Friday, February 22, 2013

(Kings) Grand Jury criticizes city attorney hiring, pay

By Mike Eiman, The Hanford Sentinel -

The city of Hanford spends too much on legal services and should have hired a city attorney with more experience, according to a report released by the 2012/2013 Kings County Grand Jury.

The Grand Jury's investigation stemmed from a complaint alleging "continued waste of public funds and fiscal irresponsibility by the [Hanford] City Council." The brief three-page report doesn't explain how it reached its conclusions.

"I find the lack of detail shocking," City Attorney Bob Dowd said of the report.

The report criticizes the council's 2006 decision to hire Griswold, LaSalle, Cobb, Dowd & Gin. Of the 11 firms that submitted proposals, Dowd's firm was one of two that lacked the "minimum of seven years in municipal law experience representing general law and/or charter cities" requested by the council. The report recommended that "in the future, the city of Hanford should hire a law firm in compliance with its [request for proposal] to maintain the integrity of the bidding process whereby the best services are obtained for the least cost."

The report says that the city pays "substantially higher" legal fees to its city attorney than other cities of comparable size, but doesn't name which cities were used for comparison or their respective legal expenses. The report also said the proposal from Dowd's firm, the only local company to bid, was the most expensive and recommended the city "confer with the staff of other cities of comparable size concerning legal fees charged to find possible savings."

Dan Chin, who served as mayor at the time, said the proposal process served to find qualified applicants, but the council isn't required to hire based on the criteria listed. Chin noted that Dowd's firm had served as special counsel to the city for about a year in conjunction with an earlier Grand Jury investigation.

"It's the Grand Jury's fault we hired him," Chin joked. "The Grand Jury was investigating an agreement we made with former City Manager Jan Reynolds."

In addition to already having worked with the city, Dowd said his firm had represented a number of other public bodies, including area school districts, community services districts and the Kings County Housing Authority.

A section of the report cites figures for the city's yearly legal billings since 2001, when about $330,000 was paid to four attorney firms. In 2005, the city spent about $238,000 among three law firms. Last year, the report said about $660,000 in legal billings were paid to Dowd's law firm.

Dowd said the report fails to ask a number of questions, including what services are now being performed by the city attorney's office compared with several years ago. He said his office has taken on a growing list of duties including human resources, risk management assessments and redistricting. Dowd said the $660,000 figure includes about $300,000 to provide these other services.

"The real question is: What was being asked of the city attorney six years ago and what is being asked of the city attorney today?" Dowd said.

In recent years, Chin said, the city has eliminated a number of city staff positions, including two deputy city managers and a community development director. Many of their duties have been passed on to the city attorney.

The City Council approved a revised contract with Dowd's firm in May 2011, which increased the annual budget cap for the legal services provided by the city attorney from $250,000 to $350,000. The decision drew criticism from the public.

At that time, the city also discontinued its policy of hiring specialized law firms in addition to the city attorney in an effort to save money.

"The Grand Jury notes that despite one firm having been contracted in 2011 to cover all legal services, expenditures increased," the report says.

Chin disputed the Grand Jury's assertions that Dowd's firm is paid more than firms representing cities of similar size. He pointed to budgets from the cities of Tulare, which has about 60,000 people, and Madera, which has a population of about 63,000. Tulare's actual city attorney costs for 2010-11 totaled about $778,000. Madera paid more than $480,000 for legal services during the same period.

Visalia, which has about 127,000 residents, more than twice Hanford's population of about 55,000, spent about $1.16 million.

"They said that no other city in the South Valley had city attorney fees that high," Chin said. "It's easily verifiable information."

Dowd said the city has 90 days from the date it received the report on Feb. 6 to submit its response.

No comments: