances. In addition to my own experience and expertise in this area, I would draw (only as needed, of course, and subject to careful consideration of efficiency and cost-controll) on the expertise of several other experienced public law/charter city attorneys at Burke, including Brian A. Pierik, Manuela Albuquerque, Donald M. ("Don") Davis and Janei Cory Sommer. Mr. Pierick and Mr. Davis are both located in the Southern California area, a consideration that may result in increased efficiency and cost-effectiveness for Chula Vista. 1 am a partner in our Oakland office. I have 30 years of experience as City Attorney, Deputy City Attorney and in representing public agencies. For 12 years, I served as City Attorney for the City of Napa. Prior to my tenure a[ [he City of Napa, I served for six years as Senior Deputy City Attorney for the City of Berkeley. I also have served as special counsel for many public agencies, and currently serve as the City Attorney for the City of St. Helena. I have drafted hundreds of charter city ordinances on virtually every aspect of city affairs. As one recent example, I assisted the City of Napa In its decision to restructure Its personnel/human resources 8-20 Los Angeles - Inland Empire - Mario County - Oakland - Orange County - Palm Desert - Silicon Valley - Ventura County r,~~;:~ i~t..i ~,r, t„riv i Bart Miesfeld July 31, 2012 Page 2 functions, and currently represent it (n litigation challenging that decision. In addition, earlier this year I represented Chula Vista in its consideration, analysis, drafting and submittal [o the voters of Measure C. Brian A. Pierik is a partner in Southern California, and is the City Attorney for the cities of Camarillo and Atascadero. He is a seasoned municipal attorney, who also has substantial experience representing charter cities, with vast experience drafting a wide array of ordinances, many of which required substantial analysis and stakeholder/community outreach. Brian assisted me in my work representing Chula Vista in its consideration, analysis, drafting and submittal to the voters of Chula Vista Measure C. Manuela Albuquerque is a partner in our Oakland office, and served as the City Attorney of Berkeley, a charter city, for twenty-two years. Ms. Albuquerque has been involved with virtually every type of administrative law matter which can come before a City. She has drafted ordinances, regulations and procedures, and advised on their implementation and application within the full range of municipal law subjects. Don Davis Is a partner in our Los Angeles office. He too is an experienced municipal attorney with an extensive history analyzing and drafting municipal ordinances of virtually every type. In addition, [o [he extent [he ordinance implicates personnel, labor and employment issues, we would propose to Include one of our labor and employment attorneys on the Chula Vista "team." One example Is Janet Cory Sommer. Janet is a partner in Northern California who assisted in the analysts of the labor and employment issues arising in connection with Measure C. Our professional summaries are included as Attachment A. Professional summaries for all of Burke's other attorneys can be found at www.bwslaw.com. Based on our previous work with the City in developing Measure C, and on our review of the recent City Council discussion and direction on July 10, 2012 with respect to the engagement of special counsel, I would anticipate that our role in assisting [he City in its development of an ordinance implementing Measure C could entail the following: general direction from the City Council with respect to policy and operational Issues; " review of applicable City charter and municipal code provisions; • research and review of "template"/exemplar ordinances from other jurisdictions; analysis of legal issues, including potential conflict of interest issues and labor and employment issues; analysis of the relationships between various charter and municipal code provisions; and 8-21 ~'i . - r~ur~ . nnni nasitsr ~•~ i i Bart Miesfeld July 3 t, 2012 Page 3 outreach to, and coordination with, Clty stakeholders, Including potentially (and as directed by the City Council) the Council itself, [he City Manager, the City Attorney, the Ethics Commission, the Charter Review Commission and the public; • drafting and revisions of an implementing ordinance. I have many years of experience in developing ordinances under similar circumstances, as does the entire "team' proposed. We would be well-suited and able to do such work for Chula Vista, whether again, as directed by Council) in a lead or assisting role. We propose the rates of $295 for partners and, to the extent needed, $255 for associates. Thank you for considering us. If you have any questions regarding this proposal, or if you would like additional information, please feel free to contact me. I look forward to hearing from you. Very truly yours, BUR ,WILLIAM SORENSEN, LLP r Partner $-22 ATTACHMENT A -PROFESSIONAL SUMMARIES curer. Partner State Bar No. 104254 Oakland Office 1901 Harrison Street Suite 900 Oakland, California 94612 voice: 510.273.8780 fax S 10.839.9104 [brown@bwslaw.com ~raS4lt~;`<i;iri~l iF7 i ien~m~nrnm~n Litigation Public Law Real Estate & Business Law J.D., University of California, Hastings College of the Law, 1982 B.A., University of California, Santa Barbara, 1978 ~l!J 441 p1: State Bar of California United Slates Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit United States District Court for [he Eastern DistricC of California United Stales District Court for [he Northern Dis[ric[ of California United States Supreme Court Thomas B. Brown Mr. Brown is a partner of the firm and served for 12 years as the City Attorney for the City of Napa. Prior to his tenure at the City of Napa, he served as Senior Deputy City Attorney for the City of Berkeley. Mr. Brown represents both public agency and private clients. His practice focuses on all aspects of municipal law. He has extensive experience advising clients and litigating in land use, zoning and planning, the California Environmental Ctuali[y Ac[ ('CEC1A'~, real property entitlements, police power, charter cities, municipal taxation, Brown Act, Public Records Ac[, code enforcement, intergovernmental relations, grand juries, elections, initiatives, and referenda. Mr. Brown was a visiting professor at Sonoma State University where he taught, 'California Land Use Law,' (Spring Semester 2002). Representative Matters Haro v. CifyofSo/anoBeach 195 CaLApp.4th 542 (2011( Trinity Park L.P. v. City of Sunnyva/e, 193 Cal.App. 4th 1014 (201 I) Disney v. City of Concord, 194 Cal.App. 4th 1410 (2011( County of Sonoma v. Superior Court, 190 Cal. App. 4th 1312 (2010( Bui/ding /ndustry Association v. County of Stanis/aus, 190 Cal. App. 4th 582 (2010( Urban Habitat v. Cify of P/easanton, 164 Cal.App,4th 1561 (2008) Hernandez v. City of Hanford, 41 Cal.4th 279 (2007) Smith v. City of Napa, 120 Cal.App.4th 194 (2004) Home Bui/dersAssociation v. City of Napa, 90 Cal. App. 4th 188, rev. den. 2001 Cal. LEXIS 6166 (Cal. Sept. 12, 2001 ~, cert. den. 535 U.S. 954, 152 L. Ed. 2d 353, 122 S. Ct. 1356, 2002 U.S. LEXIS 1946, 70 U.S.L.W. 3595 (2002) Saad v. City of Berke/ey, 24 CaLApp.4th 1206 (1994) B/ack Property Owners Association v. City of Berke/ey, 22 Cal.App.4th 974 (1994) Fisher v. County ofA/ameda, 20 Ca1.App.4th 12 ~ 1993) CiryofHerke/ey v. Cukierman, 14 Cal.App.4th 133 t (1993) Proposal to Provide Special Counsel Services to the City of Chula Vista Page A-1 8-23 Publications 'Feduniak v. Ca/ifornia Coasta/ Commission: The Coastal Commission Gets A Mulligan On Its Longstanding Failure 7o Enforce Violations Of Permit Conditions', The Morin Lawyer (July 2007) 'Note, The Reliance/Privity Requirement In Lawsuits Against Developers For Fraud And Concealment', Ca/iforniaRea/PropertyJourna/, Vol. 3, No. 3 (Summer 1985) Presentations 'Housing Element Law Update and Use by Right Zoning: HCD Is At It Again,' County Counsels Association (July 201 1) `Mammoth Lakes Land Acquisition LCC v. Town of Mammoth Lakes. The S40 Million Hit Could Have Been Avoidedll,' Contra Costa County City Attorneys Association (July 201 1) 'Challenges to Housing Element from Urban Habitat Program v. City ofP/easanton [o Haro v. City of So/ana Beach,' City Attorneys Association of San Diego County (May 201 1) 'How to Litigate a Writ of Mandate Case," League of California Cities 201 I City Attorneys Spring Conference (May 201 I ) `CFviJ Grand Juries." County Counsels Association (July 2010) "Recent Developments in Housing Element Law and Inclusionary Zoning," County Counsels Association (May 2010) 'Recent Developments In Medical Marijuana Regulation,' County Counsels Association (April 2010) '2009 Significant Developments in California Reai Property Law,' Morin County Bar Association (February 2010) 'Recent Developments In Med(cai Marijuana Regulation,' Contra Costa County City Attorneys Association (February 2010) "How To Litigate A CEQA Case; Recent Developments In Agricultural Mitigation Litigation,' County Counsels Association (December 2009) 'Recent Developments In Medical Marijuana Regulation,' Bay Area City Attorneys (November 2009) "MOrongo Band of Indians: Due Process in Administrative Hearings,' County Counsels Association (September 2009) 'Home Sweet Home? Legal Challenges to Inclusionary Ordinances and Housing Elements,' League of California Cities Annual Conference (September 2009) "Supreme Court Update: Morongo Band of Mission Indians v. SWRCB; Vargas v. City of Salinas,' League of California Cities 2009 City Attorneys Spring Conference (May 2009) 'Land Use Law Update,' League of California Cities Planners Institute (March 2009) Current Issues In Elections, Public Records, and the Brown Act, City Clerks Association of California Annual Conference (April 2007 & April 2008) 'Land Use and CEQA Update,' League of California Cities City Attorneys Department, Spring & Fall Conferences (May 2003 & October 2003; May 2007 & September 2007; May 2008 & September 2006) Proposal to Provide Special Counsel Services to the City of Chula Vista Page A-2 8-24 'Current Issues Under the Public Records Act,' League of California Cities Annual Conference (September 2005) 'Inclusionary Housing: The Napa Experience," California Planning Association Annual Conference, San Diego, CA Fall 2002 Leadership Positions/Affiliations League of California Cities, City Attorneys Department Nominating Committee Chair, League of California Cities, Legal Advocacy Committee Member, League of California Cities, Legal Advocacy Committee League of California Cities, City Attorneys Department Due Process Committee, 2009 League of California Cities, City Attorneys Department Municipal Law Handbook Committee, 2010-2012 League of California Cities, City Attorneys Department Medical Marijuana Subcommittee, Z01 I-2012 Proposal to Provide Special Counsel Services to the City of Chula Vista Page A-3 8-25 Partner State Bar No. 062407 Ventura County Office 2310 East Ponderosa Drive, Suite 25 Camarillo, California 93010 direct: 805 437.4407 main: 805.987.3468 fax: 805.482.9834 bpierik@bwslawcom ~~.. Litigation Public Law J.D., Loyola School of Law, 1974 B.A., Political Science, Loyola University, 1971 r s California Slate Bar, 1974 United Stales Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 1988 Brian A. Pierik Brian Pierik joined the law firm of Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP in 1974 and has concentrated his practice in public law for the last 38 years. Mr. Pierik is a member of the firm's Public Law and Litigation Practice Groups. Mr. Pierik is the City Attorney for the City of Camarillo, the City Attorney for the City of Atascadero, and the Assistant City Attorney for the City of Santa Clarita. Mr. Pierik has served as Special Counsel to over 30 cities, as well as several other public entities including counties, school districts, water districts, and special agencies. Mr. Pierik has advised -Public entities in a wide range of matters including issues relating to conflicts of interest, Brown Act, planning, contracts, eminent domain, inverse condemnation, redevelopment, environmental, public works, land use, growth control, election issues, employment law, civil rights, land movement, and other municipal matters. Mr. Pierik has written and presented papers before the League of California Cities, the City Attorneys' Association of Los Angeles County, the California Specialized Training Institute, the Southern California Water Utilities Association, and the Public Works Officers Institute on several subjects including public contracts, public works protects, public entity liability, water law, and emergency management. United States District Cour4 Central District. 1974 Proposal to Provide Special Counsel Services to the City of Chula Vista Page A-4 8-26 Partner Slate Bar No. 067464 Oakland Office 1901 Harrison Street Suite 900 Oakland. CaliforMa 94612 voice: 510.273.8780 fax: 510.839,9104 malbuquerque@bwslaw.com .~ Litigation Public Law J.D., University of California, Hastings, College of Law, 1975 B.A„ Economics, California Stale University. Bakersfield, 1972 B.A., Economics, Miranda House Deihi University. Delhi, India, 1970 Manuela Albuquerque Manuela Albuquerque is the firm's Director of Complex Public Litigation. She combines wide-ranging expertise across the full spectrum of public law issues with significant litigation experience before state and federal trial and appellate courts. Ms. Albuquerque served as the Berkeley City Attorney for twenty-two years -from 1985 to 2007, the longest tenure of any city attorney in Berkeley's history, garnering numerous awards for her outstanding work. She advised the Berkeley City Council, Housing Authority, City Manager and staff, and over forty, nine-member City boards and commissions, while also litigating cases at every level of state and federal courts in conJunction with a team of in-house litigators and subject matter specialists that she developed and managed. She has personally litigated some of Berkeley's most significant cases and filed amlcus briefs on behalf of cities and counties in many important cases. Ms. Albuquerque was the President of the City Attorney's Department of the League of California Cities from 1994-1995, serving on the Department's Executive Committee for three years. She represented city attorneys on the League of California Cities Board of Directors from 2003-2005 and in that capacity served on the City Attorney's Department Executive Committee for two years. Through her litigation advocacy, she has helped shape the law in favor of municipalities in many different areas Including the Firs[ Amendment, equal protection, impairment of contract, takings, due process, CEQA, charter city powers, tax issues, rent control, subsidized housing and housing element law. She has served on many important Clty Attorney Department Committees including ethics, due process and Proposition 218. Ms. Albuquerque was the recipient of a California Lawyer of the Year award and a Top Women Litigators' award in 2007 for her advocacy in Evans v. City of Berke/eybefore the California Supreme Court. She was selected as the Public Lawyer of the Year by the State Bar of California's Public Law Section in 2005. Representative Matters California State Bar Morongo Band of Mission /ndians v. State Water Resources United States District Court Contro/Board, 45 Cal.4th 731 (2009( (procedural due process in Northern District of California, administrative hearings) 1975 United States Court ofAppeais Evans v. City afBerke/ey, 38 Cal.4[h 1 (2006) (First amendment for the Ninth Circuit, 1982 and subsidies) united States Supreme Court, Marina v. Board of Trustees of the Ca/ifornla State University, 39 1985 Cal.4th 341 (2006( (CEC)A and impact of university development on cities.) Chapman v. Superior Court, 130 Cal.App.4th 261 (2005( (conflicts of interest under 1090 and liability of public agency( Proposal to Provide Special Counsel Services to the City of Chuta Vista Page A-5 8-27 RU/ One Corporation v. City of Berkeley, 371 Fad 1137 (9th Circuit 2003) (Living Wage ordinance and equal protection and impairment of contract) Kajlma/Ray Wi/son v. Metropo/itan Transportation Authority, 23 Cal.4th 305 (2000) (public contracting and promissory estoppel) Saad v. Ciry of Berke/ey, 24 Cai.App.4th 1206 (1994) (land use and takings) B/ack Property Owners Assn v. City of Berke%y, 22 Cal.App.4[h 974 (1994) (housing element) F/sher v. County ofA/ameda, 20 Cai.App.4th 120 (1993) (charter city powers of taxation) City of Berke/ey v. Cukierman. 14 Cal.App.4th 1331 (1993) (business license taxes and equal protection) Davis v. Ciry of Berkeley, 51 Cal.3d 227 (1990) (subsidized housing) fisher v. City of Berke/ey, 475 U.S. 1150 (1956) (rent control and federal anti-[rust law preemption) Affiliations City Attorneys' Department Representative on League of California Cities Board of Directors 2003-2005 City Attorneys' Department Executive Committee 2003-2005 Member, City Attorneys' Department Due Process Committees 2005 and 2008 Chair, League of California Cities Nominating Committee, Spring 1999 President, City Attorneys' Department 1994-1995 First Vice-President, City Attorneys' Department 1992-1993 Second Vice-President, Ci[y Attorneys' Department 1991-1992 Chair, Municipal Law Practitioners' Directory Committee 1992-1993 Member, City Attorney's Department Municipal Law Institute Committee from 1995 and continuing Member, Asian American Bar Association Publications & Presentations Albuquerque (co-presenter with Tom Brown(, 'How to Litigate a Writ of Mandate Case,' League of California Cities, City Attorneys' Department Spring Conference, May 201 1 Albuquerque, "Due Process In Local Administrative Hearings After The California Supreme Court's Opinion in Morongo Band of Mission Indians v. California State Water Resources Control Board, 45 Cal.4th 731 (2009)" League of California Cities, City Attorneys' Department Spring Conference, May 2009 County Counsels' Association of California Fall Conference, October 2009 Albuquerque (co-author( "Ethical Principles for City Attorneys" adopted by the City Attorneys' Department at its Spring Conference in May 2005 Proposal to Provide Special Counsel Services fo [he Ciiy of Chula Vista Page A-6 8-28 Albuquerque ~co-author) "Practicing Ethics: A Handbook for Municipal Lawyers." League of California Cities 120041 Albuquerque, "Procedural Due Process Limitations on the Municipal Lawyer Combining Quasi-Judicial and Prosecutorial or Investigatory Functions" ~2004~ League of California Cities City Attorneys' Spring Conference Albuquerque, `Public Lawyers as Whistle-Blowers: Proposed Revisions To State Bar Rule of Professional Conduct 3-600 Albuquerque, "Joint Defense of Suits brought Against Public Entities and Their Employees: Are Conflicts Manufactured or Reai" Vol. 23, No. 4, Public Law Journal 5 ~2000J Albuquerque, "Preemption Unveiled -The Full Monty" Western City Magazine, June 1998 Albuquerque, "The City Attorney -Monitor, Mentor or Meddler?" City Attorneys' Annual Conference ~ 1999J Albuquerque, 'California and Dillon: The Times They Are a-Changing" 2 Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly 187 1Winter 19981 (concerns the constitutional power of California cities) Albuquerque, `City Attorney Ethical Issues' Cities Attorneys' Spring Conference (19931 Albuquerque, `General Municipal Litigation Update," Ci[y Attorneys' Annual Conference X1992) Albuquerque, "General Municipal Litigation Update," City Attorneys' Spring Conference 11992) Albuquerque, "General Municipal Litigation Update," City Attorneys' Annual Conference ~1991~ Albuquerque, "The Local Response to the Issues Regarding the Homeless," City Attorneys' Department Spring Conference j 1987 Albuquerque, San Diego Nary Federal Credit Union v. Cumis /assurance Society. Its Implications for Public Entties, CRy Attorneys' Spring Conference 119851 Note, "The Invisible Hand and the Clenched Fist: Is There a Safe Way to Picket Under the First Amendment?" 