Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance Legal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City attorney briefs council on option to hire independent counsel; council expresses mixed views
Summary
City Attorney Carla Sykes told the Pueblo City Council that hiring an independent attorney for the council would likely require a charter amendment and estimated an annual cost of roughly $312,000 for a part-time retained counsel; council members raised confidentiality, conflict and cost concerns and did not authorize a charter change.
City Attorney Carla Sykes briefed the Pueblo City Council on options for the council to hire its own independent legal counsel and outlined legal, operational and cost implications. Council members asked questions and expressed mixed views; no charter amendment or final direction was adopted during the meeting.
Sykes said the city charter currently vests the authority to hire outside or special counsel with the City Attorney’s Office, and that creating a separate, council-hired attorney who is not under the city-law office would likely require a charter amendment. "If you wanted to do it now, it would require a charter amendment," Sykes told the council.
She outlined possible concerns: competing legal clients (the city as a whole versus council-as-client), reduced access to city records and staff for an outside counsel, and potential availability limitations for a contract attorney. Sykes said the city sometimes hires outside counsel for specialized or resource-intensive matters (water law, complex litigation), but that a permanently separate council counsel raises questions about who the lawyer would represent in conflicts between council and other city interests.
Cost and structure
Sykes presented a budget estimate for a part-time retained attorney at roughly 15 hours per week, which she said would cost about $312,000 (presenter’s estimate). She said the exact form and roles would dictate what charter sections must be amended and that a ballot question likely would be required to change the charter.
Council reaction
Councilor Flores recalled prior attempts to hire independent counsel that yielded limited vendor interest and said he opposed pursuing the model again. Councilor Martinez said she did not want to move forward and described the city attorney’s office as providing objective legal advice; other councilors raised concerns about introducing competing legal advice. Some councilors voiced support for exploring the option further, but the body did not adopt a motion to pursue a charter amendment or to issue an RFP at the meeting.
Sykes recommended that, if the council wishes to proceed, the council clarify what role it wants the attorney to perform and how conflicts would be handled so that a ballot question or charter amendment can be drafted.
Ending: No formal action was taken; Sykes and councilors said individual members may raise particular legal issues with the city attorney’s office in the meantime.
