Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Opinions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee discusses formal vs. informal city attorney opinions and a bindery of past opinions
Summary
Members reviewed whether past city attorney opinions should be catalogued publicly, discussed statutory sources for 'formal' opinions, and recommended digitizing a found loose-leaf binder of advisory opinions for transparency.
The committee examined section 7.6 — how the charter treats city attorney opinions — and heard that the city clerk's office holds a loose-leaf binder of past advisory opinions. Committee members and legal staff discussed the difference between “formal” opinions created under state law and day-to-day informal legal advice protected by attorney-client privilege.
City legal counsel explained that formal opinions issued by a state attorney general arise under statute (counsel referenced MCL 14.32 as the analogous state provision for attorney-general opinions) and that the city has no statutory requirement to produce a formal compilation of opinions in the same way the state does. Counsel and committee members agreed that the city has an advisory binder with sporadic written legal opinions but that such opinions have been issued infrequently.
Committee members recommended digitizing the binder and making formal, non-privileged opinions available on the city website and under the clerk’s custody; they also discussed caution about publicly posting privileged, informal attorney-client communications. Members said that formal opinions generated in response to a written request by council or city manager would be the proper subset to make public.
Why it matters: Clarifying whether the charter requires public access to city attorney opinions affects transparency, records management and attorney-client privilege. Committee members sought language that would preserve confidentiality for informal advice while making formal, written opinions accessible.
Next steps: The committee directed staff to draft language that: (1) recognizes the existence of a collection (binder) of past opinions, (2) specifies that formal written opinions requested in writing by the council or city manager may be filed with the city clerk and made public, and (3) recommends electronic availability with physical copies at City Hall or the library for redundancy.