26 Hastings Law Journal 167 ~ 1975) Recognitions 2010 Lifetime Achievement Award -South Asian Bar Association 2007 California Lawyer of the Year award -California Lawyer magazine 2007 Top Women Litigator award -Daily Journal legal newspaper 2007 Inducted into first annual "California Stale University, Bakersfield Alumni Hall of Fame" 2005 Public Lawyer of the Year award -Public Law Section, California State Bar 2005 Overall Community Service award - California State Bar Minority Bar Coalition 2002 Role Model award -Clara Foiz Feminist Association, Hastings College of the Law 2000 Trailblazer award -National Asian Pacific American Bar Association 1999 Selected as one of 12 Asian Pacific American Leadership Institute fellows Proposal to Provide Special Counsel Services to the Ci[y of Chula Vista Page A-7 8-29 1999 Honored by Indians for Collective Action for outstanding contributions to the community 1997 Featured as one of 12 Asian American Women of Hope in the United States by the Bread and Roses Cultural Project in its poster set and study guide aimed at middle school children to provide them with rote models 1997 Honored by the South Asian Bar Association for outstanding service to the South Asian community Proposal to Provide Special Counsel Services to thc: City of Chula Vista Page A-B 8-30 Partner State Bar No. 169163 Los Angeles Office 444 South Flower Street Suite 2400 Los Angeles, California 90071 direct 213.236.2702 main 213.236.0600 fax: 213.236.2700 ddavis@bwslaw.com ~;rt~n~acta~mx~ ~~twe Litigation Public Law .~ J.D., University of California, Davis, 1993 B.A., English, cum/dude Wake Forest University, 1984 California State Bar, 1993 United States District Court, Central District, 2002 Donald M. Davis Mr. Davis serves as a Deputy City Attorney for [he cities of Camarillo and Industry, and assists numerous other Southland cities with land use and public law matters, particularly regulations implicating federal and state rights of freedom of speech and expression. He has served as the Town Attorney and Assistant Town Attorney for the Town of Yountville (I 993- 1999(, the Assistant City Attorney for the Cities of Calistoga and St. Helena (1993-1998) and the City of Goleta (2001-2002, and as the Assistant General Counsel for the Napa Sanitation District X1993-1998(. Mr. Davis also has represented redevelopment agencies and joint powers authorities. In addition, Mr. Davis has represented private landowners and developers in land use, development, and redevelopment matters. Mr. Davis advises public agencies and staff on a broad range of issues such as the Brown Act, CECIA, code enforcement, conflicts of interest under the Political Reform Ac[, general plan updates, joint powers agreements, land use, mobile home rent control, personnel, public works bidding and contracts, the Public Records Ac[, use permits, variances, and zoning. Mr. Davis drafts opinions, ordinances and resolutions, and negotiates and drafts all types of development, Joint powers, and public/private agreements. Mr. Davis frequently lectures on California's open meeting and public records laws and on land use matters for the University of California Extension, Lorman Educational Services, and other organizations and entities. As a litigator, Mr. Davis has successfully defended public agencies in matters involving due process, equal protection, freedom of speech, government torts, inverse condemnation, public bidding and contract disputes, and writs of mandamus including CE~A suits. Mr. Davis also has represented private clients in real estate, contract, and business-related litigation. Prior to becoming an attorney, Mr. Davis served as a United States Peace Corps Volunteer In Yemen and also worked as an international educational consultant. Proposal to Provide Special Counsel Services to the Ciry of Chula Vista Page A-9 8-31 Partner State Bar No. 169516 Silicon Valley Office 2440 West EI Camino Real Suite 620 Mountain View, California 94040 voice: 650.327.2672 fax: 650.688.8333 jsommer@bwslaw com Education Law Labor & Employment Law Public Law i u 0 0 J.D., Stanford Law School B.A., University of California. Berkeley Stale Bar of California, 1993 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1994 United States District Court for the Central Dis[ric[ of California, 1994 United States District Court for [he Eastern District of California. 1994 United Slates District Court for the Northern District of California, 1993 Janet Cory Sommer Janet Sommer is a partner in [he law firm of Burke, Williams & Sorensen. She was previously a partner at Kay & Stevens. Ms. Sommer focuses on labor relations, employment, education, and other public law matters. She has worked in California public sector law and policy since 1984. Ms. Sommer worked with the California Legislature as Chief Consultant to the Assembly Education Committee. Before turning her focus to labor, employment, and education, Ms. Sommer represented public sector and political clients in education, election, and political matters. Ms. Sommer acts as a negotiator and represents local agencies on a variety of employment, labor relations, education, and other public law issues. Ms. Sommer also conducts trainings in labor relations, employee evaluation and discipline, sexual harassment, and other public sector employment issues. She has presented trainings for the National Public Employers Labor Relations Association ~NPELRAJ, the California Public Employers Labor Relations Association ~CALPELRA~, [he Center for Collaborative Solutions ~CCS), the Association of California School Administrators ~ACSA), the School Employers Association ~SEA~, and for many public agency clients. Ms. Sommer is a contributing author of Lega/ Trends. Proposal to Provide Special Counsel Services to the City of Chula Vista Page A-10 8-32 EXHIBIT 4 8-33 Intlian Wells I ~ ~i (760) 568-2611 $EST BEST & KRIEGER ~ (Nine (949) 263-2600 ATTORNEYS A T L A W Los Angeles (273) 617-8100 Ontario 655 West Broadway, 150 Floor, San Diego, CA 92101 (909) 969-8564 Phone: (619) 525-1300 ~ Fax: (619) 233-6118 ~ www.bbklaw.com Shawn Hagerty (619)525-1327 Shawn. hagerty@bbklaw.com File No. 60093.00010 August 2, 2012 VtA E-MAIL Bart Miesfeld Assistant City Attorney Chula Vista, City of 276 Fourth Street, MC C-100 Chula Vista, CA 91910 Riversitle (95'1)666-1450 Sacramento (916)325-4000 Walnut Creek (925) 977-3300 Washington, DC (202) 785-0600 Re: Qualifications and Proposal to Provide Legal Services in Connection with Proposition C Dear Mr. Miesfeld: This letter sets forth Best Best & Krieger's ("BBK") qualifications and proposal to provide legal services to the City of Chula Vista ("City") in connection with Proposition C. Proposition C was approved by the voters at the City's June 5th 2012 General Election. Among other things, Proposition C adds Section 503.1 to the Chula Vista City Charter. Section 503.1 authorizes the City Council to establish the office of Legislative Counsel by ordinance. Pursuant to your request, this letter sets forth our qualifications and proposal to provide legal services to the City in connection with establishing the office of Legislative Counsel. QUALIFICATIONS BBK is afull-service law firm with more than 200 attorneys in California and Washington, D.C. BBK has an extensive municipal law practice. Our lawyers serve as city attorney to 30 California cities and also provide special counsel services to cities throughout the state. We have extensive experience with drafting ordinances, including ordinances that implement city charier measures. A brochure summarizing our municipal experience is attached. BBK proposes that Shawn Hagerty perform the work on the ordinance implementing the Legislative Counsel position. Mr. Hagerty is a partner in the firm's municipal law group and practices out of the firm's San Diego office. Mr. Hagerty serves as City Attorney to the City of Santee and Corporation Counsel to Civic San Diego (formerly the Centre City Development Corporation). As necessary, Mr. Hagerty would use the services of Brooke Miller, an associate in the San Diego office. Resumes for Mr. Hagerty and Ms. Miller are attached. 60093.00010 V S 343 64. I 8-34 iy~ BEST BEST & KRIEGER 3 ATTORNEYS AT LAW Bart Miesfeld Assistant City Attorney August 2, 2012 Page 2 BBK has performed legal services for the City on many previous occasions. Most relevant to this assignment is our work with regard to the Elected City Attorney Charter Amendment and its implementing ordinance. On these matters, Mr. Hagerty assisted the City Clerk during the process by which the Elected City Attorney Charter Amendment was initially approved and also assisted the City Council in connection with the development and adoption of the implementing ordinance. Mr. Hagerty has also previously provided special counsel services to the Ethics Commission. PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK Proposition C authorizes the City Council to establish the office of Legislative Counsel by ordinance and provides basic parameters for the position if established. Proposition C thus provides the City Council with authority to establish the details of the Legislative Counsel position in an implementing ordinance. If retained by the City, we would work with the City Council to draft an ordinance that implements the basic parameters set forth in Proposition C and that also addresses the legal and policy questions that must be resolved to establish the position. These legal and policy questions include, but are not limited to, the five issues identified in the City Attorney's July 9, 2012 memorandum to the City Council. The steps necessary to perform the required work would be more formally established through consultation with the City Council. However, we believe that the following work will likely be required: • Review and analysis of Proposition C and its relationship to other portions of the Charter. • Research into other similar Legislative Counsel positions and any implementing ordinances associated with those positions. • Consult with the City Council regarding the desired scope and detail for the Legislative Counsel position. • Consult with, as directed by City Council, other City departments and commissions, including the City Manager, City Attorney and Ethics Commission. • Draft the ordinance. 60093,00010\7534384.1 8-35 i~:~ BEST BEST ~ KRIEGER 3 ATTORNEYS AT LAW Bart Miesfeld Assistant City Attorney August 2, 2012 Page 3 Finalize the ordinance as directed by the City Council. Attend City Council hearings. Proposition C lodges the authority over the position of Legislative Counsel with the City Council. Therefore, final decisions about the role and scope of the position are exclusively within the authority of the Council, subject to [he limits of the Charter and other applicable law. That said, the City Council may wish to conduct public outreach regarding the position. We could assist in such outreach through public workshops if so desired by the Council. In addition, creation of the position of Legislative Counsel may require consultation with the office of the City Attorney. As part of our work, we could coordinate, as directed by Council, with the office of the City Attomey to ensure that the ordinance is consistent with all legal requirements and Charter provisions. Such coordination may be important because the Legislative Counsel position must be established in a manner that is consistent with the Charter authority of the City Attorney. Such coordination would take place with the understanding, however, that Proposition C empowers the City Council to make final decisions about the position. PROPOSED FEES We would propose to perform this work at the following hourly rates: Partner (Shawn Hagerty) $ 260 per hour Associate (Brooke Miller) $ 225 per hour Thank you for the opportunity to submit our qualifications and this proposal. If I can answer any questions or provide additional information, please let me know. Very truly yours, ~~~ ~~ Shawn Hagerty of BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP Attachments 60093.00010\7534384.1 8-36 Ii~iX BEST BEST & KRIEGER_ A"ll fl Rf(Fl'S ST L1\V 8-37 M Cost-Effective Municipal Leg Comprehensive Municipalities operate in a complex and challenging environment. BB&K's Municipal Law Group helps your city capitalize on opportunities and overcome challenges. Whether your city needs general or specialized we are the most comprehensive and cost-effective municipal law firm. 8-39 Your Best Source for Legal Services City Council • City Attorney Services • Special Counsel Services • Public Policy & Ethics • Brown Act • Election Issues • LAFCO Management Services /City Clerk • Election & Redisvicting Issues • Council -Manager Relations • Brown Act • Records Retention & Destruction • Public Records Act • Subpoenas • California & Federal Government Relations Human Resources • Policy Review • Wage & Hour Law • Employee Benefits & Contracts • MOU Negotiations • Discipline@ssues • Labor Litigation Economic Development & Affordable Housing • Economic Development & Infrastructure • Successor Agency Issues • Public-Private Partnerships • Real Estate Transactions • Affordable Housing • Housing Authority8 HousingCommission Issues Finance • Public Financings • Fees, Taxes & Assessments • Prop 2b & 218 • Model Contracts • Business Licensing • Assessment Foreclosures 8-40 Planning & Development • General & Specific Plans • Sustainabiliry, SB 375 & AB 32 • Williamson Act • Zoning Codes • Development Agreements • Environmental Law Utilities • Franchise Agreements • Water Quality & Rights • Waste Water • Property Acquisition • Electricity & Renewables Telecommunications & Revenue Generation Police • Civil Rights & 1983 Actions • Pitchers Motions • Policy Review • Use of Force • Internal Affairs Reviews • Critical Incident/Administrative 6nvestigations Code Enforcement • Cost Recovery Programs • Receiverships • Medical Marijuana + Massage Parlor Abatements • Civil & Criminal Prosecution • Graffiti Abatements Public Works • Transportation • Storrnwater (NPDES) • Construction Litigation • Construction Contracts • Property Acquisition • Infrastructure • Telecommunications Including Cost Recovery 8-41 8-42 ,,& BEST BEST BL 11KIEGER3 Dynamic municipal leadership requires dynamic legal service. Best Best & Krieger provides our local government clients with professional and comprehensive legal advice. Our focus is on being proactive, not reactive. We track current trends in both state and federal law and incorporate them info our advice to our clients. Ow' lawyers have special expertise in assisting municipalities in their intergovernmental relations. When scary, we zealously defend our clients in litigation matters. We keep our clients fully informed and involved as litigation matters progress. The BB&K Municipal Law practice group focuses solely on helping public clients successfully maneuver through legal complexities and govenunental mandates. Because BB&K has a history of extensive involvement in all aspects of municipal law, we have pioneered methods to deliver advisory and litigation services in a comprehensive and cost-effective manner. Our approach ensures the highest quality and most timely representation available in California. In addition to the specific areas of municipal law described at right, BB&K also provides representation in the following specialized fields in which issues may arise far municipalities: o CEQA and Environmental Law o Employee Benefits o Litigation and Dispute Resolution o Public Finance o Real Estate For additional information, please contact effr y Ballineer, Municipal Law practice group leader. 8-43 BEST BEST & KRIEGE6~ i~ iX' BEST & KRIEGER Shawn Hagerty is a partner in the Municipal Law practice group of Best San Diego Best & Krieger LLP. He serves as both general and special counsel for municipalities throughout California from the firm's San Diego Office. San Diego, CA 92101 Mr. Hagerty provides both advisory and litigation services to municipalities in the a of land use and planning, including general plan, zoning, subdivision map act P: (619) 525-1327 and other land use regulations. He assists municipalities with election issues. He F: (619) 233-6118 serves as City Attorney for the City of Santee, where he advises the City on the full Shawn.Hagerty@bbklaw.com range of municipal issues. He also serves as Corporate Counsel to Civic San Diego (formerly the Centre City Development Corporation), a nonprofit corporation EduCatiOn that provides land use, economic development services and project management to downtown San Diego. University of Wisconsin, J.D., with honors (1995) Mr. Hagerty received his law degree, with honors, from the University of Wisconsin in 1995, where he was a staff member of the Wisconsin Law Review and a College of William and Mary, B.A. teaching assistant in the legal writing department. Mr. Hagerty graduated, with honors, from the College of William & Mary in 1991, with a major in religion. Mr. Hagerty teaches a land use and planning class at the UCSD Extension, and regularly presents at seminars for organizations such as California Stormwater Quality Association, the Association of Environmental Professionals and other planning organizations. 8-44 BEST BEST & 1KRIEGER= i~ i~ BEST ceL KRIEGER=_ Brooke Miller is an associate in the Municipal & Redevelopment Law and Special San Diego Districts practice groups of Best Best & Krieger LLP. She currently serves as assistant city attorney for the City of Santee and provides general and special counsel services to numerous other cities and other public agencies. San Diego, CA 92101 Miller is a member of several practice sub-groups including the Public Works P: (619) 525-1313 sub-group, Public Policy and Ethics sub-group, Elections Law sub-group, and F: (619) 233-6118 Constitutional Law and Civil Rights sub-group. She regularly advises municipalities Brooke.Miller@bbklaw.com including cities, special districts and nonprofit public benefit corporations on a Education broad range of issues, including compliance with the Brown Act, the Political Reform Act and other government ethics laws, and the Public Records Act. Ms. Miller specializes in local, state and federally funded purchasing and public works University of Notre Dame, J.D. contracting, bid protests, change orders and contract disputes. She is experienced (2005) in drafting local ordinances, charter amendments and initiative measures, code and policy revisions; administration of municipal mobile home rent control; and Claremont McKenna College, B.A. defending municipal clients under the Government Claims Act. Ms. Miller also regularly advises public entities in the areas of municipal elections and campaign laws, and provides AB 1234 government ethics training to local government officials and employees. Ms. Miller graduated cum laude from Claremont McKenna College with a dual major degree in International Relations and French in 2002. She received her law degree from the University of Notre Dame Law School in 2005 and was admitted to the California Bar in 2005. While attending Notre Dame, Ms. Miller served as articles editor for theNotre Dame Journal of Legislation and completed a judicial externship with Associate Justice William F. Rylaarsdam of the California Court of Deal for the 4th District, Division 3. Ms. Miller is a member of the City Attorneys Association of San Diego, the Lawyers Club of San Diego and the Municipal Management Association of $-45 BEST BEST R' KRIEGER_ ,,& BEST BEST SL 11KIEGER= Southern California (MMASC) and has participated in League of California Cities (LCC), Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA), California Special Districts Association (CSDA) and Association of Women in Water Energy and Environment (AWWEE) trainings, conferences and other events. She has published several articles in publications including the Los Angeles Daily Journal and the Public Law Journal. Her article written with Grover Trask on the applicability of Government Code section 1090 to charter schools was published in the Summer 2011 issue of the Public Law Journal. Ms. Miller is an active volunteer in the San Diego community and has served on the Associate Board of San Diego Youth Services and volunteered with the City Ballet of San Diego. 8-46 BEST BEST & IZRIEGER~ EXHIBIT 5 8-47 LOUNSBERY FERGUSON ALTONA & PEAK I,I.P ATTORNEYS AT LAW 960 Canterbury Place, Suite 300 Escondido, Califomia 92025-3870 Telephone (760) 743.1201 Facsimile (760) 7419926 W W W,[.F1tF.COm os couNSSC: JAMES P. LOUGH GARTH O. RL'1D SYECGLCOUNSEL• JOHN W. WITT August 1, 2012 Bart Miesfeld, Assistant City Attorney City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Re: Legal Advisor- Proposition C Implementation Plan Deaz Mr. Miesfeld: Lounsbery Ferguson Altona & Peak is pleased to present the resume of James P. Lough for your consideration for legal advisor regarding the implementation of Proposition C. Mr. Lough has over 30 years public sector legal experience. During his career, he has represented the cities of Fresno, Hermosa Beach, Imperial Beach, and Solana Beach as city attorney. Currently, he serves as the city attorney for the City of Lemon Grove. He currently serves as the San Diego Division representative to the Legal Advocacy Committee of the League of California Cities. This Committee recommends to the League of California Cities the legal positions in ongoing litigation that would most benefit California Cities. Recently, he successfully represented the City of Vista in a case involving the allocation of power between the State and Charter Cities before the California Supreme Court. Mr. Lough has also represented the San Diego City Clerk's office in matters concerning citywide elections as special counsel and has advised the City of Chula Vista, San Diego, Cazlsbad and other Charter Cities in matters concerning ballot initiatives and charter interpretations. In Fresno, he oversaw the drafting of the Strong Mayor Forni of Government Charter changes that were a model used by the City of San Diego. Mr. Lough is considered an expert in Charter City issues and will speak on the subject at the September, 2012 League of California Cities Annual Convention in San Diego. He has conducted seminazs on AB 1234 (ethics) and has served as an expert witness in the San Diego Superior Court on the Ralph M. Brown Act. Over the past ten years, Mr. Lough has provided advice to a majority of the cities in San Diego County on election matters and the ballot initiative process. In addition to consulting with the State Legislative Counsel's office, Mr. Lough would consult with the City Attorney's offices of the lazgest cities in Califomia on how they resolve conflicts of interest. Based on his League of Califomia Cities work and as an advisory attorney to Charter Cities, Mr. Lough has worked closely with the Chief Assistant Attorneys in three of 8-48 LOUNSBERY FERGUSON ALTONA & PEAK LLP Legal Advisor- Proposition C August 1, 2012 Page 2 the four largest cities in California over the past twenty years and would use these contacts as a resource to develop applicable conflict rules. As part of the drafting process, the implementing ordinance(s) would have to include reliance upon the State Bar Ethics rules and conflict policies drawn from the private corporate sector, to the degree that they are applicable. He is familiar with the Chula Vista Charter and has appeared before the Board of Ethics and understands its role under Charter Section 503.1(d). The goal would be to draft a set of rules that would be consistent with the State Bar Rules of Professional Responsibility while being practical so that they are not an impediment to the governing process or an undue cost burden. This would require input from the city attorney's office, city management, council members, and the City Council public deliberative process. Draft measures would be circulated to the supervising parties on a timely basis under apre-set schedule developed jointly afrer services aze begun. Mr. Lough's current billing rate is $250. After selection, Mr. Lough would consult with city management and City Council to develop a budget and work within those parameters. Any variances from the budget and work program would be subject to City approval. We are available to meet with you and the panel to discuss this opportunity. The contact number is listed above, or you can reach Mr. Lough via email at inl(a~lfan.com. /Sincerely, i David W.,Fergusoq; sq. Managing Partner :kld Attachment 8-49 LOUNSBERY FERGUSON Ai.TONA & PEAK LLP na-roxNSrseT[-nw 9b0 Canmrbury Plaee, Suite 30D on wurxEc JADSE9 P. 1.oUG7i Escondido, California 92025-3670 GARTH 0.2sID Telephone (760) 743-1201 Facsimnc (760)743-9926 SPECW.000NSEL wvw,LFAP.cOm 10FIN W. WITT JAMES P. LOUGH Mr. Lough has specialized in municipal law since 1980. Beginning in 1985, he served as City Attorney for the City of Hermosa Beach. Beginning in 1992, Mr. Lough also served as the City Attorney for the City of Fresno. As Fresno City Attorney, he assisted in the development of the Strong Mayor Charter Reform package; issuance of pension obligation bonds to stabilize long-term pension obligations; and the development of a Regional Medical Center and a Triple A Baseball stadium for the Fresno Grizzlies. Mr. Lough has also served as the County Counsel to the County Humboldt. He supervised the County's civil legal staff and represented the Board of Supervisors, County Departments, Special Districts and the Grand Jury. He advised on general county legal issues and represented the County in federal and state litigation. h1 his capacity as County Counsel, he represented the Tax Assessment Appeals Board, County Registraz of Voters, the County Planning Commission and vazious county and special district boards and heazing bodies. He has represented special districts, counties, joint powers authorities and cities as both general and special counsel. He has served as General Counsel for entities including the Westside Hospital District, Vaughn Water Company, Del Rey Community Services District, North Coast Air Quality Management District, South Bay Regional Communications Authority, Lemon Grove Sanitation District, and the Lakeside Fire Protection District. As Special Counsel, he has represented numerous special districts including the Ridgecrest Community Hospital District, Five Cities Economic Development Authority, Redway Commmunity Services District, and the Sanger Unified School District. In 2001, Mr. Lough joined the firm of McDougal, Love, Eckis, Boehmer, Foley & Lough, where he served as City Attorney for Lemon Grove, Imperial Beach, and Solana Beach. He handled election matters, stormwater and environmental issues and represented various cities in writ proceedings and appellate work. He joined Lounsbery, Ferguson, Altona & Peak in February, 2010 as Of Counsel. Currently, Mr. Lough represents the City of Lemon Grove as City Attorney, and serves as Special Counsel for a variety of entities including Chula Vista, San Marcos and Vista. He successfully represented the City of Vista before the California Supreme Court on the issue of whether Charter Cities are subject to state legislative control in the expenditure of locally-generated tax revenue. 8-50 James P. Lough Page 2 Mr. Lough has published numerous articles for various legal publications, including Duquesne Law Review, Califomia Public Law Journal and Western Cities Magazine. He is also a co-editor of the 2001 edition of the Municipal Law Handbook, published by the League of Califomia Cities. Mr. Lough has also conducted u-aining on AB 1234 for various city governments, and has lectured before the San Diego City Attorney's Association, League of California Cities, Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund Leadership Training Program and Fresno Bai• Associations on a wide range of issues, including election law, Charter City issues, Proposition 218, The Ralph M. Brown Act, Campaign Finance Reform, and ethics. Mr. Lough attended California State University, Fullerton where he earned a degree in Political Science. In 1979 he earned his Juris Doctor degree from Southwestern University School of Law in Los Angeles where he was a Member of the Law Review and the Phillip Jessup International Law Moot Court team (National Semi-finalist). In 1980, he received his LL.M in Urban Studies from Washington University Schoo! of Law in St. Louis, Missouri. 8-51 EXHIBIT 6 8-52 ~ i ,~"~ ' ' ~ _` L.. i __ THE CABRERA FIRM A.P.C. August 2, 2012 Via Electronic Mail Bart Miesfeld Office of the City Attorney City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Re: Proposal regarding Assistance with Implementation Ordinance for Proposition C Dear Mr. Miesfeld: 1t is our pleasure to submit this cover letter and statement of qualifications to the City of Chula Vista ("City's for consideration as outside counsel to assist with the preparation of an implementing ordinance for the recently passed proposition "C." We propose the following attorneys far this work: Michael R.W. Houston and Guillermo Cabxexa. Mr. Houston is a Partner at Cummins & White, LLP and Mx. Cabrera is the owner and principal of The Cabrera Firm, APC. Both attorneys have a broad depth of experience advising public agencies, private parties and elected officials in election law, campaign finance, lobbying and government ethics matters. As discussed further below, Mx. Houston has extensive experience representing public agencies and private parties in municipal law and election law matters, including drafting ordinances and advising public agencies on the appropriate use of public funds to inform residents on public issues. Mr. Cabrera is a seasoned trial lawyer and has served as both a member and Chair of the San Diego Ethics Commission. Mx. Cabrera also currently serves as panel counsel for the City of Chula Vista's Board of Ethics Enforcement Authority. While Messrs. Houston and Cabrera do not practice at the same law firm, we frequently work together on clients' matters in a co-counsel relationship. It is worth noting that because Mt. Cabxexa is located in San Diego, we will not bill the City for fees relating to travel time to and from the City, even though Mr. Houston's office is located in Newport Beach. Should the City select our team, we anticipate that each firm will enter an engagement agreement with the City, but will provide one unified bill fox any work done. Both Mx. Houston and Mx. Cabxexa have practiced law continuously in California for more than 10 years. Michael R.W. Houston Michael R.W. Houston received his undergraduate degree in Political Science from Chapman University in 1997, graduating magna cum laude. He graduated from the Vanderb$t University School of Law in 2000 and was admitted to practice law in California in 2000. Mx. Houston joined Cummins & White as a partner in 2011. Prior to joining Cuxnnuns & White, Mr. Houston practiced with Rutan & Tucker, where he was made partner in 2007 501 West Broadway, Suite 800 Sao ^iego, CA 92101 Office: 679.400.4880 Fax: 619.4D0.4881 www.cabrerafirm.corn gil~cabrerafirm.com - ~ 5_ ,~ __ Mr. Bart Miesfeld August 1, 2012 Page 2 of 3 after joining as an associate in 2003. Mx. Houston began his career as a transactional real estate and land use attorney in San Diego County with the global law firm of Gxay, Cary, Ware & Friedenrich LLP (this firm was subsequently reorganized as DLA). Mx. Houston has represented public agencies for more than nine years and his attached resume provides a summary of his extensive public agency experience across a wide variety of matters. Mr. Houston presently is counsel to the Oversight Boards for the Successor Agencies of the cities of Chula Vista, National Cit}' and Corona. He also serves as special counsel to the cities of Newport Beach and Anaheim. From 2003 to February of 2011, Mr. Houston was the named Assistant City Attorney for the City of La Quinta. In addition, Mr. Houston's expertise on issues of municipal election law includes previously advising the Cities of Adelanto (on general plan ballot measures), Dana Point (on election law and the Political Reform Act), San Clemente (on election law) and Duarte (on election law). Mr. Houston is a member of the California Association of Political Attorneys and has regularly assisted municipal officials in Elections Code compliance. He has drafted ballot measures and impartial ballot analyses, and assisted city staff with preparing statutorily authorized analyses of ballot measures. He has extensive experience advising cities on the expenditure of public funds for political purposes under Stanron v. Mott and Vargar v. City of Sak'nar. Mx. Houston regularly advises governing board members, public agencies and private companies on the disclosure and disqualification obligations under the California Political Reform Act, as well as the contractual conflict of interest prohibitions of Government Code Section 1090, the common law conflict of interest doctrines, incompatible office issues, the restriction upon campaign contributions set farth in Government Code Section 84308 and campaign finance matters. Mr. Houston has devoted a substantial portion of his legal career to these and related issues. Mx. Houston has served as an expert witness in Section 1090 litigation. Mx. Houston has served as campaign counsel for a number of state and local elected officials. Mx. Houston has presented topics before the League of California Cities, the California Redevelopment Association and has been a reviewer for the Municipal Law Handbook. As noted above, Mx. Houston is counsel to the Chula Vista Oversight Board. In the event that you desire to retain Mr. Houston as part of this proposal, it will be necessary to review and dear conflicts for this matter. This could require obtaining conflict waivers from the CWexsight Board and, potentially, taxing entities represented on the Oversight Board. Alternatively, if that is problematic, other counsel with similar expertise could be associated in. Guillermo Cabrera Mx. Cabrera has been an attorney in San Diego County fox approximately fifteen years. His resume is attached. Prior to forming The Cabrera Firm, Mx. Cabrera was a senior associate with Cooley Godward I{xonish LLP and an associate with Luce; Forward, Hamilton & Scripps LLP where he specialized in business litigation, securities litigation, intellectual 8-54 Mx. Bart Miesfeld August 1, 2012 Page 3 of 3 property and employment law. Since forming the Cabrera Finn, one of Mx. Cabrera's specialties has been political law, assisting both' public and private entities with the review, drafting and enforcement of campaign finance, lobbying and ethics ordinances. Mx. Cabrera received his J.D. from Boston College in 1997 where he served as Notes Editor for the Third Wo$d Law Journal and was a Presidential Scholaz. Mr. Cabrera received his B.A. in Political Science from California State University, Fullerton in 1994. From 2005-2010, Mx. Cabrera served on the San Diego Ethics Commission, which monitors azid enforces the City's governmental campaign finance and ethics laws and proposes new governmental ethics law reforms. Mx. Cabxexa was Chair of the Ethics Commission from 2007-2009. During his tenure on the Ethics Commission, Mx. Cabxexa oversaw the initiation, investigation, prosecution and resolution of matters brought before the Ethics Commission. Mr. Cabxexa also worked with his fellow commissioners to overhaul the City of San Diego's Election Campaign Control Ordinance and the Lobbying Ordinance. Rate Structure We propose the rate of $275/hoax, which we presume would be memorialized in an engagement agreement in the event we axe selected. If alternative rates ox structures axe required, we are happy to discuss alternatives with the City. Anticipated Sc~e Work and Process We anticipate that the process of implementing this ordinance would involve initial discussions with the City Attorney's office to establish the most effiuent use of our services and coordination with the City Attorney. Thereafter, we would foresee a survey of similar jurisdictions' ordinances so that we do not reinvent the wheel where possible. In addition, we have experience in assisting cities provide informational material to voters in a manner that is consistent with the California Supreme Court decision in Vargas v. City of Salinas and aze prepared to work with the City Council and City Attorney to provide a plan fox outreach to all stakeholders and voters fox their information and comment. Finally, we would work with the City Attorney's Office to draft an effective ordinance that addresses all of the issues raised in Chaztex Section 503.1. We would also, of course, be available to work with its CitS~ Council review and consideration of the implementation ordinance. We are happy to provide references upon request. We look forward to hearing from you and if you would like to discuss our proposal, please contact either of the undersigned. Very y your , uillermo Cabxexa of The Cabrera Firm, APC GC/jmh Endosuxes 8-55 MICHAEL R.W. HOUSTON, ESQ. CURRICULUM VITAE AREAS OF Real Estate Transactions & Land Use Municipal/Public Agency Law PRACTICE California Environmental Quality Act Political Law & Government Ethics Counsel, Oversight Board for the Successor Agency to the National City Redv't Agency Counsel, Oversight Board for the Successor Agency to the Chula Vista Redv't Agency Counsel, Oversight Board for the Successor Agency to the Corona Redv't Agency General Counsel, Anaheim Transportation Network Special Counsel, City of Newport Beach -Tidelands and Real Property Transactions Special Counsel, City Attorney of the City of San Diego -Elections and Ethics Special Counsel, City of Napa -Land Use and Election Law Special Counsel, City of Anaheim -Public Ethics and Miscellaneous matters Former Assist. City Attorney and Redevelopment Agency Counsel, City of La Quinta Former Spec. Counsel, City of Marina -Redevelopment /Water Supply / CEQA Matters Former Counsel, Cities of Duarte, Dana Point, Adelanto & 29 Palms -Redevelopment ADMISSIONS United States Supreme Court All California Courts Federal District Courts for the Southern and Central Districts of California EDUCATION VANDERBH.T UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW, Nashville, TN Juris Doctorate, May 2000 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L.: Executive Solicitation Editor. CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY, Orange CA BA Political Science (magna cum laude), May 1997 EMPLOYMENT CUMMINS & WHTTE, Newport Beach, CA Partner Apri120L1 -Present. RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP, Costa Mesa, CA Partner: Government & Regulatory Section. Apri12003 -February 2011 GRAY, CARY, WARE & FREIDENRICH, LLP (NKA DLA PIPER), San Diego, CA Associate: Real Estate Services Group. October 2000 -April 2003 COUDERT BROTHERS, San Francisco, CA Summer Associate: Litigation Department. Summer 1999 CALH' ORNIA COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH DISTRICT, Santa Ana, CA Judicial Ex[em: The Honorable David Sills, Presiding Justice. Summer 1998 U.S. REPRESENTATIVE ED ROYCE (FORMERLY CA-39), Fullerton, CA Special Staff Assistant: 1996-1997 ASSEMBLY SPEAKER CDRT PRINGLE (AD-68), Gazden Grove, CA Voter Registration Director: Fall 1995-1996. ACADEMIC ADJUNCT PROFESSOR OF LAW, CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW, AFFILIATIONS Municipal Law and Local Government FORMER ADJUNCT PROFESSOR, CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY, Political Science Dept., Spring 2004, 2005, POSC 488 & 489, "ORANGE COUNTY INTERNSHIP PROGRAM" 8-56 PUBLICATIONS Protect Your Business: Certification and Permits, Massage Today, August 2011 Protecting Corporate and Labor Union Involvement in Elections, Orange County Lawyer, July 2010 Municipal Law Handbook, reviewer of section on "Recall Elections," 2009, 2010. Developing Property in California: Strategies for Success, ORANGE COUNTY BUSINESS JOURNAL (March 11, 2003). Birthright Citizenship in the United Kingdom and the United States: A Comparative Analysis of the Common Law Basis for Granting Citizenship to Children Born of Illegal Immigrants, 33 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'LL. 693 (2000). PRESENTATIONS AB 26's LEGAL AMBIGUrrles. May 17, 2012. Association of Califomia Cities. Pane] Moderator. "EFFECTIVE AGeIVCY ADMINISTRATION: 'July 19, 2011, May 5, 2010 & May 5-6, 2009. Califomia Redevelopment Association Institute. "RECALL ELECTIONS." February 14 and 28, 2008. League of Califomia Cities, City Attorney Election Law Conference. "AB 1234 ETHICS TRAINING FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES." Numerous presentations to local agencies in 2006-2010. "CEQA AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES:' July 19, 2006, Old Towne Preservation Association General Meeting. "WATER SUPPLY AND DEVELOPMENT: UNDERSTANDING THE PROCESS FOR SB 610 AND SB 221 COMPLIANCE IN THE WORLD OF LIMITED RESOURCES." April 22, 2006 at Rutan & Tucker, LLP "THE CALIFORNIA DEVELOPMENT PROCESS: LAND USE AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT ISSUES." March 31, 2005, Lorman Educational Services, Santa Ana, CA. `BIECTION LAw SP,MINAR: BALLOT INTEGRITY",September 13, 2004, Califomia Republican Party State Convention, San Diego, CA. "THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION: UNDERSTANDING THE LAW AND PROCESS," October 1, 2003 at Rutan & Tucker, LLP. "STATEMENTS OF ECONOMIC INTEREST: COMPLIANCE FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS," February 25, 2004, Rutan & Tucker, LLP. "REVISED ARTICLE 9 OF THE UNffORM COMMERCIAL CODE," September 15, 2002 at Gray, Cary, Waze and Freidenrich, LLP. REPORTED BrennvoadAcademy v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association, 535 U.S. 288 CA$ES~MATTERS (2001) (interscholastic high schoo] athletic association held to be a state actor for purposes of a first amendment challenge to state recruiting rule), reseazch assistant to Professor James F. Blumstein. Moraga-Orinda Fire District v. Weir, 115 Ca1.App.4th 477 (2004) (amicus brief filed on behalf of California League of Cities relating to anti-SLAPP statute's applicability to election code challenges to ballot pamphlet statements). -2- 8-57 City of Sonia Monica v. Stewart, 126 CaLApp.4'" 43 (2005) (represented city clerk in connection with her refusal to implement an initiative measure that limited campaign contributions by persons seeking project approvals from a city). South of Airport Neighborhood Assn v. City of La Quinta, 2003 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 10662 (Unpub. Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division 3) (City General Plan upheld). Houston Advice Leiter, Cal. Fair Pol. Pract. Comm'n, A-04-026 (April 26, 2004) (Application of mass mail restrictions were municipal funds used to partially pay for chamber of commerce newsletter in which councilman pays fair mazket value for advertisement). Houston Advice Letter, Cal. Fair Pol. Pract. Comm'n, A-04-248 (March 14, 2005) (Board member may participate in vote to determine whether water agency should participate in the California Public Employees Retirement System because board member has no financial interest in the decision). Opinion of the California Attorney General OS-404 (June 24, 2005) (City does not violate Government Code Section 1090 in permitting a councilmember to purchase advertising in a community services brochure for fair market value because the brochure is a public service). Opinion of the California Attorney General No. 06-806 (December 5, 2006) (City does not violate Government Code Section 1090 in entering into a subdivision improvement agreement and a reimbursement agreement with a landowner who is the employer of a member of the city council) Houston Advice Letter, Cal. Fair Pol. Pract. Comm'n, I-OS-183 (September 8, 2005) (Publication of advertisement in city-sponsored community services brochure violates state mass mail prohibition if councilmember's name is listed in the advertisement). Houston Advice Letter, Cal. Fair Pol. Pract. Comm'n, A-05-249 (January 31, 2006) (Councilman could use committee funds to pay for or reimburse legal fees incurred in challenging a Public Records Act request). SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL /LAND USE /REDEVELOPMENT MATTERS SPECIAL COUNSEL, CITY of NEWPORT BEACH. Act as lead real property negotiator for City of Newport Beach on tideland leases. SPECIAL COUNSEL, CITY OF ANAHEIM. Serve as outside counsel to City of Anaheim on public ethics and related matters. SPECIAL COUNSEL, CITY ATTORNEY OF THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO. Advise Ciry Attorney on drafting of impartial analysis and other election-related matters in relation to local pension ballot measure. (FORMER) ASSISTANT CTCY ATTORNEY AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY COUNSEL, City of La Quinta, California. Provided legal counsel to City of La Quinta on land use, planning and development matters; served as board counsel to the La Quinta Planning Comnussion; served as Assistant Agency Counsel to the former La Quinta Redevelopment Agency. (FORMER) CTTY ATTONREY'S OFFICES OF ADELANTO AND 29 PALMS. Advised on a variety of matters, including redevelopment agency transactions relating to redevelopment of agency-owned pazcels. Negotiated loan transactions between cities and redevelopment agencies. -3- 8-58 RoRtNSON RANCH, Yucaipa, California. Act as lead land use wunse] for development of 600 acre vacant land with Highway 10 frontage in Yucaipa. Negotiate with City for land use entitlements, oversee preparation of EIR. Property was located in a redevelopment project area. KSL Land Corporation v. Ciry of La Quinta, Cal. Sup. CL Riv. Co. Case INC060133. Lead counsel representing the City of La Quinta in declaratory relief action brought by developer in connection with City's denial of a subdivision map. Successfully demurred to the complaint on the basis that it was barred by the statute of ]imitations and ripeness. Part of team representing major league baseball franchise in connection with ]azgest redevelopment project in San Diego history by providing land use counsel relating to Subdivision Map Act issues, development agreement obligations and negotiation of project management agreement for baseball stadium. Jose de to Pena ed al. v. Ciry of La Quinta et al., U.S. Dist. Ct. C.D. Cal., Case No. CV0406373 DT, Cal. Sup. Ct. Riv. Co. Case No. INC047843. Represented City of La Quinta against federal and state fair housing act and racial discrimination challenges to city's acquisition of a mobilehome park and redevelopment as affordable housing. Successfully removed case from federal to state court, settled with all federal defendants and obtained dismissal without leave to amend as to 4 of 7 causes of action. Advised municipality in connection with formation of community facilities district to fund municipal services in an annexation azea. Represented municipality in connection with prepazing and negotiating sales tax sharing agreements with automobile dealerships, major retailer and "big box" businesses. Represented developer in connection with re-tenanting and developing a retail center on property formerly used as a big box retail complex. This project had significant environmental issues and entitlement issues relating to a sales tax sharing agreement with the local government. Property ultimately disposed by the redevelopment agency pursuant to a DDA. Represented developer in connection with acquisition and development of several residential infill projects in a redevelopment azea. Conducted land use due diligence for several thousand acres of takedown in the Central Valley, including review and recommendation on cancellation of Williamson Act contracts. Prepared Ordinance to impose transient occupancy taxes on condominium -hotel development. Negotiated multiple disposition development agreements for transfer of RDA owned property m private developers, including significant public improvement and financing components. FORMER SPECIAL COUNSEL TO THE CITY OF MARINA AND MARINA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY. Represented the City of Mazina and its RDA in connection with preparing and defending environmental documentation, land use approvals and land disposition for major development projects located on a former military base. t Dunbar Lane Task Force v. Cajon Valley Union School District, San Diego Sup. Ct., Case No. GIE 18395. Mr. Houston and his supervising attorney worked closely with district staff to prepare the 15-volume record of proceedings in the matter in a Cwo-week time period. Pursuant to ex parte application hearing, obtained an abbreviated briefing schedule and a hearing date that was scheduled less than four months after the action was filed. Succeeded in obtaining a court order requiring the property owners to post a bond for the total cost of the record, which exceeded $19,000. When the owners failed to post -4- 8-59 the bond by the date ordered by the court, commenced proceedings to dismiss the action. Ultimately, the property owners agreed to dismiss the action with prejudice in exchange for a waiver of costs. Dismissal occurred less than two months after the filing of the action. Airport Working Group, et al. v. City of Irvine, Orange County Sup. Ct., Case No. 030008461. Represented the City of Irvine in an action challenging sufficiency of City's EIR and General Plan approvals relating to the Orange Coumy Great Park. Aggressively pursued briefing schedule by seeking denial of the writ of mandate, which allowed the City to file the opening brief and successfully obtained hearing date less than 6 months after Plaintiff filed its petition. The trial court ruled in favor of the City and upheld the City's environmental review. Irvine v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., Orange County Sup. Ct., Case No. 030000225. Represented City of Irvine in an action challenging sufficiency of City's mitigated negative declaration for a residential infill project. The trial court granted motion to dismiss in favor of City on the basis of petitioner's failure to file and serve petition within statute of limitation. COASTAL ACT SPECIAL COUNSEL, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH. Advise City Of Newport Beach On development in tide]ands and coastal zones. Represented community services district on issues relating to Coastal Act compliance for construction and rehabilitation of public improvements. Defended five-staz resort located in Laguna Beach in connection with proceedings brought by adjoining property owner to revoke resort's coastal development permit. Successfully obtained a finding of "no substantial issue" from the California Coastal Commission, resulting in full victory for the resort. Long Beach Water Department, Desalination Research Facility. Successfully defended the appeal by two Coastal Commissioners of a coastal development permit issued by a local agency, which approved the Long Beach Water District's construction of 850,000-gpd temporary desalination research facility. Appeal to Coastal Commission resulted in de novo heazing wherein Cormnission upheld the local agency's approval with conditions. Successfully represented district in obtaining a coastal development permit from the Califomia Coastal Commission. Represented aquatic theme park located in San Diego in obtaining amendment [o Coastal Development Permit to improve theme park. INITIATIVE/REFERENDUM Represented City of Napa in reviewing initiative petitions; advised City Attorney and City Clerk on processing initiative petitions. Prepared land use ballot measure to protect hillside property and permit development on golf course property. Due to questionable federal case law, oversaw the translation and printing of this 50-page initiative into 5 foreign languages pursuant to the federal Voting Rights Ac[. Represented the developer of a 110-acre residential and open space project in connection with an effort by a "citizens group" to referend the project approvals granted by the City of Orange. Represented developer of 14-unit residential infill development in connection with referendum petition challenging developer's land use approvals and City's determination -5- 8-60 to rescind project approvals. Azusans for Responsible Growth v. City of Azusa, et al. Served as special counsel to the City of Azusa in litigation to defend City's decision to invalidate a referendum petition to invalidate project approvals for a large mixed-use development at the former Monrovia Nursery site. Trial Court ruled in favor of the City of Azusa. Drafed a land use initiative, which has qualified for the November 2004 ballot, to redesignate 50 acres of commercial property to residential use following the Hemet City Council's rejection of a project application to construct medium density residences at the site. Drafted and provided legal counsel for circulation of an initiative to reallocate Proposition 172 funds to provide funding for fire services in Orange County. Drafted local initiatives for general plan and zoning code amendments. Advise numerous cities on processing ofcitizen-sponsored initiatives, including potemia] for pre or post election challenges to measures. ELECTION LAW /GOVERNMENT ETHICS Advised trade associations, developers, businesses and candidates on compliance with California and Federal campaign contribution and lobbying disclosure and reporting requirements. Present and Former Representative Clients: Yamaha Motor Corp. U.S.A., Harbor Distributing, LLC, SunCal, Inc., Wynn Resorts, LLC, Orange County Auto Dealers Association. Advise beneficiary of a $900 million estate on political and non-profit contributions and legal compliance issues. Represented the City Clerks and the Cities of Dana Point, San Clemente and Irvine in recall matters. Represent numerous state officials, local officials and private applicants on conflicts of interest, Section 1090, the Levine Act, Form 700, use of public funds, and other government ethics matters. City of Anaheim, Special Counsel -Public ethics Local Counsel, Fred Thompson for President 2008 General Counsel for Former Audra Strickland for State Assembly General Counsel Tony Strickland for State Controller General Counsel for Tony Strickland for State Senate. General Counsel to the Non-Profit Candidate Evaluation Council General Counsel to California Taxpayers Alliance General Counsel to Califomia Rifle & Pistol Association (both 501(c)(3) and (c)(4) entities) General Counsel to Technology Leadership PAC Nguyen v. Nguyen. Acted as lead counsel for Trung Nguyen in recount and an election contest for the office of Orange County Supervisor. -6- 8-61 Bakall v. Thomas. Successfully challenged candidate's ballot designation as unlawful use of advisory position as an occupation in violation of state law. Eckman v. Bakall. Successfully defended challenge to incumbent water district board member's residency status and qualification to run for re-election; successfully defended incumbent's use of a nickname on the ballot. Young v. Kelley. Successfully obtained writ of mandate striking information contained in ballot statement made by a challenger to Sheriff Mike Carona. COMMUNITY Experience on over 75 political campaigns, including remunerative and senior advisorial ACTIVITIES Positions; California Republican Party Central Committee, Voting Member (2005-2009, 1996-2002); Orange County Republican Party Centra] Committee, Ex Officio Representative for California State Assemblyman Bill Campbell, 1997; Federalist Society; California Republican Lawyers' Association; California Political Attorneys Association; Orange County Public Affairs Association; Fundraiser for numerous local, state and federal candidates. NONPROFIT Inside the Outdoors, Board Member AFFILIATIONS International Game First Association, Member IA00 2190 3 7 80.DOC;11 _ ]_ 8-62 GUILLERMO ("Gil") CABI2ERA 501 West Broadway, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101 (619) 400-4880 Email: gil@cabrerafirm.com EDUCATION Boston College Law School, Newton, MA Juris Doctor, May 1997 Boston College Third World Law Journal, Staff writer 1995-96, Notes Editor 1996-97. Boston College Presidential Scholar, Cuban American Foundation Scholarship Recipient California State University, Fullerton, CA Bachelor of Arts in Political Science, Minor in English, May 1994 The Cabrera Firm, APC, San Diego, CA Principal -August 2007 to present • Specializing in business and securities litigation, political law and corporate policy consulting. • Assist clients in transactional work, including drafring, reviewing and negotiating agreements. • Panel counsel for Appellate Defenders, Inc. preparing criminal appeals for indigent individuals. Cooley Godward Kronish LLP, San Diego, CA Senior Associate, Litigation Practice Group -October 2000 to July 2007 • Specialized in securities litigation, complex business litigation and white collar criminal defense. • Appeared before federal and state courts and arbitrators in all aspects of litigation and dispute resolution, including depositions, law and motion practice, pretrial proceedings and mediation. • Responsible attorney for tactical and strategic decisions on matters with amounts in dispute between $2 million and $40 billion. • Counseled clients regarding business transactions, securities laws, stock and intellectual property transactions, board member fiduciary duties and employment law. Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps LLP, San Diego, CA Associate, Business Litigation Practice Group -October 1997 to October 2000 • Experience in complex business litigation, real estate litigation, employment litigation, white collar criminal defense, anti-trust, unfair competition, shareholder derivative actions, intellectual property and general civil litigation. • First Chair, bench trial involving breach of contract issues. • Co-Chair, six week jury trial involving intellectual properly, libel and breach of fiduciary duty. • Second Chair, bench trial involving real estate ]ease dispute and breach of contract issues. Middlesex County District Attorney's Office, Cambridge MA Student Assistant District Attorney -January 1997 to May 1997 • Authorized to practice law as law student with attorney supervision. • Prosecuted criminal misdemeanors on behalf of People ofMassachusetts. Responsible for case work up, interview of witnesses, court appearances and sentencing hearings. United States Attorney's Office, District of Massachusetts, Boston, MA Legal Intern, Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Task Force -May 1995 to August 1995 • Assisted Assistant United States Attorney with the preparation and drafring of legal motions, sentencing memoranda as well as interviewing and preparing cooperating witnesses. 8-63 PROFESSIONAL/COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES/SHILLS Chairman, City of San Diego Ethics Commission Past Member, Board of Directors and Executive Committee, Make-A-Wish Foundation of America, lnc. Past Chair, San Diego Police Department Use of Force Task Force Named one of 50 People to Watch in 2006 by San Diego Magazine Member of American Business Trial Lawyers Association and Lawyers Club of San Diego Graduate, LEAD San Diego, Spring 2001 Fluent in Spanish BAR ADMISSIONS Licensed to practice before all state and federal courts in California. Admitted in the Ninth and Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court. 5-64 ~ ~ August 6, 2 012 Honorable Mayor Cox and City Council Persons: Subject: August 7, 2012 Council Meeting: Item 8, Proposition C 1) Change the elected City Attorney's salary and compensation: A. Why does the City Attorney's salary and compensation have to be tied something else? i.e. superior court judge. B. I am aware that the mayweres to tines 1 d off,thhae o~tysCuhp~~or allowed the and I believe that when several g g mayor a raise. So >f in the future the salary of our city attorney is also tied into the superior court judge salary and the superior court judge gets a raise so will the city attorney while others are being laid off. 2) City Attorney has no term limit: A. Any elected city person should have term limits. Our City positions were never meant to be a lifetime profession. However, how then will our City acquire competent people? Who will leave a law firm for 8 years for lower paying position? 3) Establish the office of Legislative Counsel _ A. My concern is with the ~~ ~~ ache charter Review Commis ion and the procedures were not followed by g Board of Ethics; the change was not clear to the public. B. The Legislative Counsel is to be selected by the Council at additional cost to serve at the pleasure of the~C e ®~ ©~e~ ~g ~ ~ ~~~g mO°~ u ho .ty in bringing about an added exp the establishment of a Legislative Counsel, Prop C would not have past, C. Our City Attorney was elected by the People and meets our qualifications. The City Council is expected to use the office of the City Attorney as well as the other eight attorneys within that office. We most certainly do not need a Legislative Counsel to advise the Council of legislative duties, or hiring of special counsel. Work it out; you have been elected to a part time, lucrative Position to serve the public in keeping the City's budget operating in the black. Educate yourselves on your legislative duties; which one would expect you to already know. All of this appears to be a ploy for power. Respectfully, -~ ..,~_ ~;, ,' ~ `~~` NORMA JEAN TURNER Space 119 521 Orange Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91911 xo~ rxor-E: 6191409-6995 c~ir_. rxorrE: 619/948-9235 E~arL: normajean79(acox.net